Perceptual Biases
71
P E R F O R M A N C E I M P R O V E M E N T Q U A R T E R L Y , 2 8 ( 3 ) P P . 7 1 – 9 3 © 2015 International Society for Performance Improvement Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/piq.21197
Managerial Practices and Organizational Conditions That Encourage Employee Growth and Development
Jerry W. Gilley, EdD, Anne M. Gilley, PhD, Sherry Avery Jackson, PhD, and Heshium Lawrence, PhD
Employee growth and development is best facil-itated by creating plans that identify employ-ees’ strengths, weaknesses, and areas requiring improvement, and creates specifi c action-oriented strategies for continuous improvement (Lines, Selart, Espedal, & Johansen, 2005). According to Kuvaas and Dysvik (2009), employee growth and development plans are long-term developmental strategies, mutu- ally designed by managers and employees, that are linked to reward strategies to modify employee per- formance behaviors.
Managers are a critical factor in the growth and development of employees. Given the importance to the organization, it is important to determine whether, in fact, managers do support employee growth and development. Manager traits or behaviors can aff ect a number of employee outcomes, both positive and negative. To date, research has not addressed spe- cifi cally which manager traits or behaviors improve employee growth and development. Our research seeks to address this gap in the literature by specifi - cally identifying those traits or behaviors that have a signifi cant positive or negative impact on employee growth and development. Accordingly, our research questions are: (a) Do managers support employee growth and development, and (b) Which manager traits or behaviors have the most impact on employee growth and development?
This paper focuses on seven major managerial practices and three negative conditions that must be managed to enhance employee growth and devel- opment. These managerial practices and conditions have signifi cant poten- tial for human resource development practitioners and performance improve- ment technologists by providing new perspectives to improve employee per- formance through employee growth and development activities. Surveys measuring employee perceptions of manager behaviors were administered to 503 MBA and PhD students from the United States, resulting in 463 useable responses. The hypotheses were tested using linear regression and structural equation modeling. Based on the analy- sis, the researchers found that involving employees in decision making, motivat- ing employees, treating employees as unique individuals, and making certain that managers are eff ective have the highest infl uence on employee growth and development.
72 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
Theoretical Foundation
Th e theoretical foundation of this article is based on the concept of developmental leader- ship. According to Gilley, Shelton, and Gilley (2011), developmental leadership is the process of equipping managers with the knowledge, skills, and abilities they need to develop their employees so employees can be more eff ective. Such leadership occurs whenever and wher- ever a need arises—bolstering the relationship
between managers and employees. Developmental leadership involves creating a synergistic relationship with employees, the primary benefi t of which is the establishment of a collegial partnership with employees (McIntyre, 2010). Th is partnership is based on two-way communication, trust, honesty, and interaction, and should be nonjudgmental, free of fear, personal, and professional (Gilley & Gilley, 2009). Additionally, develop- mental leadership allows managers the opportunity to better serve their employees through a variety of activities such as integrated communi- cations, performance evaluations, employee growth and development activities, and reward and recognition systems used to improve employ- ees’ accomplishments and development (McIntyre, 2010).
Stone (1999) contends that developmental leadership provides orga- nizations and their employees with creative opportunities to provide innovative and creative solutions to complex problems. It enables organi- zations to identify and incorporate procedures and approaches that help them rebuild their market share and create successful business strategies (Gilley et al., 2011).
Developmental leadership is a process of ultimate sharing, providing managers the opportunity to unlock the mysteries of the organization for their employees (McIntyre, 2010). Developmental leadership helps employees avoid the errors so damaging to their careers while helping them adjust to the organization’s culture and better assimilate into the organizational work environment (Gilley & Gilley, 2009).
Recently, Gilley et al. (2011) identifi ed 10 principles of developmental leadership, each of which is foundational to enhancing employee growth and development. Th ey are:
1. Principle of personal accountability: Demonstrate personal accountability for managers and leaders own behavior, actions, and results, including the policies, procedures, incentives, inter- ventions, and plans they advocate and implement.
2. Principle of trustworthiness: Build relationships based on truth, respect, character, and integrity.
3. Principle of employee advocacy: Develop others to assume new roles and responsibilities, which is quintessentially a growth and development strategy.
Managers are a critical factor in the growth and
development of employees. Given the importance to the organization, it is important
to determine whether, in fact, managers do support
employee growth and development.
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 73
4. Principle of employee self-esteeming: Create working climates where employees feel good about themselves, their contributions, experiences, skills, and abilities.
5. Principle of performance partnership: Develop performance initia- tives that benefi t the organization and its members simultaneously.
6. Principle of organizational performance improvement: Create work climates and environments where employees are challenged to perform at maximum levels, encouraged to demonstrate creative solutions to complex problems, and engaged in quality initiatives for the purpose of achieving organizational results.
7. Principle of eff ective communications: Use all interpersonal mecha- nisms available to stimulate and challenge employees to perform to the best of their abilities.
8. Principle of organizational consistency: Filter decisions through a set of guiding principles that demonstrates consistent behavior and action.
9. Principle of holistic thinking: Articulate a vision for the organiza- tion, identify an actionable game plan designed to achieve this vision, and critically refl ect upon actions as a means of improving and maximizing future opportunities.
10. Principle of organizational subordination: Place the contribu- tions, involvement, and loyalty of employees above those of the institution, striving to guarantee organizational subservience to employees’ eff orts to improve their performance, productivity, effi ciencies, and approaches essential to organizational readiness and renewal (Gilley et al., 2011, p. 391).
Literature Review
Gilley and Gilley (2007) believe that employee growth and development plans allow managers to identify employees’ performance improvement needs, address organizational cultural issues, and determine the barriers that prevent learning acquisition and transfer and, thereby, reduce employee motivation. Th ey contend that growth and development plans help manag- ers identify confl icting job tasks and activities that diminish learning yet provide performance feedback on the job. Poon (2013) contends such plans should be specifi c, attainable, realistic, and tied to a timetable.
Lee and Bruvold (2003) believe that “investing in employee develop- ment is vital in maintaining and developing the skills, knowledge and abilities of both individual employees, and the organization as a whole” (p. 981). Further, Hameed and Waheed (2011) contend, “the success or failure of the organization depends on employee performance. Th erefore, organizations are investing huge resources on employee development” (p. 224). Hurtz and Williams (2009) suggest that managers are critical in the employee and growth and development process because they are the ones who encourage and reinforce performance improvement, which is the outcome desired of the process. Finally, improving employee growth
74 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
and development requires managers to encourage cooperation, create fear-free and positive work environments, develop partnerships and link- ages with common goals, and serve as a catalyst for renewal and perfor- mance capacity (Daniels & Daniels, 2004; Hill, 2004; Smollan, 2012).
A crucial element of the growth and development process is the per- formance appraisal. It is used to discuss the means by which an employee can improve his or her performance results. Th is conversation includes the examination of employee strengths, weaknesses, and areas requiring improvement, which becomes the focus of employee growth and devel- opment plans (Buckingham & Coff man, 1999).
Gilley and Maycunich (2000) believe that managers and employ- ees should mutually design growth and development plans that focus on long-term development strategies that enhance an organization’s competitive readiness and capacity. Further, growth and development plans are enhanced by developing a partnership between managers and employees that allows employees to acquire critical competencies that enhance their performance and career development opportunities while the organization enjoys better business results.
Treating employees as unique individuals often produces compassion- ate actions by managers, which other researchers have noted as assisting with the creation of trust (Twenge, 2010). Once trust is established, employ- ees are more likely to participate in growth and development activities.
Motivation is a critical ingredient when managing employee perfor- mance and is a key element in the growth and development process (Hurtz & Williams, 2009). In this study, we discovered that motivation by man- agers positively infl uences employee growth and development. Eff ective managers solicit creative solutions to complex problems (Grant & Berry, 2011) and eliminate fear in the workplace, expect success of employees, encourage performance excellence, and allow individuals to make mistakes and govern their own performance, all of which motivates employees.
Pellerin (2009) suggests that improved teamwork, often referred to as team building, is an important component in improving employee eff ectiveness because it requires performance improvement of every employee. Th is promotes self-development and participatory decision making on the part of employees.
Managers who eff ectively involve employees in decision making are player-centered, which means they collaborate with employees (Guttman, 2008). Such managers rely on the input of employees’ experiences or perspectives when making decisions (Emerson, 2012). Managers who involve employees early in decision making provide a work environment that encourages employees to participate in growth and development activities (Robbins & Finely, 1995).
Brown and Cregan (2008) suggest that employees are more likely to embrace opportunities for involvement in decision making when a par- ticipatory style of leadership is used. West and Markiewicz (2004) believe that eff ective organizations create a high level of constructive controversy, which enables employees to feel that their decision-making competence
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 75
is valid rather than diminished. As a result, a climate of cooperation and trust prevails that facilitates high quality decision making on the part of employees. In other words, true involvement means giving authority and responsibility for decision making to employees, which encourages them to embrace growth and development opportunities (West, 2004).
When employees participate in decision making, organizations are more effi cient and their results improve (Hashim, Alam, & Siraj, 2010). Further research reports that engaged employees are closely connected to their organizations and are willing to devote time and energy to ensure the organization’s success (McShane & Von Glinow, 2003).
Th e literature suggests that eff ective coaches possess highly devel- oped interpersonal skills (Hameed & Waheed, 2011). Eff ective coaching is based on good questioning, facilitation, feedback, listening skills, shar- ing benefi ts of personal experience, teaching, mentoring, counseling, and providing feedback (Kroth, 2007).
Kroth (2007) identifi ed the most common coaching skills that enhance employee growth and development as:
♦ Interpersonal skills ♦ Conceptual skills ♦ Technical skills ♦ Integrative skills ♦ Objectivity ♦ Political awareness ♦ Organizational awareness ♦ Confl ict resolution skills
However, there have been no empirical tests to determine which skills make a diff erence in coaching eff ectiveness (Kampa & White, 2002) and, as Joo (2005) state, “no universal credential seems to exist to identify com- petent coaches” (p. 476). However, coaching skills can be used to improve communication with employees, which is an essential in improving the relationship between managers and employees. Such an improvement will help managers encourage their employees to participate in growth and development activities.
Well-designed reward systems that encourage employee growth and development exhibit the following attributes:
♦ Rewards are linked to business strategy. ♦ Program objectives are clearly articulated (participants know what
is being rewarded and why). ♦ Rewards support the organization’s culture (Bartol & Srivastava,
2002).
Presslee, Vance, and Webb (2013) report that such systems are adaptable to changing business conditions, are clearly communicated and fully understood by employees, and are related to actual business
76 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
performance. Finally, Randolph and Kemery (2011) believe that such systems allow employees to participate in their design, are regularly reviewed for eff ectiveness in meeting stated goals and objectives, and are perceived by employees as having value.
When an attitude of managerial indiff erence exists, managers often refuse to develop their employees and ignore responsibility for their employees’ growth and development (Randolph & Kemery, 2011). Consequently, as these employees fail to meet performance expectations, they are quickly dismissed (Mujtaba, 2007). Th ese behaviors degrade employee morale and productivity, severely limiting loyalty and commit- ment, and when these behaviors exist it is diffi cult to encourage employ- ees to participate in growth and development activities.
Work environments that are free of hostility and fear allow managers and employees to communicate and work collectively together in devel- oping long-term growth and development plans that enhance employ- ees’ future career development (Gilley, Anderson, & Gilley, 2008). As such, conditions are created in which creativity fl ourishes and employ- ees are challenged and encouraged to collaboratively participate in their future growth, which allows managers and employees the opportunity to build a supportive environment that ultimately benefi ts the organiza- tion. Managers may also be surprised at the eff ects of such encourage- ment, in that employees actively own their career development initiatives (Shelton, Waite, & Makela, 2010).
Shelton et al. (2012) report that managers who do not exhibit the above referenced behaviors fail to conduct eff ective performance apprais- als, do not establish positive relationships with their employees, and do not establish priorities. However, organizations recruit, select, and pro- mote them anyway, which negatively aff ects employees’ participation in growth and development activities (Robbins & Judge, 2012).
Organizations that hire or retain unskilled or ineff ective managers, those who have a negative impact on organizational results and success, engage in managerial malpractice (Gilley & Gilley, 2009). A real cause of this condi- tion is rooted in organizational policies and practices that encourage and support unproductive, ineffi cient, and incompetent managers. Managerial malpractice occurs when managers are poorly trained, unqualifi ed, or inadequately prepared to engage employees and improve organizational performance. Gilley and Gilley (2009) identifi ed symptoms of managerial malpractice within organizations that include but are not limited to:
♦ Hiring or promoting managers who lack the understanding and skills necessary to eff ectively manage others
♦ Hiring or promoting managers because they are the “best performers” or “highest producers,” without regard for their interpersonal skills
♦ Wasting valuable time and resources attempting to “fi x” ineff ective or incompetent managers
♦ Retaining managers who are ineff ective in securing results through others
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 77
♦ Failing to reprimand, demote, or fi re managers who are ineff ective or incompetent (p. 343)
Method
Th is study explores leadership practices that infl uence employ- ees’ perceptions that their organization managers encourage employee growth and development. Employees’ assessments of managerial behav- ior provide accurate ratings of leadership performance (Hogan, Curphy, & Hogan, 1994). Although this study was part of a larger, long-term study of managerial practices, our primary research questions focused on how frequently organization leaders or managers are perceived as encour- aging employee growth and development and which of their behaviors infl uenced employees’ perceptions that organization managers encourage employee growth and development.
Survey Development Th e previously validated “Managerial Practices” survey instrument
(see Gilley, Gilley, & Kouider, 2010) was derived from seminal and exist- ing literature related to managerial competencies, traits, and behaviors (Argyris, 1962; Bucur, 2013; Derue, Nahrgang, Wellman, & Humphrey, 2011; Levenson, Van der Stede, & Cohen, 2006; Leverty, 2012; Spencer & Spencer, 1993; Waldman, Ramirez, House, & Puranam, 2001; Zaccaro, 2001; Zaccaro, Kemp, & Bader, 2004). Th e survey instrument contained 19 perceptual-based questions (see Measures) about leader or manager behavior and organizational practices, and nine questions pertaining to respondent demographics (i.e., gender, age, industry type and size, orga- nization size, and gender and age of respondents’ managers).
Population The voluntary, written survey instrument was offered to 503 full-
time and part-time students in MBA and organizational development (OD) master’s and PhD programs at five four-year, public institu- tions in diverse locations (the Mountain West, the Midwest, and the South). Data collection took place over six semesters. Master’s and PhD students at varying locations were chosen to enhance diversity among industries, job titles and positions, and respondent demo- graphics. Respondents represented all organizational levels (front-line to executive) in service, manufacturing, educational, professional, and governmental entities. The response rate was 92%, with 463 usable responses.
Measures Th e dependent variable in the study was a perceptual measure of
employee development. Respondents were asked to specify, in their
78 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
opinion, how frequently organization managers encourage employee growth and development. Responses were collected using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from never (1) to always (5). Th e independent variables examined in this study were derived from research on lead- ership skills and managerial behaviors. Using the same 5-point scale, respondents were asked to indicate the frequency with which organiza- tion managers exhibit eighteen managerial behaviors:
1. Treat employees fairly and consistently 2. Coach employees 3. Eff ectively evaluate employees 4. Appropriately reward employees 5. Communicate appropriately 6. Eff ectively implement change 7. Motivate employees 8. Involve employees in decision making 9. Treat employees as unique individuals 10. Encourage teamwork and collaboration 11. Are ethical 12. Are trustworthy 13. Positively infl uence culture 14. Promote work–life balance 15. Are held accountable for employee results 16. Create hostile or fearful work environments 17. Do not possess appropriate supervisory/management skills, yet are
promoted to or hired for management positions 18. Are promoted despite being ineff ective or poor managers
Results
Population characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Table 2 reports the frequency of employees’ perceptions that orga-
nization managers encourage employee growth and development. Respondents indicated the organization managers “never,” “rarely,” or only “sometimes” encourage employee growth and development 70.6% of the time, as compared with 29.4% for “usually” or “always” eff ective.
Table 3 refl ects descriptive statistics and between-subject correla- tions for all signifi cant variables identifi ed by step-wise linear regression (see Table 4). Strong correlations indicated by a p < .01 signifi cance level exist between all variables, except fi rm size only correlated with employee growth and development and accountability of managers.
Common Method Bias
As the survey item responses for both independent and dependent variables came from the same group of respondents, it may result in
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 79
common method bias (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986). We conducted a Harmon one-factor test to determine whether common method bias pre- sented a threat. Th is technique assumes there is common method bias if a single factor is present, or one factor accounts for most of the variance (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986). Our results indicated that more than one
TABLE 1 SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS
DESCRIPTION PERCENT
Respondent’s gender
Male 49.5
Female 50.5
Respondent’s Age
<25 22.9
26–35 36.7
36–45 22.9
46–55 13.8
56–65 3.7
Respondent’s Years Employed at Organization (years)
<1 21.8
1–3 47.3
4–6 19.2
7–10 6.7
11–14 3.9
<15 1.1
Industry
Manufacturing 6.5
Service 30.7
Education 24.0
Professional 23.3
Government 9.7
Nonprofi t 5.8
Number of employees in organization
<100 29.4
101–500 18.8
501–1,000 11.0
1,001–2,500 12.7
2,501–5,000 4.1
5,001–10,000 7.3
>10,000 16.7
n = 463
80 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
n = 463, M = 3.05, SD = .89
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Never Rarely Sometimes Usually Always
TABLE 2 ORGANIZATION MANAGERS ENCOURAGE EMPLOYEE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
factor was extracted, with a total variance of 58%. Th e most covariance explained by one factor was 47%, indicating that common method bias did not appear to present a problem.
Data Analysis
Linear regression and structural equation modeling were used to ana- lyze the relationship between the independent variables and the depen- dent variable “employee growth and development.” Both methods rely upon similar assumptions about the distribution of the data. Th e depen- dent variable exhibited a reasonably normal distribution (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson & Tatham, 2006). Additionally, there was no evidence of collinearity (all VIF factors < 3.0).
Regression Analysis To identify the signifi cant item measures that aff ect employee growth
and development, a step-wise regression was run on all 18 indepen- dent variable items (Nunally & Bernstein, 1994; Vogt, 2005). Of those 18 items, eight measures had a signifi cant infl uence on employee growth and development at p < .05. Subsequently, a multiple regression analysis of the eight item measures and the demographic variables of industry, fi rm size, and employee position was performed. Industry, fi rm size, and employee position were included in the analysis to determine whether they had an eff ect on the employee’s perception of managerial support of employee growth and development. Industry type includes manufactur- ing, service, education, professional, government, and nonprofi t. Firm size is based on the number of employees. Employee positions include front-line employee, supervisor, mid-level manager, and senior manager.
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 81
TA B
LE 3
M
EA N
S, S
TA N
D A
R D
D E
V IA
T IO
N S,
A N
D C
O R
R EL
A T
IO N
S
V A
R IA
B LE
M EA
N S
D 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
1. G
ro w
th 3.
04 .8
9
2. U
n iq
u e
2. 87
.8 9
.6 4*
*
3. M
o ti
va te
2. 97
.7 8
.6 2*
* .5
4* *
4. T
ea m
w o
rk 3.
35 .7
9 .5
9* *
.4 9*
* .5
7* *
5. D
ec is
io n
m ak
in g
2. 72
.8 9
.6 0*
* .6
0* *
.5 3*
* .5
0* *
6. A
cc o
u n
ta b
le 3.
09 .9
4 .5
1* *
.4 6*
* .4
7* *
.4 9*
* .3
9* *
7. R
ew ar
d 2.
81 .7
6 .5
4* *
.4 9*
* .5
2* *
.5 1*
* .4
6* *
.4 8*
*
8. C
o ac
h 2.
91 .8
8 .5
2* *
.5 0*
* .5
4* *
.4 8*
* .3
9* *
.4 6*
* .4
3* *
9. P
o o
r m an
ag em
en t
sk ill
s 2.
97 .7
3 –.
29 **
–. 39
** –.
40 **
–. 30
** –.
33 **
–. 32
** –.
25 **
–. 36
**
10 . F
ir m
s iz
e 3.
32 2.
2 .1
0* .0
01 –.
00 1
.0 3
.0 3
.1 0*
.0 3
–. 01
.0 7
n =
4 63
, * p
< 0
.0 5,
* *p
< 0
.0 1
82 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
Th e results of the regression analysis are provided in Table 4. Firm size is the only control variable with a statistically signifi cant positive impact. Industry and employee position did not have an impact on the dependent variable of employee growth and development. Th e manage- rial behaviors of treating employees as unique individuals, motivating, encouraging teamwork, involving employees in decision making, holding managers accountable for employee results, rewarding or recognizing employees, and coaching have a statistically signifi cant positive impact, while retaining managers with poor management skills has a statistically signifi cant negative impact on employees’ perception that fi rm managers encourage employees’ growth and development. Th e model explained 59.9% (R2 adjusted = .599) of the variation of the dependent variable “managers encourage employee growth and development.”
Structural Equation Modeling Amos 20.0 was used to analyze the model using maximum likeli-
hood estimation. Th e two-step approach recommended by Anderson and Gerbing (1988) was followed. In the fi rst step, confi rmatory factor analysis was used to validate the measurement model. In the second step, struc- tural equation modeling was used to evaluate the full model, including both the measurement and structural model covariance structure analysis.
Measurement Model Assessment Th e management behaviors of treating employees as unique
individuals, motivating, encouraging teamwork, involving employees in
TABLE 4 REGRESSION ANALYSIS
B SE
Constant –.57** .22
Industry –.01 .08
Firm size .03** .01
Employee position .004 .02
Unique individual .25*** .04
Motivate .22*** .05
Teamwork .17*** .05
Decision making .17*** .04
Accountable .08** .04
Reward .12** .05
Coach .10** .04
Poor management skills –.09** .04
F 63.63***
n = 463, **p < .05, ***p < .001,
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 83
decision making, coaching, rewarding or recognizing employees, and holding managers accountable for employee results were included in the positive traits construct, while organizational behaviors of creating hos- tile work environments, retaining those with poor management skills, and hiring or promoting ineff ective managers were included in the nega- tive trait construct.
Th e reliability and validity of the measures were assessed. Th e item measures and factor loadings along with the reliability values for the constructs are presented in Table 5. All items were statistically signifi cant at p < .05. All of the individual item factor loadings, except for hostile work environment at .46, exceeded the minimum threshold of .50 rec- ommended by Hair et al. (2006). Th e composite reliabilities for both constructs exceeded the minimum threshold of .70 (Hair et al., 2006) and the average variances extracted for both constructs were very close to the threshold of .50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Th ese results provide evidence that the measurement model is valid.
Structural Equation Modeling Assessment Th e fi t indices for the structural model demonstrate a good fi t with
χ2 = 121.29, GFI = .96, AGFI = .94, NFI = .95, RFI = .95, IFI = .97, TLI = .96, CFI = .97, and RMSEA = .05. (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Th e model and results are reported in Figure 1. Th e positive trait construct had a positive infl uence (p < .01) on employees’ perceptions that managers encourage employee growth and development. In contrast, the negative trait con- struct had a negative infl uence (p < .01) on employees’ perceptions that
TABLE 5 INDIVIDUAL ITEM RELIABILITIES, COMPOSITE RELIABILITY, AND AVERAGE VARIANCE EXTRACTED
ITEMS ITEM RELIABILITIES AVE
Positive Behaviors .87 .49
Treat employees as unique individuals .76
Motivate employees .67
Involve employees in decision making .70
Coach their employees .67
Encourage teamwork and collaboration .71
Eff ectively reward and recognize employees .66
Are held accountable for employee results .63
Negative Behaviors .71 .46
Create hostile or fearful work environments .46
Promote or hire individuals who do not possess appropriate supervisory/management skills for management positions
.73
Promote ineff ective or poor managers .80
Note: Composite reliabilities in bold.
84 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
managers encourage employee growth and development. Additionally, fi rm size has a positive impact on the dependent variable. Th is suggests that as the fi rm size increases, employees’ perceptions that managers encourage employee growth and development increases.
Discussion
Earlier in the article, we defi ned our research questions as: (a) Do managers support employee growth and development and (b) Which manager traits or behaviors have the most impact on employee growth and development? Our research provides evidence that employees do not perceive that organization managers consistently encourage their growth and development. Only 29.4% of the respondents indicate that organiza- tion managers usually or always encourage their growth and develop- ment. Given the importance of employees to the long-term strategy and health of the fi rm, these results indicate that managers need to focus more on the development of employees. Th is naturally leads to the next research question: specifi cally, which manager traits or behaviors have an impact on the development of employees. Th e next section discusses the traits identifi ed in our research study.
n = 463, **p < .05, ***p < .001
Positive TraitsPositive Traits
Negative TraitsNegative Traits
Growth and Development Growth and
Development
Firm SizeFirm Size
Unique Individuals
Unique Individuals
otivateMotivate
Poor management
skills
Poor management
skills
Hostile environment
Hostile environment
Ineffff ectiveIneffective
.67* * *
.76* * *
.73* * *
.80* *
.46* *
.98* * *
-.23* * *
.03* * *Decision making
Decision making
CoachCoach
.70* * *
.67* * *
RewardReward
AccountableAccountable
TeamworkTeamwork
.71* * * .66* * *
.63* * *
FIGURE 1. STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODEL
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 85
Implications for Adopting Managerial Practices and Organizational Conditions That Positively Enhance Employee Growth and Development
In this section, we will discuss the seven managerial practices and three organizational conditions identifi ed in our research study that posi- tively enhance employee growth and development and how each practice or condition can help create an organizational culture that embraces the continuous improvement of employees.
Seven Managerial Practices Seven managerial practices that positively enhance employee growth
and development were identifi ed and were statistically signifi cant. Th ey are: treating employees as unique individuals, motivating employees, encouraging teamwork and collaboration, involving employees in deci- sion making, coaching employees, rewarding employees, and holding managers accountable for employee results.
Treating Employees as Unique Individuals. Th e idea of equitable treat- ment has been recognized as a behavior important to managers (Gilley & Gilley, 2009). In fact, we found that managers who treat employees as unique individuals will positively infl uence employee growth and development. Treating employees as unique individuals is anchored in attitudes refl ected by compassion, care, and concern (Gilley, Heames, & Gilley, 2012).
Motivating Employees. According to Katzenbach and Smith (2003), motivation increases as employees get more acquainted with the proj- ects in which they participate. Th ey also believe that motivation is a pro- cess because, without it, employees will fail to exert the necessary eff ort to improve their skills, knowledge, and abilities. Th us, a manager’s abil- ity to motivate others signifi cantly improves employees’ participation in growth and development activities (Hurtz & Williams, 2009).
Developing an incentive system that creates alignment between desired performance and the rewards that employees’ value is essen- tial in achieving desired performance results (Kuvaas & Dysvik, 2009). Incentives that motivate employees include demonstrating trust, making compensation fair and competitive, making job assignments more com- prehensive and challenging, and empowering employees (Kroth, 2007).
Encouraging Teamwork and Collaboration. Our fi ndings suggest that managers who encourage teamwork positively infl uence employee growth and development. Team building improves work environments, motivates employees to work together, encourages employees’ self- management strategies, and identifi es and utilizes the strengths of each employee. Team building is important when there is a need to quickly
86 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
respond to ever-changing conditions. Moreover, team building is the process of helping individuals and groups to become more eff ective in accomplishing tasks while satisfying the needs of all employees. As such, eff ective managers create environments that bring the best out of employees by encouraging collaboration, imagination, and vision (Gilley et al., 2012).
Involving Employees in Decision Making. Redsteer (2012) states “employee empowerment generally involves management recogniz- ing that employers are in a better position to oversee their own duties and work processes such as decision-making” (p. 2). Further, McShane and Von Glinow (2003) argue that when there is involvement, employ- ees have some level of authority in making decisions that were not pre- viously within their mandate. Th ey stated that employee involvement extends beyond controlling resources for one’s own job; it includes the power to infl uence decisions in the work unit and organization. Emerson (2012) believes that many managers “are reluctant to empower their employees with decision-making abilities because they feel that they are relinquishing their responsibility to lead and control the organization”
(p. 2). However, managers who involve employ- ees in decision making are able to break down the barriers that prevent open and honest com- munications. Accordingly, our fi ndings suggest that managers who ensure employee participa- tion and involvement in decision making will positively infl uence employee growth and devel- opment.
Coaching Employees. We specifi cally addressed the issue of whether there was a positive relationship between managers who coach and employee growth and development. Our fi ndings suggest that manag- ers who assume the role of coach enhance their employees’ growth and development within the organization. Coaching is designed to maxi- mize employee strengths and minimize weaknesses (Hill, 2004). Mujtaba (2007) suggests:
. . . coaching is about enhancing human capacity and development, and is focused on developing a trusting relationship with others, as well as on clarifying expectations and goals, which leads to specifi c action plans for their achievement. Eff ective coaching is, and it can be, one of the most important functions managers perform because it communicates performance levels, expectations, importance of the tasks and responsibilities, and a caring attitude. (p. 1)
Coaching is a person-centered management technique that requires per- sonal involvement with employees that motivates them to improve their
. . . our fi ndings suggest that managers who ensure
employee participation and involvement in decision
making will positively infl uence employee growth
and development.
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 87
performance and face-to-face communications (Kroth, 2007). Hameed and Waheed (2011) suggest that “coaching is not formal . . . it involves treating employees as a personal partner in achieving both personal and organizational goals” (p. 225). Additionally, Gilley and Gilley (2007) state, “research reveals that coaching involves establishing a collegial partnership between leaders and their employees, one based on two- way communication that is nonjudgmental, free of fear, personal and professional” (p. 2).
Rewarding Employees. Our study found that managers who adequately reward employees positively infl uence employee growth and develop- ment. Th e result is motivated, productive employees ready to accept challenges and take initiative for professional development (Bartol & Srivastava, 2002). According to Presslee et al. (2013), developmentally oriented managers do not develop employees; they equip employees to develop themselves.
To create an organizational culture that rewards employee growth and development eff orts, managers create reward systems in which employ- ees are given the autonomy and freedom required to do their respective jobs (Wang, Li, & Huang, 2012). Eff ective reward systems support an organizational culture in which members feel a sense of ownership of the fi rm’s vision, mission, and strategy (Randolph & Kemery, 2011).
Holding Managers Accountable for Employee Results. Findings of our study suggest that managers who are held accountable for employee results positively enhance employee growth and development. However, many managers believe that employees are easily replaced (Gilley & Gilley, 2009). Consequently, they develop policies and procedures that demonstrate a revolving door philosophy toward employees. Under these circumstances, employees are often treated with a lack of dignity and respect due to a manager’s belief that employees are disposable and that an abundant quantity of qualifi ed replacements exists in the marketplace (Randolph & Kemery, 2011).
Three Conditions That Must Be Managed and Controlled by the Organization
Negative conditions occur when organizations create hostile or fearful work environments, hire or promote individuals with poor man- agement skills, and retain ineff ective managers. Th ese three negative conditions were found to be statistically signifi cant and must be man- aged and controlled by the organization to positively enhance employee growth and development.
Eliminating Hostile or Fearful Work Environments. Trust cannot be established when managers create hostile or fearful work environments
88 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
(Gilley et al. 2008). Hardy and Schwartz (2006) believe that such envi- ronments create self-defeating and dysfunctional behavior on the part of employees, which discourages them from participating in growth and development activities. Scott (2005) reports that hostility and fear-based work environments are commonly characterized by reprisals and intimi- dation.
Hiring or Promoting Individuals with Poor Management Skills. According to our fi ndings, managers who lack the supervisory and man- agerial skills to be eff ective are perceived as having a negative eff ect on employee participation in growth and development activities. Many managers have poor feedback, listening, and interpersonal relation- ship skills and are the ones that do not develop their employees (Gilley, McMillan, & Gilley, 2009).
Retaining Ineff ective Managers. Th e results of our study demonstrate that organizations should select managers for their people skills and hold them accountable for securing results through people. Th is requires managers to become involved with their employees by encouraging face- to-face communications, establishing rapport, and embracing mutual, two-way feedback, which all enhance employee growth and development.
Limitations
Our study is subject to several limitations, most of which involve the potential ambiguity of language and imprecise measurement of respon- dent opinions. Further, our research solicited employees’ perceptions of the behaviors and eff ectiveness of their organizations’ managers, which yields highly subjective opinions fi ltered through participants’ under- standing of terminology, biases and stereotypes, experiences, and poten- tially inaccurate or incomplete information (Burke, Sims, Lazarra, & Salas, 2007).
Our research relied on self-ratings, imprecise measures, and percep- tual data, which leads to concerns about methods variance and attribu- tion bias. Self-selection has been shown to distort results (Podsakoff , MacKenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990); consequently, we utilized mul- tiple groups at diff ering locations to lessen this threat. Th e self-rating, convenience sampling methodology used in this research may also detract from our ability to generalize results. Graduate students in MBA and OD master’s and PhD programs may not refl ect the composition of the population in a manner that yields transferrable conclusions. We issued 503 questionnaires to MBA, OD master’s, and PhD students from fi ve universities in the Mountain West, Midwest, and South regions and received 463 or 92% usable responses. Th ese students attended classes at these respective universities, which made it easier to collect a higher than
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 89
normal response rate. However, our collection techniques did not bias the responses of individuals or aff ect the data collected.
Conclusion
Employee growth and development is a critical activity for managers, leaders, and human resource development and performance improve- ment practitioners. Th e seven major managerial practices and three neg- ative conditions that must be managed to positively enhance employee growth and development are critical to successfully achieving perfor- mance improvement and desired organizational results. Th e end result is improved renewal and performance capacity on the part of employees and the organization.
As stated previously, seven managerial practices that positively enhance employee growth and development were identifi ed as statisti- cally signifi cant. Treating employees as unique individuals and motivating employees had the biggest impact on employee growth and development, with beta weights of .25 and .22. Encouraging teamwork and collabora- tion and involving employees in decision making were the next highest infl uence, with beta weights of .17. Rewarding employees was .12, coach- ing employees was .10 and holding managers accountable for employee results was .08.
We also identifi ed three negative conditions that must be managed and controlled by an organization to enhance employee growth and devel- opment. Th e combined impact of these three negative conditions had a statistically signifi cant negative impact of .23 on employee growth and development. Accordingly, organizations must make certain that manag- ers do not create a hostile or fearful work environment, or hire or promote individuals with poor management skills or retain ineff ective managers.
References Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A
review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411– 423.
Argyris, C. (1962). Interpersonal competence and organizational eff ectiveness. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
Bartol, K. M., & Srivastava, A. (2002). Encouraging knowledge sharing: The role of organizational reward systems. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9(1), 64–76.
Brown, M., & Cregan, C. (2008). Organizational change cynicism: The role of employee involvement. Human Resource Management, 47(4), 667–686.
Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (1999). First, break all the rules: What the world’s greatest managers do diff erently. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Bucur, I. (2013). Managerial core competencies as predictors of managerial performance, on different levels of management. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 78, 365–369. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.312
Burke, C. S., Sims, D. E., Lazarra, E. H., & Salas, E. (2007). Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(6), 606–632.
90 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
Daniels, A. C., & Daniels, J. E. (2004). Performance management: Changing behav- ior that drives organizational eff ectiveness (4th ed.). New York, NY: Performance Management Publications.
Derue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N., & Humphrey, S. E. (2011). Trait and behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 7–52.
Emerson, A. L. (2012, February). The benefits of employee empowerment. Credit Union Times. Retrieved from http://www.cutimes.com/2012/02/15/the-benefits-of -employee-empowerment
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Structural equation models with unobserved variables and measurement errors: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Gilley, A., & Gilley, J. W. (2009). Managerial malpractice. In A. Gilley, J. W. Gilley, S. Quatro, and P. Dixon, The Praeger Handbook of Human Resource Management and Workplace Policy, Vol. 2 (pp. 342–345), Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Gilley, A., Gilley, J. W., & Kouider, E. (2010). Characteristics of managerial coaching. Per- formance Improvement Quarterly, 23(1), 53–70.
Gilley, A., Heames, J. T., & Gilley, J. W. (2012). Leaders and change: Attend to the uniqueness of individuals. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 17(1), 69–83.
Gilley, J. W., & Gilley, A. (2007). The manager as coach. Westport, CT: Praeger. Gilley, J. W., & Maycunich, A. (2000). Beyond the learning organization: Creating a culture of
continuous growth and development through state-of-the-art human resource prac- tices. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
Gilley, J. W., Anderson, S., & Gilley A. (2008). Human resources management as a champion for corporate ethics: Moving ethical integration and acculturation in the HR function and profession. In S. Quatro and R. Sims (Eds.), Executive ethics: Ethical dilemmas and challenges for the C-suite (pp. 191–213). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, Inc.
Gilley, A., McMillan, H. S., & Gilley, J. W. (2009). Organizational change and characteristics of leadership effectiveness. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 16(1), 38–47.
Gilley, J. W., Shelton, P. M., & Gilley, A. (2011). Developmental leadership: A new perspective for HRD. Advances in Human Resource Development. 13(3), 386–405.
Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. (2011). The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1), 73–96.
Guttman, H. M. (2008). Great business teams: Cracking the code for standout performance. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hardy, R. E., & Schwartz, R. (2006). The self-defeating organizations: How smart companies can stop outsmarting themselves (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Eaglewood Cliff, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Hameed, A., & Waheed, A. (2011). Employee development and its affect on employee performance: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(13), 224–229.
Hashim, F., Alam, M. G., & Siraj, S. (2010). Information and communication technology for participatory based decision-making-E-management for administrative efficiency in higher education. International Journal of Physical Sciences, 5(4), 383–392.
Hill, L. A. (2004). New manager development for the 21st century. Academy of Manage- ment Executive, 17(4), 64–72.
Hogan, R., Curphy, G. J., & Hogan, M. (1994). What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist, 49, 493–504.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Model- ing: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55.
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 91
Hurtz, G. M., & Williams, K. J. (2009). Attitudinal and motivational antecedents of participation in voluntary employee development activities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 635–653.
Joo, B. K. (2005). Executive coaching: A conceptual framework from an integrative review of practice and research. Human Resources Development Review, 4(4), pp.462-488.
Kampa, S., & White, R. P. (2002). The effectiveness of executive coaching: What we know and what we still need to know. In R. Lowman (Ed.), Handbook of organiza- tional consulting psychology: A comprehensive guide to theory, skills, and techniques (pp.139–158). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (2003). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-perfor- mance organization (3rd ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.
Kroth, M. (2007). Manager as motivator. Hartford, CT: Praeger. Kuvaas, B., & Dysvik, A. (2009). Perceived investment in employee development, intrinsic
motivation and work performance. Human Resource Management Journal, 19(3), 217–236.
Lee, C. H., & Bruvold, N. T. (2003). Creating value for employees: Investment in employee development. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(6), 981– 1000.
Levenson, A. R., Van der Stede, W. A., & Cohen, S. G. (2006). Measuring the relationship between managerial competencies and performance. Journal of Management, 32(3), 360–380.
Leverty, J. F. (2012). Dupes or incompetents? An examination of management’s impact on firm distress. Journal of Risk & Insurance, 79(3), 751–783.
Lines, R., Selart, M., Espedal, B., & Johansen, S. (2005). The production of trust during organizational change. Journal of Change Management, 5(2), 221–245.
McIntyre, M. G. (2010). Developmental leadership. Your Offi ce Coach website. yourofficecoach.com
McShane, S. L., and Von Glinow, M. A. (2003). Organizational behavior. Emerging realities for the workplace revolution (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Mujtaba, B. (2007). Coaching and performance management: Developing and inspiring. Davie, FL: ILEAD Academy, LLC.
Nunally, I. H., & Bernstein, J. C. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hall.
Pellerin, C. J. (2009). How NASA builds teams: Mission critical soft skills for scientists, engi- neers, and project managers. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107–147.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–542.
Poon, J. M. L. (2013). Effects of benevolence, integrity, and ability on trust-in-supervisor. Employee Relations, 4(35), 396–407.
Presslee, A., Vance, T. W., & Webb, R. (2013). The effects of reward type on employee goal setting, goal commitment, and performance. Accounting Review, 88(5), 1805–1831.
Randolph, W. A., & Kemery E. R. (2011). Managerial use of power base in a model of managerial empowerment practices and employee psychological empowerment. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 18(1), 95–106.
Redsteer, A. (2012). What is employee participation and empowerment? The Houston -Chronicle. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/employee-participation empowerment-42037.html
Robbins, H., & Finley, M. (1995). Why teams don’t work: What went wrong and how to make it right. Princeton, NJ: Petersons/Pacesetter Books.
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2012). Organizational behavior (15th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
92 DOI: 10.1002/piq Performance Improvement Quarterly
Scott, E. D. (2005). The ethics of human resource management. In J. W. Budd and J. G. Scoville (Eds.), The ethics of human resources and industrial relations (pp. 173–202). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Shelton, P., Waite, A., & Makela, C. (2010). Highly effective teams: A rational analysis of group potency and perceived organizational support. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 12(7), 93–114.
Smollan, R. K. (2012). Trust in change managers: The role of affect. Journal of Organiza- tional Change Management, 4(26), 725–747.
Spencer, L. M., & Spencer, S. M. (1993). Competence at work: Models for superior perfor- mance. New York, NY: John Wiley.
Stone, F. M. (1999). Coaching, counseling, mentoring: How to choose and use the right technique to boost employee performance. New York, NY: AMACOM.
Twenge, J. M. (2010). A review of the empirical evidence on generational differences in work attitudes. Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 201–210.
Waldman, D. A., Ramirez, G. G., House, R. J., & Puranam, P. (2001). Does leadership matter? CEO leadership attributes and profitability under conditions of perceived environmental uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 134–143.
Wang, R., Li, X., & Huang, M. (2012). Channel management through selective announcement of reward and punishment decisions. Journal of Business-To-Busi- ness Marketing, 19(2), 129–146.
West, M. A. (2004). Eff ective teamwork: Practical lessons from organizational leadership (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: BPS Blackwell.
West, M., & Markiewicz, G. (2004). Motivate teams, maximize success: Eff ective strategies for realizing your goal. San Francisco, CA: Chronicle Books.
Vogt, W. P. (2005). Dictionary of statistics and methodology: A nontechnical guide for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). The nature of executive leadership: A conceptual and empirical analysis of success. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp. C., & Bader, P. (2004). Leader traits and attributes. In J. Antonakis, A. T. Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The nature of leadership pp. 101–124. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
JERRY W. GILLEY
Jerry W. Gilley, EdD, is a professor of human resource develop- ment with a specialization in organizational development and change at the University of Texas at Tyler (2010–present), and served as a prin- cipal (senior partner) and director of organizational development for Mercer Human Resource Consulting (1989–2005). He has authored and co-authored 26 books and more than 120 articles, book chapters, and monographs. E-mail: jgilley@uttyler.edu
ANN M. GILLEY
Ann M. Gilley, PhD, is a professor of management at the University of Texas at Tyler, where she teaches graduate courses in strategy, OD, and change. She is an author, co-author, and editor of numerous books and articles, including Manager as Change Leader, Th e Performance Challenge, and the Praeger Handbook of Human Resource Management.
Volume 28, Number 3 / 2015 DOI: 10.1002/piq 93
Her business background includes approximately 15 years in insurance and fi nancial services for large corporations, primarily in marketing and strategy, and nearly 15 years in management consulting as a partner for Trilogy Performance Group. She consults in leadership develop- ment, change management, and strategic planning. Her areas of research include change, the organizational immune system, and managerial malpractice. E-mail: agilley@uttyler.edu
SHERRY AVERY JACKSON
Sherry Avery Jackson, PhD, is an assistant professor of management at the University of Texas at Tyler, where she teaches in the areas of operations management and management science. Her current research focuses on the impact of internal (manager and employee) and external (buyer and supplier) relationship on performance. E-mail: sjackson@uttyler.edu
HESHIUM LAWRENCE
Heshium Lawrence, PhD, is an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Tyler in the Department of Human Resource Development and Technology. He currently teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in Six Sigma, total quality management, and project management. He has research experience in the pedagogy of undergraduate students in indus- trial technology programs and is a certifi ed Lean Six Sigma black belt. E-mail: hlawrence@uttyler.edu
Copyright of Performance Improvement Quarterly is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.