Study of managerial identity at the first line supervisor level

Abstract

Studies on supervisors are common. However, very little literature exists which highlights the major reorientation a promotes requires towards the new role especially when moving from the worker to the supervisor level. With the growing pressures organizations are required to promote from within either by policy or by agreement. The orientation and managerial identity of individuals promoted from within and those recruited from outside could be different. This has implications for the organizations in terms of career planning and designing training inputs.

The exploratory study aims at investigating the similarities and differences of managerial identity between direct recruits and promotes. The study focuses on the first line supervisors of a large public sector organisation to investigate the patterns in their managerial role identity. Managerial identity has been operationally defined as values and predispositions refloated in the managerial role.

The study included 107 first line supervisors comprising of fifty two direct recruits and fifty five promotees. Promotees are individuals who have risen from at least one level below the first line supervisors' level. The direct recruits are people who are either fresh graduates or people having experience elsewhere. The data base consisted of responses collected through questionnaires on values, predispositions, and socio-occupational data, The data analysis consisted of contingency tables for identifying broad relationships followed by t -tests, analysis of variance for ascertaining the nature of differences.

Some of the findings of the study are: a) The promotees were found to be more personalized, rigid, conflict oriented, marginal and resource controlling than the direct recruits; b) The two groups showed more differences in the values than in predispositions; c) Experience within the organisation accounted for difference in the pattern of managerial identity while experience outside the organization showed no such differences; d)The line people were in general found to be more personalized, rigid, conflict oriented and resource controlling than the staff people; e)The line direct recruits showed more personalization, rigidity, conflict orientation, and resource control than the staff direct recruits thereby showing a pattern closer to the promotees in the organisation;

f) While the staff promotees showed more marginality than the line promotees, the line direct recruits showed more marginality than staff promotees thereby showing the relevance of qualifications in staff jobs and experience in the line jobs; g)The differences between line and staff supervisors and the marginality in line direct recruits and staff promotees indicate the influence of technology and organisation culture on the pattern of managerial identity; h)Training conducted for first line supervisors who have worked for sufficient number of years did not show a significant difference between the trained and the untrained, Further analysis with the help of analysis of covariance confirmed the influence of age, education, experience and number of subordinates in differentiating direct recruits and promotees; among subgroups made on the basis of the type of experience; and among line direct recruits, line promotees, staff direct recruits and staff promotees. However significant differences were obtained between line and staff groups and trained and untrained showing that education, age, experience and number of subordinates plays no rorle in differentiating these groups. The differences between line and staff are a reflection of technology and organisation culture while the differences between trained and untrained are accounted by the training inputs given to the trained group.

The behavioral variations in the above mentioned groups reflect the fragmentation in the organisation and also highlight the influence of the organisation socialization. This influence can be channelised through systematized inputs both at the individual and organisation level. Inputs like the tightoning Of recruitment and selection and also introduction of induction and training for preparing both now corners to organisation as well as promotes moving into new roles were thought useful. This kind of anticipatory training was felt to be even more effective than training given to individuals after they have commenced work in the now role.

The process of identifying talent much in advance is rendered simple and effective through potential appraisal. Potential appraisal along with an idea of a career path for each individual would facilitate developing the managerial identity required by the organisation.