3%
L... H\“ ‘5
5 a .

i
.I x :
. .

.4 a: .11 3...:
vi . ya...»

... . ‘
.5.
2’; h

a:

rug».

. :3

 

.. :.
,3-

..nuﬂnmq Hump.
‘

 

3..
i l
.‘

1, 1:51.;
tip I n p. :. .~..
Qeéé : 335; mu 1....

Kiv ....

 

'. ...Vv I

w m, ﬂaggiiaéﬁ ..._ .

 

"l

 

m LIBRARY
Michigan State

6 . .
2 00 Umversrty

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

EXPLORING THE DEVELOPMENTAL MANAGER
PHENOMENON WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF HIGHER
EDUCATION

presented by

Tina Marie Riley

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for the

PhD. degree in Higher, Adult, and Lifelong
Education

 

 

f /’ ‘/.':""-‘

/4/4

Major Professorjs Signature
{/7 «1/5” 9’

Date

 

MSU is an Afﬁrmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

PLACE IN REI’URN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/05 a/cﬁcromootn.mis

-_————-— ‘ -- E____

EXPLORING THE DEVELOPMENTAL MANAGER PHENOMENON WITHIN THE
CONTEXT OF HIGHER EDUCATION

By

Tina Marie Riley

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
In partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
For the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOSPHY

Department of Educational Administration

2005

ABSTRACT

EXPLORING THE DEVELOPMENTAL MANAGER PHENOMENON WITHIN THE
CONTEXT OF HIGHER EDUCATION

By
Tina Marie Riley

The growth of the workplace as a site of learning, the increasing importance of
informal learning at work, and the resulting changes in the roles of management have led
to a signiﬁcant body of literature, predominately prescriptive, on managers’ possible
roles in workplace learning. Little is known, however, about how managers perceive this
role, and the events leading them to hold the view that employee learning, growth, and
development is an integral part of their supervisory role.

The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the lived experiences of staff
managers within the context of higher education, focusing particularly on their
relationship with employees and employee learning, growth, and development. The
research question guiding this study was “How do staff managers in the context of higher
education come to understand and construe their managerial role?” To ﬁnd answers to
this question, in-depth interviews were conducted with ﬁve managers in a large research
university in the Midwest. The focus on staff managers was intentional, as this important
group of individuals has been largely ignored in research on the academy.

The ﬁndings indicate that the participants hold an alternative conceptualization of
management wherein employee development is a deﬁning characteristic of the
management role rather than a separate role or function. Three elements set this

conceptualization apart from other management models: (a) employee development is

integrated into the supervisory role and the lifelong learning needs of employees is a
fundamental consideration; (b) because employee learning, growth and development is
integrated into the supervisory role, role conﬂict is not experienced; and (c) there is a
substantial use of and reliance on reﬂection.

The participants in this study experience developmental management as reﬂective
practice and perceive that their past experiences have led them to a developmental
conceptualization of their supervisory roles. The lessons, values, assumptions, and
principles that they learned in childhood form the basis of their working philosophy.
Added to these early experiences are life experiences as adults, including family and past
work experiences. Together these experiences are perceived as having a substantial
inﬂuence on how they understand their roles. These experiences are reﬂected upon and
inform the course of action the participants choose when they are faced with non-routine
employee interactions or situations.

This study has added to our understanding of the ways in which managers
inﬂuence employee learning, growth, and development. It has also provided insight into
the ways in which individual managers come to hold the view that fostering such
learning, growth, and development is a deﬁning characteristic of management. This
insight has implications for both theory and practice as the workplace continues to be an

important site of adult learning.

I dedicate this dissertation to my son, Trevor M. Riley.

iv

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge and thank the many individuals who made this
dissertation possible.

To the men and women who so generously shared their time and experiences with
me during this project: Thank You. This is your story.

To my husband, I thank you for providing me with the space to write this
dissertation. Without your support, encouragement, and protection of time from other
responsibilities, this work would not have been possible.

To my parents, thank you for believing in me and in the value of education and to
my sister for always remembering when.

To Robin Roots and Monica Mouton—Sanders for reading endless revisions,
making insightful suggestions, and most of all, for listening.

To everyone at the School of Labor and Industrial Relations, I thank you for
granting me the privilege of working with you as a faculty member while continuing my
formal education, and for providing opportunities for informal learning on a daily basis.

And ﬁnally, to my dissertation committee, John Dirkx, Marilyn Amey, Ann
Austin, and Elaine Yakura, for providing guidance and insight and never ceasing to push

me in my thinking. I thank you all.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter One Introduction ......................................................... 1
Background to the Study .......................................... 3
Research Question ................................................. 10
Signiﬁcance ......................................................... 10
Limitations .......................................................... 12
Chapter Two Literature Review ................................................... 15
Background ......................................................... 18
Emerging Management Models .................................. 20
Context ............................................................... 27
Chapter Three Research Methods .................................................. 29
Participant Sampling Procedures ................................. 29
Data Collection Procedures ....................................... 32
Pilot Study .......................................................... 35
Data Analysis ....................................................... 35
Role of the Researcher in Data Analysis ........................ 36
Presentation of Findings .......................................... 37
Chapter Four Study Context and Participant Proﬁles .......................... 39
The Context of the Study .......................................... 39
The Participants .................................................... 40
Summary ............................................................ 46
Chapter Five Participants’ Perceptions of their Supervisory Roles ......... 49
How Participants Understand their
Supervisory Roles .................................................. 52
Ways Past Experiences Inform Participants’
Understanding of their Supervisory Roles ...................... 69
Chapter Summary .................................................. 80
Chapter Six Discussion, Implications, and Recommendations for Future
Research ............................................................. 83
Conceptualization of Management .............................. 83
Implications for Theory and Practice ............................ 90
Suggestions for Future Research ................................. 96
Conclusion .......................................................... 98
Appendices ..................................................................................... 99
Appendix A: Interview Protocol .................................. 100
Appendix B: Informed Consent .................................. 102
Appendix C: Questionnaire ....................................... 104

vi

Appendix D: Data Management and Analysis .................. 105

References ...................................................................................... 107

vii

Chapter One
Introduction

At 21, I left college to be a full-time mom. At 25, I was a divorced single parent
looking for work. At the local grocery store, I interviewed with a man named Don who
asked why I wanted the job. Feeding my child seemed to me to be a good reason to want
work. Don agreed and offered me the job, contingent upon my enrolling in a class for
displaced homemakers that a nearby college was offering. As this was a free class, I
agreed. My ﬁrst day on the job started with Don asking what I had learned in the class.
All I had learned, I responded, was that working in a grocery store was not the best career
choice for me, and that better choices required a college degree. Over the following
weeks Don and I had several conversations about what I wanted to do with my life and
when was I going to enroll in college. Within three months, I was taking classes and Don
was scheduling my work hours around my class schedule. At 42, I am now teaching
managers and human resources professionals in a big-ten university and completing my
Ph.D. In large part, I owe my current position, and the lifestyle that it affords, to Don.
Had it not been for his support of my education, I would very likely still be working in a
low-paying, service-sector job.

My experience with Don in the personal narrative above highlights three major
themes related to adult learning that are relevant to this study: (a) “. . .education and
development continue throughout working life” (Poell & Van der Krogt, 2003, p. 252),
(b) the workplace has a signiﬁcant role in adult growth, learning, and development
(Dirkx, 1996; Rainbird, 2000; Watkins, 1989; Wexley & Latham, 2002) and (c) managers

can exert considerable inﬂuence on employee learning, growth, and development (Ashton

& Maguire, 1986; Bradﬁeld, 1992; Ellinger, Ellinger, and Keller, 2002; Ellinger,
Watkins, and Bostrom, 1999; Grace & Straub, 1991; Grugulis, 2003).

The growth of the workplace as a site of learning, the increasing importance of
informal learning at work, and the resulting changes in the roles of management have led
to a signiﬁcant body of literature, predominately prescriptive, on managers’ possible
roles in workplace learning. This prescriptive focus is not surprising given the increasing
focus on techniques and solutions in management education and development (Burgoyne
and Jackson, 1997; Clutterbuck, 2000).

The prescriptive focus on how management should foster learning in the
workplace has led to a dearth in the literature on understanding how managers experience
their employee development role. Exploring the ways in which managers think about
workplace learning and their corresponding roles is important as managers exert greater
inﬂuence over employee learning, growth, and development (Van der Krogt & Vermulst,
2000). Enactrnent of this inﬂuence has the potential to cause conﬂict for managers as
they seek to create work environments that foster learning while ensuring productivity,
two goals which may be viewed as dichotomous. This dichotomy may create confusion
for employees as managers act in accordance with whichever role is being enacted at any
given time (Ellinger & BostrOm, 2002). Given these challenges and the current lack of
empirical research, Stewart suggests that exploring the ways in which managers view
their roles is “the most open—ended, and potentially the most difficult and the most
exciting of the possibilities outlined so far” (1989, p. 8).

The purpose of this study was to explore the ways in which managers experience

the developmental management phenomenon. Managers who hold developmental

relationships with employees by exhibiting developmental behaviors that seek to foster
learning, provide employees with emotional support, or facilitate employees’ careers
(D’Abate, Eddy, & Tannenbuarn, 2003) are referred to as developmental managers.
Developmental managers view employee growth, learning, and development as integral
to their managerial responsibilities and regularly engage in developmental activities such
as coaching, mentoring, teaching, supporting, and guiding employees.
Background to the Study

Over the past two decades, managers have been given greater responsibility for
employee learning. It has become commonplace for managers to engage in some form of
activity to enhance employee development. Douglas and McCauley (1999) conducted a
study of formal development relationships in use in 300 American ﬁrms including
coaching, mentoring, apprenticeships, and action learning. As a result of their research,
they combined these separate constructs under the broad heading of developmental
relationships. In an effort to build on the work of Douglas and McCauley and bring
additional clarity to the developmental relationships construct, D’Abate, Eddy, and
Tannenbaum (2003) conducted a comprehensive review of 182 scholarly articles
published in the Academy of Management Journal, the Academy of Management Review,
Human Resource Development Quarterly, the Journal of Applied Psychology, the
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, the Journal of Management, the Journal of
Vocational Behavior, and Personnel Psychology (p. 369). D’Abate et a1. identiﬁed 23
different characteristics of developmental interactions being used in the literature. They
grouped these characteristics into six separate categories: participant demographics,

interaction characteristics, organizational distance-direction, purpose of interaction,

degree of structure, and behaviors exhibited (p. 366-3 67). The exhibited behaviors were
ftuther grouped according to the purpose of the interaction. The purposes of exhibited
behaviors that D’Abate et al. (p. 367-368), identiﬁed include: enhancing the employee’s
ability to learn, such as modeling problem solving and providing opportunities for
practice; providing emotional support, such as afﬁrming, befriending, and claming; and
assisting with career progression by providing networking opportunities. Further
examples of the behaviors associated with each of the categories are provided in Chapter
Two.

The research conducted by Douglas and McCauley (1999) and D’Abate,
Tannenbaum, and Eddy (2003) provides a foundation for further exploring
developmental relationships and the impact that managers can have on adult learning in
the workplace.

The focus on employee development in both research and practice reﬂects a
departure ﬁ'om previous conceptualizations of management. To more fully understand the
signiﬁcance of the developmental conceptualization of management on adult learning in
the workplace, it is necessary to review the history of Westem-style business
management.

During the early 19003, Taylor’s Scientiﬁc Management Theory (1911/1972)
framed the structure of most work environments. Under Scientiﬁc Management, the
primary role of management was to increase production through the command and
control of employees. Training consisted of managers explaining to employees how to
perform a simpliﬁed task in the most efﬁcient manner (Taylor, 1972). Employees were

not allowed to deviate from these predetermined processes. Additionally, employees were

not required or encouraged to provide suggestions for improving the manner in which
work tasks were performed.

The nature of work began to change in response to the changing needs of society.
In the 19805, command and control management began to give way to employee
involvement and empowerment (Rowden, 1996). Under this model, employees took on
many of the responsibilities previously in the purview of managers. In dramatic contrast
to the tenets of Scientiﬁc Management, employee input and problem solving was
encouraged, expected, or required. These changes in the expectations and roles of both
employees and managers, economic constraints resulting from global competition and
economic downturns, and rapid technological advances changed the nature of work so
that continuous learning began to be seen as a requirement of workplace success (Bennis
& Nanus, 2003; Ellinger, Ellinger & Keller, 2002; Gilley & Maycunich, 2000; Senge,
1990). These changes have led to a dramatic increase in the importance of work as a site
of adult learning.

Today, the workplace is a major site for informal and formal adult growth,
learning, and development (Dirkx, 1996; Rainbird, 2000; Watkins, 1989; Welton, 1991;
Wexley & Latham, 2002). The magnitude of this phenomenon is evident when
comparing the 10% of employees trained in the workplace in 1987 (U .8. Census Bureau,
1999) to the 79% who experienced workplace training in 2002 (American Society of
Training and Development [ASTD], 2003). Watkins (1989) stressed this point by stating
“adult education in business and industry is the fastest growing area of practice in the
ﬁeld of adult education in the United States” (p. 422). This focus on employee learning,

growth, and development, both formal and informal, is altering the nature of management

as work is restructured to promote learning in addition to promoting productivity
(Bierema, 1996; Harris, 1985; Pearson, Chattergee, & Okachi, 2003). While the decision
to create an organization that fosters continuous learning may emanate from top
leadership, it is the ﬁrst level managers who serve as a link between the leadership and
the employees (Salleh & Grunewald, 2001). It is the managers who engage in the
behaviors that facilitate employee learning.

In order to facilitate employee learning, growth, and development, managers act
as coaches (McGill & Slocum, 1998), educators (Antonioni, 1994), facilitators (Ellinger
& Bostrom, 2002; Weaver & Farrell, 1997), learning leaders (Argyris, 1993), and
teachers (Cohen & Tichy, 1998). To avoid adding another term to this body of literature
that already suffers from a lack of consensus on terms and deﬁnitions (D’Abate, Eddy &
Tannenbaum, 2003), this study relies on the umbrella term developmental relationships,
identiﬁed by Douglas and McCauley (1999). Managers who hold developmental
relationships with employees by exhibiting developmental behaviors that seek to foster
learning, provide employees with emotional support, or facilitate employees’ careers are
therefore referred to as developmental managers. The developmental relationship
between managers and employees shares a striking similarity to the relationship that
exists between teachers and students.

Based on his review of both management and teacher literature, Eden (1990)
asserts “[t]eachers and managers actually do have quite a bit in common. Both have
authority over other persons whose activities they direct and for whose well-being,
accomplishments, and future they assume considerable responsibility” (p.16). The

developmental manager has responsibility not only for employee work performance but

also for employee learning outcomes. It is reasonable to consider that in the same way
that teacher expectations inﬂuence students’ learning outcomes (See Good 1987, for
review; Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968; Rosenthal & Rubin, 1978), developmental
managers’ views and expectations will inﬂuence employees’ learning outcomes. This
contention is supported by a body of research beginning with Merton’s (1949)
groundbreaking work exploring the signiﬁcant impact that expectations can have on the
shaping of reality. In organizational contexts, expectations have been found to inﬂuence
both employee performance (Hogan, 1987; Phillips & Dipboye, 1989) and trainee
outcomes (Eden, 1990; Eden & Shani, 1982).

In addition to broadening managers’ spheres of inﬂuence over employee work
and learning outcomes, the changing nature of management has implications for
managers themselves. As organizational expectations change, managers must rethink
their relationship with employees and what being a manager means. Reﬂection on the
meaning of management and on their interactions with employees may help managers
make sense of their changing roles. Reﬂective practice, particularly guided reﬂection,
(Johns, 2000; Schon, 1983; Schbn 1987) is used to foster deeper understanding and
enhance the practice of teachers and other educators. Given the similarities between
teachers and developmental managers in today’s workplace, it is reasonable to assume
the use of reﬂection would enhance managers’ understanding and performance of their
organizational roles. A discussion of the role of reﬂection in learning and management is
provided in Chapter Two.

The educative roles of developmental management may be viewed as distinct

from, and contradictory to, the more traditional management responsibilities of

accountability and productivity (Kaiser, 1996; Ellinger & Bostrom, 2002). Limited
research has explored the ways in which managers experience these seemingly
contradictory roles. In one of the few empirical studies that have been conducted,
Ellinger and Bostrom (2002) found that managers did perceive employee learning as
separate ﬁom their traditional managerial role. The managers who participated in Ellinger
and Bostrom’s study were found to view management and facilitating employee leaming
as not only separate but completely dichotomous roles. This dichotomy led to feelings of
role conﬂict. Ellinger and Bostrom represent these two roles, that of traditional
management and that of learning facilitator as two ends on a continuum. Managers who
fully identify with the learning facilitator role, they assert, would likely not experience
this role conﬂict (Ellinger & Bostrom, 2002). The experience of managers who fully
identify with the learning facilitator role have heretofore been absent from the literature.
Given this absence, whether such managers experience role conﬂict, or other types of
conﬂict, has also missing from the literature.

Although there is a plethora of prescriptive literature claiming that managers
should take responsibility for employee learning, growth, and development, (Argyris,
1993; Cohen & Tichy, 1998; French & Bazalgette, 1996; Gilley & Maycunich, 2000,
Salleh & Grunewald, 2001), insufﬁcient empirical research exists exploring the ways in
which managers experience the developmental manager role (Altman & Iles, 1998;
Ellinger & Bostrom, 2002). Empirical research in related areas of organizational life is,
therefore, informative.

The leadership literature is informative because some characteristics of

organizational leadership, such as holding a holistic view of employees, promoting

problem solving, and learning are also characteristics of developmental management. As
Bennis & Nanus (2003, p. 20) point out, however, “[t]here is a profound difference
between management and leadership... ‘To manage’ means ‘to bring about, to
accomplish, to have charge of or responsibility for, to conduct.’ ‘Leading’ is ‘inﬂuencing,
guiding in direction, course, action, opinion.” The behaviors that developmental
managers engage in, such as teaching, encouraging, and supporting, likely have the effect
of inﬂuencing and guiding employees’ direction, courses of action, and opinions.
Developmental management, then, may be viewed as exhibiting certain leadership
behaviors.

While this view of developmental management, and the current thinking on
leadership, suggests that leaders exist at all organizational levels and need not be linked
to positions of formal authority (Bolman & Deal, 1997; Heifetz 1994), there is a trend in
the literature to focus on those holding high levels of formal authority. This focus on
high levels of leadership within the organization is particularly noticeable in academic
leadership literature, where the focus is almost exclusively on the positions of president,
provost or chair. Empirical research on lower levels of academic management is slight
and focuses on the experience of faculty rather than staff (see for example Bergquist,
1992)

In addition to leadership studies, research on work-family initiatives in
organizations also provides insight into the developmental management phenomenon.
Work-family policies are deﬁned as “employer policies to support the integration of paid
work with other signiﬁcant family demands” (Kossek, in-press). This represents a holistic

approach to management that is consistent with the view encompassed by developmental

management. Certain behaviors associated with developmental management, such as
providing support and allowing ﬂexible work schedules, enhance employees’ ability to
integrate work and family responsibilities. Developmental management also fosters
employee personal growth and development, thereby enhancing employees’ competency
in areas such as communication, interpersonal, decision-making, and lifelong learning,
skills identiﬁed (Stein, 2000) as necessary for adults to succeed in the knowledge age.

This study is informed by existing research on the workplace as a site of adult
learning opportunities. It adds to the literature by exploring how staff managers in the
context of higher education experience the developmental manager role. The decision to
focus on university staff managers sheds light on staff level management within the
academy and provides voice to this ubiquitous yet under-examined population.

Research Question

In response to societal changes, the workplace has become a dominant provider of
adult learning opportunities. The emphasis on employee learning and development has
signiﬁcantly altered both the structure of work, the role of managers, and their sphere of
inﬂuence over employee outcomes. While this is arguably beneﬁcial for employees and
organizations, little is known about the ways in which managers experience the role.
Therefore, the primary research question is: “How do staff managers in the context of
higher education come to understand and construe their managerial role and perceive the
developmental management phenomenon?”

Signiﬁcance
This research has implications for both theory and practice. Given the increasing

importance of lifelong learning and the emphasis on the workplace as a provider of adult

10

learning opportunities, a deeper understanding of the developmental manager
phenomenon is warranted. The current literature will be augmented by an examination of
experiences of managers as they enact their supervisory roles.

The ﬁndings of this study are important for a variety of reasons. As adults
continue to be faced with changing expectations in the workplace and in their personal
lives, the need for lifelong learning increases in importance. These changes impact
employees as well as managers. The changing nature of management to include
responsibilities for employee learning requires managers to hold developmental
relationships with employees by exhibiting behaviors that foster employee learning.
These developmental activities are generally in addition to, rather than in place of, more
traditional management behaviors that seek to enhance productivity. Previous research
indicates that developmental managers may experience role conﬂict when attempting to
fulﬁll both developmental and traditional management responsibilities. By exploring how
the developmental manager role is experienced, this conﬂict may be articulated and
reﬂected upon, thereby leading to strategies for minimizing the potentially negative
effects of the conﬂict. This is particularly important as the workplace continues to grow
as a site for adult learning and managers continue to take on greater responsibility for
employee learning, growth, and development. It is hoped that human resource
development and management development professionals, particularly those working
within higher education institutions, will utilize the ﬁndings of this study to inform their
management development practice.

In addition, while it is an accepted notion (Kerry, 2001) that support staff are

critical to the operations of educational institutions, very little research has been

11

conducted exploring how support staff experience their work. Support staff are often
missing from research on the academy, which is primarily focused on faculty and
university leadership. This study will add to our understanding of this ubiquitous yet little
understood population within the academy.

Finally, as my work and research interests lie in the intersectionof higher
education administration and management development, this research will inform my
own practice. The developmental manager phenomenon is still emerging and many
questions remain unanswered. These questions provide numerous opportunities for
further research. Speciﬁc suggestions for future research are articulated in Chapter Six.

Limitations

As with any research, limitations exist in this study. The ﬁrst limitation lies with
the population from which the study sample was drawn. The participants in this study
were all unionized employees working in a large university in the United States. The
University setting may limit the relevance of the study for those interested in the
developmental manager phenomenon in other types of organizations. By focusing on
support staff ﬁrnctions, this difference is somewhat diminished, however, as support staff
work lives within the academy share many similarities with staff in industry. In contrast
to the faculty experience, support staff have clear lines of direct supervision, work regular
shifts, and are subject to progressive corrective action (discipline) up to and including
discharge for poor performance, violation of organizational rules and policies, or
exhibiting behavior problems.

Another limitation arises from the union status of the study participants. As union

members, the managers in this study enjoy greater job security than do managers who are

12

not represented by a union. Non-unionized employees generally fall under the doctrine
of employment-at-will. The employment relationship of an at-will employee may be
terminated by either the employer or the employee at any time for good reason, bad
reason, or no reason whatsoever. Unionized employees, in contrast, may only be
terminated for just cause. Just cause clauses outlining criteria for determining cause in
disciplinary cases are negotiated between the union and the employer and are included in
the resulting collective bargaining agreement. Also in the collective bargaining
agreement are formal grievance procedures, which unionized employees use to seek
redress if they believe that they have been treated unfairly. Job security provisions that
protect employees from job loss are also included in the collective bargaining agreement
with the employer. The job security and just cause provisions, coupled with the unions’
duty to represent employees in disputes and negotiations with the University, may
increase the participants’ willingness to engage in employee development activities than
would otherwise be the case.

Potential gender differences among managers represent an additional limitation in
this study. Concerns surrounding the nurturing and development of others, such as might
be underlying the developmental manager paradigm, have generally been associated with
women. While these and other gender differences are important, they are beyond the
scope of the present study. Fortunately, other scholars are exploring gender differences in
management (see for example Davidson & Burke, 1994 — 2000; Van Velsor & Hughes,
1990)

Additional limitations exist due to the study’s exclusive focus on the managers’

perceptions of the developmental management phenomenon. It is possible that the

13

employees with whom these managers work perceive the managers’ roles,
responsibilities, and behaviors quite differently than do the managers themselves. The
exclusive focus on the managers also fails to evaluate whether, and to what extent,
learning actually occurs as a result of the managers’ behaviors. Future research exploring
the employees’ experience of the developmental manager phenomenon, including an

evaluation of learning outcomes is, therefore, warranted.

l4

Chapter Two
Literature Review
In response to the changing needs of society, the workplace has become a
signiﬁcant provider of adult learning experiences (Dirkx, 1996; Rainbird, 2000; Watkins,
1989). Given global competition and the rapid technological change of the Knowledge
Age “ [a] literate, educated, inquisitive, problem-solving workforce is essential to the
survival and competitiveness of business and industry” (Rowden, 1996, p. 3). The
realities of today’s society require that adults be competent in communication,
interpersonal, and decision-making skills and continually engage in learning (Stein, 2000)
as they fulﬁll their roles both within, and beyond, the workplace. Societal changes and
the resulting changes in the workplace have led to a new model of work that incorporates
learning as an integral part of the work process (Bierema, 1996; Harris, 1985; Pearson,
Chattergee & Okachi, 2003; Sengel 990). Under this model, the role of management, and
management’s relationship with employees, is changing from one of command and
control, where knowledge and authority reside with the manager, to a developmental
model (N ewstrom & Davis, 1997) where managers facilitate learning opportunities and
strive to create an environment conducive to adult learning. In this emerging
developmental model, knowledge is co-created (Bruffee, 1999) through the collaborative
efforts of employees and managers. Indeed, such collaborative learning in the workplace
is deemed critical and is built on the understanding that “learning is the most important
activity of modem-day organizations” (Bensimon & Neumann, 1993, p. ix). Fishback and
Polson (1998) found that an environment that is both challenging and supportive

facilitates adult learning. Reﬂection also facilitates learning. Recognition of the value of

15

reﬂection to adult cognitive development is not new. In 1933, Dewey deﬁned the act cf
reﬂection as “active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form
of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further considerations to
which it tends” (1933, p. 118). Dewey’s model included ﬁve states of thinking:
suggestions, intellectualization of the experience, use of one suggestion after another to
guide observation, mental elaboration or reasoning, and testing the hypothesis (1933, p.
199-209). Building on Dewey’s work, Boud, Keogh, and Walker (1985) condensed
Dewey’s ﬁve states of thinking into three: returning to the experience, attending to
feelings about the experience, and evaluating the experience.

One of the most inﬂuential scholars of reﬂection is Schdn. Schon’s
conceptualization of reﬂection presents a distinction between two types of reﬂection that
professionals engage in: reﬂection-in-action and reﬂection-on-action. Reﬂection-in-
action occurs during an experience or “thinking on one’s feet” (Schon, 1983. p. 68).
Reﬂection-on-action involves looking back on the experience aﬁer it has occurred. When
reﬂecting-on-action, one looks back at an event and considers what happened and thinks
critically about the reasons why one responded to the event in a given manner.

The work of Argyris, Senge, and others has inﬂuenced organizational human
resource and management development efforts through the concepts of organizational
learning and the learning organization. The impact of Schdn’s work on reﬂection has
been more evident in teacher education. The value of reﬂection has been less accepted in
management practice where “reﬂection of any type has been considered a luxury... Yet,

paradoxically, reﬂection is becoming more important, particularly for managers”

16

(Marsick, 1990 p. 23). As Siebert and Daudelin (1999) suggest “the blending of
reﬂection and management is essential to productive learning.”

The concepts of experiential learning (Dewey, 1933; Kolb, 1984), action learning
(Argyris & Schon, 1978), and the learning organization (Senge, 1990) inform the adult
learning that occurs in the workplace and the restructuring of work to incorporate
learning. The developmental model of management rests primarily upon these theoretical
foundations of adult learning and organizational behavior. These foundations also include
Bandura’s social cognitive theory (1986), which recognizes that learning takes place
within a social context. The social context in the workplace includes department level
subcultures. These subcultures have been found to be critical to understanding how
organizational policies are put into practice (Palthe & Kossek, 2003). In the workplace
context, indirect learning may occur at the departmental level as employees observe and
model the behavior of their immediate supervisor. Similarly, the human resources model
of organizational behavior that “is concerned with the grth and development of people
towards higher levels of competency, creativity and fulﬁllment” (Newstrom & Davis,
1997, p. 15) supports the emerging developmental manager model. The human resources
model views the management role as one of service rather than control. This is consistent
with the concept of servant leadership (Block, 1993) wherein managers release control by
empowering employees and achieve organizational goals through the growth and

development of others.

17

Background

To more fully understand the signiﬁcance of the developmental model of
management for adult learning and management theory and practice, a review of Western
style business management is appropriate.

Management in America has evolved since Taylor’s Scientiﬁc Management
(1911/1972), which began in the early the 19008. Scientiﬁc management was predicated
on the View that efﬁciency is achieved by breaking complex tasks into their simplest
elements. Under this model, workers needed only rudimentary skills training to perform
these simpliﬁed tasks. The accompanying management style was that of command and
control where managers ensured that workers performed tasks as proscribed without
deviation. This model of work and management can be understood as a panopticon, with
the manager being an all-seeing central authority ﬁgure continually monitoring worker
activity. This model required multiple levels of management, each responsible for
monitoring the performance of the next lowest level. During this period, research interest
into the formal practice of management grew signiﬁcantly. One outcome of this interest
was the development of Managerial Role Theory (Mintzberg, 1983) that continues to
shape management development today (Pearson, Chatterjee, and Okachi, 2003).
Mintzberg identiﬁed four primary functions of management: planning, organizing,
coordinating, and controlling. According to Mintzberg, these functions apply to all levels
of management, and can be deﬁned in terms of 10 roles such as monitor and disturbance
handler, disseminator and liaison, leader and ﬁgurehead. These four primary functions,
and the 10 corresponding roles, form the basis for a traditional understanding of business

management in America.

18

Although scientiﬁc management began in business and industry, higher education
has been greatly impacted by its principles. In 1910, The Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching sought out a mechanical engineer, Morris Llewllyn Cooke, to
study the efficiency of Western higher education. One ﬁnding of this study was a
reported need for greater uniformity and accountability. To achieve this, Cooke
introduced the “student hour” (1910, p.19), the precursor of today’s credit hour, as the
unit of measurement by which universities would achieve this uniformity and
accountability and by which its management would be evaluated. As explained by Cooke
“The college professor must take the position that he is not an individual set apart, and
that in the long run he must be governed and measured by the same general standards that
obtain in other positions” (1910, p. 21). To facilitate the adaptation of scientiﬁc
management principles to higher education, Knowles (1970) wrote an extensive
handbook explaining in detail how its concepts could be applied to higher education.
Other scholars began to exhort academic leadership to adopt business management
models (McManis & Parker, 1978; Rourke & Brooks, 1966) with the goal of
“produc[ing] at the lowest cost goods desired by customers — that is, to make higher
education more like a business” (Bimbaum, 2000, p.27). This represented a dramatic shift
in the thinking surrounding the structure and management of higher education in
America. This shift to a business model of academic management led to increased
scholarly interest in the management of institutions of higher education. The literature
during this time, both descriptive and prescriptive, focused primarily on policy-level
issues such as budgeting, planning, accounting, and information systems. As the business

model became accepted as appropriate for higher education, administrators were

19

encouraged to improve overall management of the institution by adopting other business
management techniques such as Management by Objectives (MBO), Total Quality
Management (TQM), and Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI). Although the
TQM/CQI movement in higher education “provoked serious discussion not only of its
technical merits but also of its educational and social implications” (Birnbaum, 2000, p.
107), research exploring the impact of management models on academic support staff
remains scarce.
Emerging Management Models

As the needs of society and the workplace began to change in the 19803,
disillusionment with scientiﬁc management began to emerge. Employee welfare issues
such as quality of work life, worker dissatisfaction, and motivation were coming to the
fore. Theories such as Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (1954), Herzberg’s Motivation and
Hygiene Factors (1959/1993), and the human resources model of management began to
gain prominence over traditional command and control models of management.

Argyris and Schdn (1978) recognized the importance of organizational learning
and developed the concept of Model-I and II management behaviors. Argyris (1987)
posited that the behaviors of most managers could be described as Model-I, wherein their
primary interests were: (a) winning rather than losing, (b) achieving self-deﬁned goals,
(c) suppressing negative feelings, (d) maximizing rationality, and (e) minimizing
emotionality. These types of behaviors, Argyris argued, lead to single-loop rather than
double-loop learning. Single-loop leaming inhibits problem solving and questioning, and
ultimately “. . .people begin to accept the idea that their organization is not a place for

learning, and, consequently, they cease learning” (Wexley & Latham, 2002, p. 227).

20

Argyris and Schdn ’3 work focused attention on the need for reﬂection and
reﬂective practice (Schon, 1987) to understand one’s actions. Schon explains that an
individual reﬂects upon the “understandings which have been implicit in his action,
understandings which he surfaces, criticizes, restructures, and embodies in future action”
(1983, p. 50). In the time since their original work, the idea of reﬂection and reﬂective-
practice has been used extensively in the development of nurses, teachers and other
educators (Usher, et al., 1997). Reﬂection, as used here, is deﬁned by Boyd and F ales
(1983) as “The process of creating and clarifying the meaning of experience in terms of
self in relation to both self and the world” (p. 101). It has been suggested that, in order to
be effective, such reﬂection must be directed or guided (Johns, 2000). While the use of
guided reﬂection has not been explicitly linked to the developmental management
phenomenon, engaging in reﬂection and examining one’s mental models is a basic
element of the concept of the learning organization (Senge, 1990). Developmental
management, and the concept of the learning organization, arose in response to the
realization that traditional management models are ill suited to the needs of the
knowledge age.

Also in response to the growing realization that traditional models of work and
management would not meet the organizational and societal needs of the knowledge age,
the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London developed the concepts of work
groups and job enlargement (Trist, Higgin, Murray, & Pollack, 1963) that were the
precursors of self-directed teams in the workplace.

The advent of self-directed work teams and employee empowerment initiatives

required management behaviors that “motivate and empower” (Rosow & Zager, 1989, p.

21

10) rather than direct and control employees. According to Rosow and Zager, in their
1989 National Policy Study, New Roles for Managers, if organizations were to be
successful, they would need to help employees develop the ability to engage in problem
solving and self-directedness. In order to do this, managers would have to engage in what
they referred to as “TCL” management (p. 1); that is, managers would have to act as
trainers, coaches, and leaders. It has been suggested that only through such activities, and
the development of intellectual capital that they foster (Bennis & Nanus, 2003; Ellinger,
Ellinger, & Keller, 2002; Gilley & Maycunich, 2000; Senge, 1990), can organizations
achieve the needed ﬂexibility, responsiveness, and quality needed to survive in today’s
environment. This environment is characterized by global competition, complexity
brought on by “rapid and spastic change” (Bennis & Nanus, 2003, p. 8), mergers and
acquisitions, downsizing, incessant advances in technology where the power of the
microchip is said to double every 18 months (Burke, Trahnant & Koonce, 2000, p. 4),
and the shiﬁ from the Industrial Age to the Knowledge Age (Naisbitt, 1984). Drucker
(2001) captures this concept when he claims “[m]anagement must also enable the
enterprise and each of its members to grow and develop as needs and opportunities
change. Training and development must be built into it on all levels — training and
development that never stop” (p. II). The Knowledge Age workplace requires a new
management paradigm with a corresponding change in management roles and behaviors
(Bennis & Nanus, 2003; Rosow & Zager, 1989).

The knowledge age also places new requirements on employees. Rapidly
changing technology, the necessity for dual wage-earners, the elder care needs that come

from enhanced life spans, and the changing nature of work itself (Daly, 2000) often cause

22

the employees to experience work-life intensiﬁcation (Milliken & Dunn-Jensen, 2005),
where employees feel that they do not have time to do everything that is expected of
them. In an effort to recruit and retain employees experiencing work life intensiﬁcation,
many employers have developed work-family policies (Kossek & Ozeki, 1999;
Osterrnan, 1995). Many of these work-family policies are congruent with those behaviors
associated with developmental management such as allowing ﬂexible work schedules and
providing support to employees. Official access to these policies is often limited,
however, based upon an employee’s position and level of seniority. In practice, how
access to work-family policies is granted (Kossek, In-press), and how employee learning,
growth, and development are actually facilitated, is based largely on the discretion of
individual managers.

The developmental management model, which has evolved in response to the
requirements of the knowledge age, has signiﬁcant implications for managers’ roles and
relationships with employees. As organizations strive to maintain competitive success in
a rapidly changing environment, managers are expected and trained (Wexley & Latham,
2002) to engage in teaching (Cohen & Tichy, 1998; French & Bazalgette, 1996),
coaching (McGill & Slocum, 1998), training (Rosow & Zager, 1989), and facilitating
learning (Ellinger & Bostrom, 2002), in addition to enacting the 10 roles Mintzberg
described. Building on the work of Douglas and McCauley (1999), D’Abate et al. (2003,
pp. 367-368) identiﬁed behaviors that managers exhibit when fulﬁlling these
developmental roles. These behaviors, grouped according to the purpose for the behavior,

include:

23

The behaviors exhibited by the developer that enable the learner to learn.
These include:

1.

2.
3

8.
9.

10.
11.

Collaborating: The extent to which the developer and learner work
together in a collaborative manner.
Directing: The degree of direction provided to the learner.

. Goal Setting: The establishment and tracking of goals and the

provision of goal-related support.

Helping Assignments: The provision of task assistance or technical
support to the learner.

Modeling: The demonstration or modeling of appropriate behaviors by
the developer.

Observing: The observation of the learner in a work setting for
developmental purposes.

Problem Solving: The developer working with a learner to examine
and resolve a particular problem.

Providing Practical Application: The provision of experience or
practice with hands-on projects or challenging work for the learner.
Providing feedback: The provision of feedback or constructive
criticism to the learner. ‘

Sharing Information: The provision of information to the learner.
Teaching: The instruction or teaching of the learner to build expertise,
skills, or knowledge.

The behaviors exhibited by the developer that provide emotional support
to the learner. These include:

12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

18.
19.

Affirming: The provision of communications indicating acceptance
and conﬁrmation of the learner.

Aiding: The provision of aid or help to the learner.

Befriending: The provision of friendship to the learner.

Calming: Actions or communications designed to reduce the learner’s
anxiety or stress.

Conﬁdence Building: Communications or actions taken to enhance the
conﬁdence or self-esteem of the learner.

Counseling: The provision of counseling, advice or guidance to the
learner.

Encouraging: The encouragement or motivation of the learner.
Supporting: The social, emotional, or personal (i.e., psychosocial)
support of the learner.

The behaviors exhibited by the developer that assist the learner’s career
progression. These include:

20.

Advocating: The sponsorship of the learner to advance in the
organization or ﬁeld.

24

21. Introducing: The provision of opportunities for the learner to network,
increase visibility, and gain exposure to others in the organization or
ﬁeld.

22. Sheltering: The protection of the learner.

23. Socializing: The socialization or orientation of the learner to the
organization or ﬁeld.

In essence, today’s managers are accountable for employee development (Bennis
& Nanus, 2003; Pugh, 2001; Rosow & Zager, 1989; Salleh & Grunewald, 2001) as well )

as the production of goods and services. For the developmental manager, the behaviors

and the nature of the manager - employee relationship is signiﬁcantly different than, and
may be perceived as being in conﬂict with (Ellinger & Bostrom, 2002; Kaiser, 1996),
those identiﬁed by Managerial Role Theory. Rosow and Zager (1989, pp. 6-7, italics in
original) highlighted these differences when they wrote:
Managers who train instead of disciplining employees transfer knowledge and
experience to operating levels and develop individual talent and ability. Managers
who lead instead of conﬁning employees increase their self-esteem and that of the
total work group. Managers who coach instead of scold develop a rapport with
employees and create a spirit which can manage dissent and achieve consensus.
Additional conﬂict may also emerge from managers’ philosophical perspectives
regarding the purpose of adult learning. Friere (1970), hooks (1994), and others state that
adult learning must lead to the empowerment of learners to challenge the existing order.
This perspective appears to be enacted when managers encourage individual employee
learning, growth and development rather than focusing solely on work-based skill
training. The degree to which managers hold these views, what inﬂuenced the

development of these views, and how such holistic development efforts are interpreted by

25

the organization remain unclear. Indeed, the concept of the learning organization, deﬁned
by Senge (1990) as “. . .an organization that is continually expanding its capacity to create
its future” (p14) has been viewed as both an ideal workplace where workers re-create
themselves through learning and thereby increase their productivity and yet another
method for employers to manipulate and exploit employees to achieve organizational
goals and where very little learning occurs (Coopey, 1998; Owneby, 2002). The reality of
how and why employee learning is facilitated in organizations is likely someplace in
between (Driver, 2002) and is dependent upon the subcultures that exist at the department
level where organizational policies are actually carried out (Palthe & Kossek, 2003).
Management by Objectives, conceived of by Drucker (1954) in response to the
changing management needs of increasingly complex organizations, is illustrative. MBO
claims to empower employees because speciﬁc work outcomes are co-determined and
approved by both the employee and his or her immediate supervisor. This view fails to
consider the power differential between managers and employees. It seems unlikely that
an employee, particularly at the staff level, could easily refuse to agree upon goals
suggested by his or her manager. Additionally, management models cannot be view as
neutral processes. They are value-laden as they are “used, always by persons operating in
time, place, circumstance, culture and power relationships” (Enarson, 1975, p.172).
Within the context of higher education, as elsewhere, the underlying “ideological
foundations” (Birnbaum, 2000, p. xii) of various management models need to be

considered.

26

Context

This study was situated within the context of higher education with speciﬁc focus
on support staff management. The designation of support staff, as used in this study,
includes departments such as grounds and maintenance, student services, housing and
food services and other non-academic functions and departmetns. A review of research
on higher education administration revealed that previous research has focused primarily
on high-level administrative positions such as the President, Provost, and Board of
Trustees, or on faculty and the cultures that these groups experience. Bergquist (1992),
for example, identiﬁed four distinct cultures existing within the academy. His
examination explored the impact of the various cultures on the working lives of faculty.
His description of the one of the four cultures, the Developmental Culture, is reﬂective of
the developmental manager model being explored here and seems to apply to all
individuals within the institution. A review of Bergquist’s (1992) developmental culture
is, therefore, relevant. Bergquist deﬁnes the developmental culture as:

A culture that ﬁnds meaning primarily in the creation of programs and activities

furthering the personal and professional growth of all members of the collegiate

community; that values personal openness and service to others, as well as

systematic institutional research and curricular planning; that holds untested

assumptions about the inherent desire of all men and women to attain their own

personal maturation, while helping others in the institution become more mature;

and that conceives of the institutions’ enterprise as the encouragement of potential

for cognitive, affective, and behavioral maturation among all students, faculty,

administration, and staff (p.5).

27

A notable exception to the lack of empirical research of academic support staff is
Kerry’s (2001) study concerning academic secretaries in the United Kingdom. Many
similarities exist between the individuals in Kerry’s study and those in this study.
Activities such as making copies for faculty, answering phones, and ﬁling are common to
support staff in both settings. The importance of this work group is often overlooked but
is crucially important to the functioning of the organization. Indeed, Kerry found that
support staff wield signiﬁcant power because “[t]hey are often the people with crucial
knowledge” (2001 , p. 14) within the organization. Members of the support staff rather
than the faculty often hold the working knowledge of institutional procedures and
accompanying paperwork.

Given the critical nature of support staff to the operations of the University, the
importance of creating work environments that foster employee learning, growth and
development, management’s role in creating such environments, and the lack of
empirical research in this area, further research is warranted. The purpose of this study
was, therefore, to examine the experience of staff-level developmental managers within
the context of higher education. Chapter Three explains the research methods that were

used.

28

 

CHAPTER THREE
Research Methods

The purpose of this study was to examine the experience of staff managers in the
context of higher education. This chapter outlines the phenomenological approach of a
qualitative research design that was used. The primary question guiding this research
was: How do staff managers in the context of higher education come to understand and
. construe their managerial role? The research question focused primarily on the
developmental role that the participants held with the employees with whom they work.
Included in the appendices are the interview protocols, informed consent document,
demographic information questionnaire, and the detailed data analysis steps that were
used as the study was carried out.

The data were analyzed using Moustakas’ modiﬁcation of the Van Kaam Method
of phenomenological data analysis (Moustakas, 1994). Rich textural descriptions of the
nature of the phenomenon, and structural descriptions of how the phenomenon was
experienced (Moustakas, 1994) were co-created by participants and researcher to capture
the “essence” (Creswell, 1998, p. 52, 55; Moustakas, 1994, p. 100) of the phenomenon.

Participant Sampling Procedures

This study focused on staff managers in the context of higher education, seeking
speciﬁcally to explore how they experienced their responsibilities for employee
development. Purposeful sampling (Creswell, 1998; Seidman, 1991) was used to identify
a criterion sample of ﬁve staff managers. Receipt of the university’s exemplary
supervisor award was used as an admittedly imperfect indicator that managers who

received the award might engage in developmental interactions with employees.

29

Supervisors are nominated for the award by individual employees. The award recognizes
supervisors for respecting employees as individuals with important roles and
responsibilities beyond the University and for managing in a manner that facilitates work-
life integration. Given that this reﬂects a holistic view of employees and that some of the
activities that support work-life integration, such as supporting employees, also facilitate
employee learning, it was hoped that the recipients of the award might view employee
learning, growth, and development as part of their managerial role. The data analysis
provided confirmation that the individuals who participated in the study did indeed hold
this view of their management roles. This ﬁnding enhances the validity of the receipt of
the commendation as an indicator of the presence of the developmental manager
phenomenon.

The majority of staff managers in the University where the study took place are
members of the Staff Managers Association (SMA). To minimize differences due to job
structure, job security, and work culture, the study was limited to those managers who
received the commendation and who were also members of the SMA.

The speciﬁc process for participant selection that was used was as follows:

1. Upon committee and UCHRIS approval, I developed a list of SMA members who
had received the exemplary supervisor award. The individuals on this list were
then evaluated to determine whether they met the following criteria:

a. At the time of the study, hold a position as a staff manager or supervisor
position with responsibility for supervising two or more employees.
b. At the time of the study, have held their current position for at least ﬁve

years.

30

2. Slightly fewer than 10 individuals met all of the criteria. Of these, I was able to
contact ﬁve, all of whom agreed to participate in the study. Although six to eight
participants were originally desired, ﬁve was determined to be a sufficient number
for this study as the goal was to seek a deep understanding of lived experiences of
individual managers.

a. Following Seideman’s (1991) framework, I initially contacted potential
participants to provide a brief overview of the study, an explanation of
how I came to have their name, and a request for a meeting to discuss the
study and their interest in participating. This initial contact was not used to
attempt to persuade individuals to participate in the study but rather to
explain the purpose of the research.

3. Individual meetings with potential participants were then conducted to further
explain the study and the rights and expectations of participants.

Although the process of contacting each individual was labor intensive and time
consuming, the process provided potential participants with what I hope was valuable
information about the study, the time that was required, and the level of information
sharing anticipated. By providing this information before asking for their participation,
individuals had an opportunity to consider these issues prior to making a decision
regarding participation. Additionally, the individual contact hopefully signaled to
potential participants that I value them as individuals and did “lay the groundwork for

the mutual respect necessary to the interview process” (Seidman, 1991, p.38).

31

Data Collection Procedures

In-depth interviews were the primary data collection method in this study. The
interviews closely followed the framework provided in Seideman’s Three-Interview
Series (1991). Through the use of open-ended questions, participants were asked to
reconstruct their experience as managers within the context of their lives. By placing
experiences in context “[p]eople’s behavior becomes meaningful and understandable”
(Seidman, 1991, p. 10).

With this data collection technique, my primary role as a researcher was to ask
open-ended questions and actively listen to the responses. I made a concerted effort to
allow participants an opportunity to think about responses and respond as fully as they
desired without interruption. While follow-up and exploratory questions were asked, I
made every effort to avoid asking leading questions. I also strove to avoid making
judgments and imposing my own ideas regarding the topic onto the participants.

Each interview built upon the information shared and reﬂected upon in the
preceding interviews. To the extent possible, participants were allowed to select the date,
time, and location for each of the interviews. Although alternative locations such as
meeting rooms both on and off campus and my ofﬁce were offered, each of the
participants preferred to be interviewed in their own offices. Each interview was
approximately 90 minutes in length. Although in-depth interviews may run to two hours
(Creswell, 1998), 90 minutes allows sufﬁcient time for participants to “reconstruct their
experience, put it in context of their lives, and reﬂect upon its meaning.” Out of respect

for the participant’s time, and to maintain a feeling of mutual trust, interviews were not

32

allowed to go beyond the 90-minute time frame. The Interview protocols used are
provided in Appendix A.

To more fully capture interview responses, each interview was audio-taped. In
addition, interview notes, both descriptive and reﬂective, were made during each
interview. As soon as possible after each interview, additional notes were made to
document reﬂections, follow-up questions, etc. The speciﬁc questions asked during each
interview were dependent upon the participant’s responses and the follow-up questions
that I had identiﬁed. While variation occurred based on the needs and preferences of the
participant, the rapport that developed between each participant and myself, and time
constraints, the interviews approximated the following outline:

Interview One: Setting the Context and Examining the Details of the Experience

Informed consent was obtained at the start of the ﬁrst interview. The participant’s
right to stop any of the interviews or to withdraw from the study at any time was made
explicit. Appendix B contains a sample of the informed consent form that was used. The
demographic questionnaire (Appendix C) was also administered at this time.

The goal of the ﬁrst interview was to set the context for the study by illuminating
the “concrete details of the participant’s present experience” (Seidman, 1991, p.11). This
was achieved by asking the participant to share examples of enacting his or her
management role. The participants were asked to talk about their relationships with
employees, and to share stories illustrating these relationships. Speciﬁc details and

concrete examples were drawn from the stories shared by the participant.

33

Interview Two: Focused Life History

The purpose of the second interview was to establish the context of the
participant’s experience. This was achieved by asking the participant to share as much as
possible about his or her experiences with management prior to becoming a manager.
The participant was asked to go back in time as far as possible within the 90-minute time
frame. The focus here was on past experiences relating to work, management, teaching
and learning.

Interview Three: Reﬂection on the Meaning

In the third interview, participants were asked to reﬂect upon the meaning of their
experiences. This included thinking about connections between their work and personal
lives and how they make sense of their managerial role given their lives prior to
becoming managers and their current work. Participants were also asked to make
connections between their past, present, and future by responding to the question “Given
what you have reconstructed in these interviews, where do you see yourself going in the
future?” (Seidman, 1991, p. 12).

Also during the third interview, I shared initial categories and ﬁndings to
determine whether what I viewed as important was also perceived as important to the
participant. The perceptions of the participants informed, rather than replaced, my
analysis and ﬁndings. This member checking is common to forms of narrative inquiry
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Marshall & Rossman 1999; Seidman, 1991) and provided
greater conﬁdence in the rigor of the study. Additional contacts via phone and e-mail

were made for clariﬁcation purposes.

34

Pilot Study

Although I had conducted a number of interviews prior to conducting this study,
I had not previously used the Three-Interview Series technique. To enhance my comfort
with the process, and to evaluate and revise the data collection techniques, a pilot study
was conducted. The pilot study consisted of two managers. The managers in the pilot
study were not from the population from which the study sample was drawn. As a result
of the pilot study, original questions were determined to be too vague and open-ended,
leading to long discourses on the personal lives of the pilot study participants. Closed-
ended questions were revised to be more open-ended.

Data Analysis

All of the data gathered during the study was carefully stored and managed. A
detailed listing of the data analysis steps used is provided in Appendix D.

To begin the data management process, each of the interview tapes was
transcribed in its entirety. This included pauses, non-verbal sounds such as laughter and
background noise, as well as linguistic devices such as “um”, “you know” and the like.
By capturing these non-verbal sounds, I was able to more fully remember the interview
experience.

Hard copies of the complete, original transcripts were created and stored in a safe-
deposit box. Additional hard copies were used for the actual data analysis.

To protect participant conﬁdentiality, real names were only retained in the
original documents. All documents used for analysis, whether electronic or hard copy,
refer to participants only by pseudonyms. Care was used when selecting pseudonyms,

taking into account “issues of ethnicity, age, and the context of the participant’s life.”

35

(Seidman, 1991, p. 93). The pseudonyms, while reﬂective of each individual, do not
provide so much information that the participant’s identity becomes obvious.

Data analysis was conducted following Moustakas’ modiﬁed version of the Van
Kaam Method (Moustakas, 1994). Audiotapes were listened to in their entirety after each
interview and sections were returned to repeatedly throughout the study. Transcripts
were read through in their entirety with passages of interest highlighted and labeled. As
anticipated, these labels used the ﬁrst letter of the participant’s pseudonym to denote the
participant, a roman numeral to refer to interview number one, two, or three, and an
Arabic number to refer to the page number of the interview transcript (Seidman, 1991, p.
100). Transcripts were read several times throughout the study with each statement being
viewed as having equal value. Repetitive, vague, and overlapping statements were then
eliminated.

From these readings, the categories of the phenomenon began to emerge from the
text. Passages were grouped in these categories and the categories were combined into
themes. As this was an inductive process, the initial categories and themes changed as the
analysis continued.

Member checking was conducted by sharing the emergent themes that I perceived
to represent the essence of the developmental manager phenomenon and relevant
passages to participants for review and comment.

Role of the Researcher in Data Analysis

As with any qualitative researcher, my presence is felt in this study. My

questioning likely provided the impetus for some of the participants to think more deeply

about the origins of their views of management and the implications for their daily

36

 

practice. The questions that I asked, and failed to ask, directly inﬂuenced the course of
the interviews and, therefore, the data that were collected.

Just as the life experiences of the participants inﬂuenced their work, so too, did
my life experiences inﬂuence this research. My initial interest in the subject was, as is
noted in the introductory paragraphs, driven by my relationship with a manager who
greatly inﬂuenced the direction of my life. My view of myself as a developmental
manager, and my role as a management educator, led me to experience a continuous
struggle to view the data as something new, rather than as afﬁrmation of my own
experiences and beliefs. To minimize the impact of my personal biases, I bracketed my
experiences and beliefs. Bracketing, in phenomenological research, “describes the act of
suspending one’s various beliefs about the reality of the natural world in order to study
the essential structures of the world” (Van Mannen, 2000, Glossary section). Bracketing
allowed me to acknowledge, and then consciously hold in abeyance, the biases, opinions,
and beliefs that I held regarding developmental management. In practice, I often had to
insert my beliefs in a large red font at the top of the page of data I was analyzing as a
reminder to myself to view the data as it was, rather than as how I experienced it. This
process of bracketing enhanced the data analysis and resultant ﬁndings.

Presentation of Findings

As appropriate to a qualitative study that seeks to examine the lived experiences
of participants, ﬁndings are presented in a narrative format. Participants’ stories have
been shared using their own words and experiences as appropriate. From the data
analysis, “textural-structural descriptions” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 121) presenting both the

essence of the developmental manager phenomenon and its meaning for participants have

37

been developed and presented. Chapters Four, Five and Six provide additional
information regarding the study context, ﬁndings, and implications for theory and

practice.

38

Chapter Four
Study Context and Participant Proﬁles

The purpose of this study was to explore the lived experiences of staff managers
within the context of higher education, focusing particularly on their relationship with
employees and their role in employee growth and development. The research question
guiding this study was “How do staff managers in the context of higher education come
to understand and construe their managerial role?” This research was situated within a
speciﬁc place and time and the perspective is that of a group of individuals who
experience the developmental manager phenomenon as they interact with employees
every working day.

As learning occurs within a speciﬁc socio-cultural and political context,
understanding the context within which this study was situated is critical. In this chapter I
will share information about the context of the study to enhance the readers’ ability to
draw meaning from the research ﬁndings and participant narratives.

The Context of the Study

This study was conducted in a large and diverse American university. The
University supports employee learning through policies such as tuition assistance, release
time for employees to engage in credit or non-credit courses, and through workshops
offered by their human resources development unit. Although the University encourages
these policies, it is likely that, as is the case with access to work-life integration policies
(Kossek, 2005, in press), employee access to such policies is often dependent upon the
support of individual managers. One of the ways in which the University encourages

managers to grant access to employee development and work-life policies is through its

39

Exemplary Supervisor Award. As explained in Chapter Three, employees nominate their
supervisors for this award if they view the manager as treating employees with respect
and facilitating employees’ ability to integrate their work and personal lives.

The University employs over 5,000 support staff, approximately 15% of whom
are members of the supervisors union. The purpose of the union is to protect and promote
the interests of its members. Being a member of a union may provide workers with a
greater degree of voice and job security than that enjoyed by non-unionized employees,
as termination of employment must be for just cause. In addition, union members who
feel that they have been treated unfairly in the workplace may seek redress through
formal grievance procedures.

Although beyond the scope of this research, the fact that the participants in this
study are union members must be acknowledged. The enhanced job security enjoyed by
union members may have inﬂuenced the participants’ willingness to support employee
development. It is probable that this perception of job security led them to be more
ﬂexible with university policies than would otherwise have been case.

The Participants

The Exemplary Supervisor Award is open to all individuals in the university with
supervisory responsibilities. At the time of this study, approximately 20 individuals had
received the Award. Fewer than 10 of these recipients were members of the supervisors
union. Of these, I was able to make contact with ﬁve, all of whom agreed to participate in
this study. The ways in which they understand and experience their supervisory roles is
explored in Chapter Five. To protect conﬁdentiality, participants’ names have been

changed and the departments in which they work have not been identiﬁed.

40

 

The participants in this study hold supervisory positions within the University and
have responsibility for directly supervising up to 25 staff members. Each participant
worked his or her way “up through the ranks,” holding non-supervisory positions within
the university prior to entering management. They have all been with the university for
over 20 years and in their current positions for approximately 10 years.

The following paragraphs provide a brief demographic overview of each of the
participants.

m

Alicia is in her 'SOs and exudes an air of calm professionalism. Her workday starts
at roughly 7:30 each morning as she checks her calendar and e-mail for important
messages, “to see what I’m challenged with” for the day. After checking for important
messages she pulls up the highlights ﬁ'om USA Today, checking the headlines and the
weather. By ﬁve minutes to 8:00, she opens her ofﬁce door and then goes back to her e-
mails. The phone generally starts to ring and “it may or may not require a response. It
may require that I communicate with one of my people and say ‘I need you to do this,
that or some other thing." Alicia’s sense of humor shows when she laughingly says that
she again checks her e-mail, “to make sure I shouldn't have been in an 8:00 meeting and
it's already 8:05.” Alicia’s workday ofﬁcially ends at 4:30, although she usually doesn’t
leave until almost 5:00.

Alicia deﬁnes her supervisory role and the relationship that she has with
employees as that of listener. She strives to listen to fully understand employees’ needs

and perspectives.

41

At the ﬁrst interview, Alicia, who had been sitting at her desk when I anived,
immediately made me feel welcome. She smiled broadly, made eye contact, and shook
my hand. I got the impression that she was genuinely glad to see me. This feeling of
welcome was a consistent element of all of my interviews with her.

KLIC.

Kyle is in his 40’s and is the ﬁrst person in his family to earn a college degree.
Kyle lives with his wife and children in a small town approximately 30 minutes from the
university. At the end of the day, Kyle uses the drive home to transition from work to
home, thinking about what needs to be done at home, what the kids are doing, and so on.
By the time he arrives home, he has left his worries from the office behind him.

Kyle has been with the same campus department the entire time he has worked at
the university. There was a time when he thought he would never want to move into
management, but his supervisor often encouraged him by saying, “Someday, you are
going to have this job.” In response to this statement Kyle thought to himself, “No way,
can’t do it, don’t want it.” When a supervisory position actually became available in the
department, Kyle thought deeply about what being a supervisor meant to him, what kind
of supervisor he wanted to be, and what type of relationship he wanted to have with
employees if he was a supervisor. After a great deal of consideration, Kyle applied for,
and received the promotion to management. He views his management role as that of a
resource for employees. He believes that the employees know their jobs so he acts as a
resource by overseeing the workﬂow, pitching in when there is a backlog and answering

employees’ questions.

42

Kyle’s ofﬁce invites people to come in and talk. His desk is perpendicular to, and
facing, the door. The ofﬁce is small but has a chair for visitors and a coffee pot. His easy
manner made me feel welcome and restful every time we met. He smiled and laughed
with regularity, and I always left our meetings feeling fortunate for having spent time
with him.

M_ary

Mary is in her 40’s. She comes from what she refers to as a “blue-collar”
background of which she is very proud. Her father worked long hours and died soon after
retiring. Mary thinks her father was unhappy being retired. She seems torn between
admiring her father, saying “He was God to me” for being so loved and respected in the
community, and resenting him for not spending more time at home. Mary, somewhat
sadly, acknowledges that she is, in many ways, like her father.

Mary often works nights and weekends, and is concerned about spending less
time with her family than she should. She usually arrives at work between 8:00 and 8:15.
During busy periods, it is common for her to not get home until 10:00 or 11:00 at night.
She often works six days per week, in addition to taking work home with her at night.

Mary’s dedication to her work should not be construed to mean that she is an
uninvolved mother. It is clear from the way that she talks that she loves her family dearly
and wishes she could spend more time with them.

When I ﬁrst met Mary, she came up to me, extended her hand and heartily asked
if I was Tina. She smiled as she looked into my eyes and gave me the impression that I
was the most important person in the world at that moment. Throughout the course of our

conversations, I learned that Mary has a gift for making people feel that way. I was

43

 

always surprised when our 90-minute interviews were over, as it always felt like we had
only been talking for a few minutes. Talking with Mary, her passion for her work is
obvious, and contagious.

Rim

Rebecca is in her 40’s and this is her ﬁrst supervisory position. She obtained it
after working her way up through the ranks, holding almost every position in the
department at one time or another. Rebecca reﬂected upon these experiences as an
employee when considering how she would enact her management role. She recalls times
when she had to miss work because her children were sick or she had day care problems.
Rebecca’s own experiences led her to recognize that these circumstances are sometimes
unavoidable and she vowed to respect that when the employees she supervises have to
miss work due to unavoidable circumstances. She made a commitment to herself to treat
employees the way she would want to be treated.

As Rebecca talked about her managerial role, she exuded a quiet sense of ability,
coupled with humility. Her ofﬁce has a homelike feel with a chair for visitors, family
photos, and a wall calendar. She was always very poised and professional. I felt
comfortable during our interviews and was thankful for the way she listened carefully
and paused to think before answering questions.

While Rebecca was willing to share a great deal about her work experiences, she
gave me the impression of being a private person. She occasionally chose not answer

questions about her personal life.

44

 

Sam is in his 50’s. He has been in his current position for almost 20 years. He
started with the University as a part-time employee, working his way through the ranks to
his current position. Although some of his siblings spent time at community college, Sam
is the only member of his family to have earned a bachelor’s degree.

Sam’s workday starts with a swim in the pool before work. He is at his ofﬁce by
8:00. The ﬁrst thing he does when he reaches his ofﬁce is read his email. As he reads his
messages, he decides what he needs to take action on, what he can respond to quickly,
and what will take more time. His days are ﬁlled with meetings, reports, and deadlines.
The deadlines and requests for meetings and for information change constantly. To get
done what he needs to on any given day, Sam works until after 5:00, and occasionally
goes in to the ofﬁce on weekends.

When Sam does get home in the evenings, he uses the ﬁrst 15 minutes or so to
“decompress”. He sits on the couch and reads the newspaper. He laughingly relates that
his son, now an adult, learned as a boy not to ask questions until Dad had been home for
15 minutes and had ﬁnished reading the newspaper.

When I ﬁrst met Sam, I was a bit intimidated. He was poised, professional, and
cordial. He greeted me politely, yet for some reason, I felt uncomfortable and a bit guilty
for taking his time. During that ﬁrst interview, Sam seemed more comfortable talking
about others in the department, than he did talking about himself. I walked away from the
interview concerned that I had just spent 90 minutes with this man and felt that I did not
know anything more about him than before we met. This was indicative of his

introverted personality. This is a personality preference that he recognized he cannot

45

always indulge, “I am an introvert. . .but you know the position I am in, I have to act a
different way. . .um, be a different type of person.”

It was not until the end of the second interview, after the tape recorder had been
turned off, that Sam began to open up to me. After that, I felt more comfortable with him
and, I hope, he began to feel more comfortable with me.

Summary

This study explored the developmental manager phenomenon through the lived
experiences of ﬁve staff managers within a large American university. It is worth noting
that these ﬁve individuals share many features in common: they are all in their 40’s or
50’s, all have been or are parents, and have all worked their way up through the ranks
during the more than 20 years each of them has spent working at the UniverSity.

Each of the managers takes great pride in their work. They consistently work
more than 40 hours per week. It is common for them to arrive earlier or stay later than the
employees whom they supervise.

In their current positions they are responsible for the direct supervision of
between two and 25 employees. They work in a variety of support functions on campus.
All are members of the supervisors union, which may inﬂuence their ability to support
employee development through an enhanced sense of job security.

Each participant received the exemplary supervisor award for his or her respectful
and supportive treatment of employees. The employees with whom they work nominated
them for the award.

While the participants in this study share many common features, each is a unique

individual and they each bring their unique characteristics to their work. One difference

46

is the desired amount of distance between the manager and the employees with whom
they work. Alicia, Kyle, and Mary strive to minimize this distance. Mary explained that
she has invited employees to her home so that, “they see who I am. And they don’t look
at me as a manager. They look at me as a co-worker.” Mary views the distance that often
exists between employees and managers as problematic. This is very different than the
view of appropriate distance between employees and managers that was held by Rebecca
and Sam. Rebecca and Sam stated that the line between employees and management must
be clear and maintained. As Rebecca stated, “I try to maintain distance where they
understand that I am the boss. I am not just one of them, one of the group, one of the
guys... You have to maintain that somehow.”

As the contrast of views of the participants illustrate, the desired distance between
management and employees did not appear to impact their views that employee learning,
growth, and development are an integral part of their supervisory roles. Further
exploration in this area is warranted.

Regardless of the unique characteristics of each of the participants, one
characteristic was held by each of the participants. That characteristic was the view that
employee development is an integral element of their supervisory role. The ways in
which they conceptualize and enact these roles is examined in Chapter Five. The
implications of these ﬁndings are discussed in Chapter Six.

In this chapter I have provided information about the University within which this
study was situated. I have also provided brief descriptions of the participants themselves.

A greater sense of each participant is presented in Chapter Five. It is hoped that this

47

 

information will enhance the reader’s ability to draw meaning from the research ﬁndings

and participant narratives.

 

48

Chapter Five
Participants’ Perceptions of their Supervisory Roles
The purpose of this study was to explore the lived experiences of staff managers
within the context of higher education focusing particularly on their relationship with
employees and employee growth and development. The research question guiding this
study was: “How do staff managers in the context of higher education come to
understand and construe their managerial role?” Underlying this research question was a

desire to learn more about the following questions, from the perspective of those who live

1mm“! V

the phenomenon every working day.

1. What does it mean to be a manager?

2. What does it mean to facilitate employee learning, growth, and
development?

3. How is the manager employee relationship deﬁned?

4. How is the developmental manager model different ﬁ'om other
constructions of management?

5. How did the participants come to hold their current conceptualizations of
management?

This chapter describes the ﬁndings that emerged through an extensive analysis of
the data collected through individual interviews with ﬁve staff supervisors at a large
American university. These ﬁndings suggest that the developmental management model
represents an alternative construction of the supervisory role of managers. In contrast to
traditional conceptualizations of management, the developmental management model

views employee learning, growth, and development as integral to the managers’ role.

49

This is consistent with Ellinger and Bostrom’s (2002) conceptualization of managers who
have fully integrated employee learning into their organizational role identities. Although
the participants in this study did not refer to themselves as developmental managers,
facilitators of learning, coaches, teachers, or any of the other myriad terms used to
classify this type of management, the data suggest that they identify with the
developmental management model. Speciﬁcally, they:
1. View employee learning, growth, and development as integral to their
managerial role, rather than as a separate task, function, or role.
2. Came to hold their current conceptualization of their managerial roles
through an ongoing process of reﬂection. This reﬂection consisted of a
critical reﬂection of personal experiences, beliefs, values, and views of
work engaged in prior to entering their management roles, and reﬂection-
in-action as they engage in daily interactions with employees.

Facilitating employee learning, growth, and development deﬁnes the manager
employee relationship for the participants in this study. It is not something that they do,
it is how they do what they do, how they enact their supervisory roles. Much of the
learning that the participants facilitate is informal in nature. As they engage in their daily
activities and their day-to-day interactions with employees, they recognize and act upon
teachable moments. Such teachable moments involve professional development, as when
a manager encourages an employee to take a training class, or personal development,
such as when a manager engages in dialogue and provides support to an employee
experiencing a personal crisis. These teachable moments are sometimes of both a

personal and professional nature, such as when a manager works with an employee to

50

better deal with stress, enhance interpersonal skills, or increase self-conﬁdence. The
recognition of, and attention to, the overlap between personal and professional learning,
growth, and development is indicative of the holistic and humanistic view of employees
inherent in the developmental management model. As Kyle explained:

It is so important to let them know that, that they matter and that the job they do is

important. And, it is important that they are here. And, that we want them here

and we are glad they are here. That would be my greatest wish, that it would be
across the board, somehow that that can get out to everybody in the nation, the
world.

The participants respect the employees with whom they work as intelligent adults
with needs and responsibilities beyond the workplace. Their facilitation of employee
development in both personal and professional areas is indicative of this respect. They
view facilitating employee learning, growth, and development as a deﬁning characteristic
of their management roles. This conceptualization of management has at its foundation a
reﬂection upon the lessons, values, and beliefs that were learned during childhood. Four
of the ﬁve managers in this study, Alicia, Kyle, Mary, and Sam, explicitly stated this
reﬂection upon their early experiences when asked how they came to hold their
understanding of their management role. Rebecca, in contrast, did not. When asked about
her early experiences, she said that “there are some things that I am not comfortable
talking about.” She repeated this comment several times during our interviews, also
stating that her childhood had not inﬂuenced her work life. Interpreting these comments
is beyond my area of expertise. From a lay perspective, however, the strength of these

comments led me to consider that there are issues from her childhood that she is not yet

prepared to address.

51

Alicia, Kyle, Mary, and Sam cited reﬂection upon their early experiences as
having led to their holding certain principles, assumptions, values, and beliefs about
people. The meanings drawn from these early experiences inform their views about the
nature of work, workers, and the role of management. Added to this were meanings
made from critical reﬂection upon signiﬁcant experiences they had had as adults,
experiences both in their family and work lives. Reﬂection upon work included
experiences that they had had as employees and their experiences as managers. Together,
these experiences and the meaning drawn from these experiences through reﬂection form
the managers’ working philosophies. These working philosophies inﬂuence how the
managers identify with their managerial roles, their relationships with employees, and
their daily interactions with employees.

In this chapter I share the ﬁndings that emerged from the analysis of the data. The
chapter is divided into two major sections: how the participants understand their
supervisory roles and the ways in which reﬂection informs this understanding.

How Participants Understand their Supervisory Roles

The participants in this study hold a developmental management view of
supervision. When interacting with employees or deciding on a speciﬁc course of action
regarding an employee, they consider the facilitation of employee learning, growth, and
development. In contrast to being viewed as a separate task or function, employee
development deﬁnes the supervisor-employee relationship for the participants. This is an
alternative to more traditional views of management as discussed in Chapter Two.

For the participants, their interactions with employees were based on the

underlying assumption that employees are intelligent adults who add value to the

52

organization. Four major themes inform these interactions: (a) a striving to get to know

employees as individuals with goals and responsibilities outside of the organization, (b)

engaging in and fostering lifelong learning, (0) trusting that employees have the ability

and desire to perform their jobs well and therefore treating them with respect and, (d)

demonstrating empathy and ﬂexibility to accommodate and validate employee needs.
Striving to Get to Know Employees as Individuals

The participants in this study viewed employees in a holistic fashion, recognizing
that, like themselves, employees have myriad roles and responsibilities in society. They
are respectful and supportive of the fact that these multiple responsibilities may cause
events that impact employees’ job performance. The participants did not view these
events as indications of poor work ethic or lack of dedication to the job. Rather, they are
accepted as valid events to which employees must respond. To better understand and
accommodate these events, the participants engaged in a variety of activities to get to
know employees as individuals, rather than as one-dimensional employees of the
university. As Alicia stated, “I try to know each one of my employees and their family
lives and what they are going through.”

In order to get to know employees as individuals, the participants took the time to
talk with employees every day. They listened and observed employees as they went about
their work. Alicia included time to talk with employees in her daily routine.

I try to make a trip at eight o’clock every morning or just between 8:00 and 8:10

to the two administrative assistants we have that really keep the ofﬁce moving.

That is Michelle and Susan. I am not going to them for anything speciﬁc. I am

every morning [going] to see what kind of day they have had the day before.

What is their demeanor in the morning? How are your kids? How did Johnny do
in baseball? What is going on with your daughter? Did she have the baby all

right?

53

 

Mary attempted to learn more about what was going on in employees’ lives by
being attentive to what was going on in the ofﬁce.

You have to walk through this office and notice that if there is somebody who has

a new picture on their [sic] desk, you say, “Is that this year’s school picture?” Or,

you listen to people’s conversations and someone talks about having to take the

dog to the vet. The next day you ask “how is your dog doing?”

By taking the time to talk with employees and by noticing and commenting on
events in employees’ lives, the participants signaled to employees that they were
interested in their lives and in the events outside of the workplace that were important to
the employees. This show of interest was reinforced by the participants’ open-door
policies and the respect with which they treated employees’ requests for time off to deal
with personal issues. Kyle explained:

I feel it is important to realize that people are people and they have things, we all

have things, outside of the office that can affect your performance. I have an

open—door policy where my door is never shut. And I think that the staff feels
comfortable coming to me and talking, whatever it is, a personal issue or not. You
know, it is important to be at work, it is important to do your job, but your life
outside of work is important, too.

Keeping one’s ofﬁce door open to encourage employees to come in and talk with
the supervisor was cited as a common practice by all of the participants. Sam shared that,
“Sometimes they come to me and close the door to talk. Sometimes you just sit and listen
and talk with the employee.” Rebecca has told employees that they can talk with her
whenever they wish. She stated that this has helped employees understand that “they feel
that I listen to what they are telling me.” She cited this “openness, willingness to listen,

availability, being available for your staff to come talk to you about an idea that they

have” as critical to her role as a manager.

54

Fix

While the participants did note that they had responsibilities that occasionally
necessitated the closing of their ofﬁce doors, they kept them open whenever possible to
signal their availability and approachability to employees. As Rebecca explained:

I may not be physically available but when I am here, and it sounds trite, but I
leave my door open. It’s not ‘I have to schedule a meeting with Rebecca.’ They
know they can come in and get a half an hour of time no matter what. But, it
never stops anybody from just [coming in] as evidenced from a conversation I had
this morning. The door was open, he stood in the doorway, and said, ‘Hey, I got
this situation, let’s talk about it.’ So, it is being here, being open and
communicative.

 

In addition to keeping their ofﬁce doors open whenever possible, all of the
managers in this study held regularly scheduled staff meetings. The frequency of
regularly scheduled staff meetings varies by manager. Mary and Rebecca, for example,
schedule bi-weekly group staff meetings. Sam and Kyle, on the other hand, schedule their
group staff meetings every week. In addition to the regularly scheduled group staff
meetings, Rebecca also scheduled a weekly meeting with individual employees. This
served to let employees know that they “can get a half-hour if they want it.”

The participants in this study noted that employees sometimes resisted their desire
to be accessible, and to get to know employees. In an attempt to minimize such
resistance, Sam shared how he repeatedly told one employee that he was willing to listen
and that he viewed what the employee had to say as valuable:

The person in the cubicle space next to me is the most fantastic employee in the

world. Do you know how long it took me to convince her to not ask if she is

bothering me if she comes in with a question? It is not only the supervisor that has

to be willing to let their employees speak freely, the employee has to be able to do
that [too]and not all of them can.

55

To help her get to know employees better, and to build stronger relationships with
them, Mary pitches in with mundane tasks.

One of the things that I ﬁnd is when you pull everybody to do a menial task it is

great tearnbuilding. People laugh, people smile, and they’re seeing each other

doing stuff... and you say you know what, let’s order pizza for lunch. What it
does is it makes people feel good about things with a minimal amount of money
and also, you are building relationships.

To varying degrees, all of the participants reported that listening was critical to
their success as managers. As Kyle explained, “I think management is doing a good job
listening.” Listening carefully to what is being said, to what is “left unsaid”, and to “fully
understand what the employee is experiencing” were cited as important elements of the
participants’ supervisory roles. Mary explained the act of listening as a choice.

You can make a choice about either ﬁghting with people and creating a negative

environment that will make it tough to come to work everyday, or you can get

along with folks, you can understand folks, you can listen to folks.

Alicia was particularly aware of the value of listening. Drawing on a painful
lesson that she learned as a child, she listens to thoroughly understand the message that
the employee is sharing, knowing that the words are not always the most important part
of that message. She shared how she learned, as a young child of ﬁve or six years old, the
importance of listening to truly understand the message being conveyed.

I had a father that was a very good teacher. Pretty neat, huh? He taught my

brother and I [sic] to listen. . ..One day my father called me to the shop and in his

hand he had a piece of metal and he said “Take this to the house and cool it off.”

So I reached for it and I had the hot end. . .after which I then dropped it and I

caught a verbal lashing. He said, “God damn it, Alicia! You are not listening. I

am asking you to cool this off ...and you need to reach around and take my side

of it because the side that is extended is hot and you are not listening.” I guess it
was certainly an experience I have never forgot. So I listen.

56

 

As the narratives above illustrate, the participants in this study engaged in a
variety of strategies to learn more about the employees with whom they work. These
strategies included listening to employees, taking the time to talk with employees, being
attentive to what was going on in the ofﬁce, being accessible, and communicating their
accessibility to employees, and holding regular staff meetings. These activities were
reported as common practice by all of the study participants.

Engaging in and Fostering Lifelong Learning

 

The participants viewed engaging in and fostering lifelong learning as an integral

1
1

part of their supervisory roles. The lifelong learning that the managers themselves
engaged in was primarily of an informal nature, although formal leaming opportunities
were also cited as engaged in and beneﬁcial. Lifelong learning opportunities focused on
personal development. These included gaining self-conﬁdence and managing stress,
professional development, staying abreast of technological changes, staying current in
their professions, and improving work processes.
Engaging in Lifelong Learning
Each of the participants recognized the value of learning and stated that they
needed to continue leaming in order to perform their jobs well. Sam explained.
In this job, in this office, it is so non-static. You are constantly learning. The
lowest level support person up to the director, it is a ﬁeld that is constantly
changing and has so much information. . .. so, the sky is kind of the limit here in
this office about what you want to learn because there is so much.
Alicia also reported a need to continually learn to stay current in her profession.
She did this informally, spending time each day reading professional journals and other

materials in order to stay current with the ﬁeld. Similarly, Sam reviewed job-related

websites to keep up with changes in his profession.

57

In addition to these informal learning opportunities, the participants also engaged
in formal training programs. Each of the participants had attended at least one formal,
work-related, training program during his or her management career. Topics included
management skills, interpersonal skills, and negotiation skills. In addition, Kyle,
Rebecca, and Sam engaged in training designed to help them better understand
themselves and their own preferred styles and personal preferences.

The participants also learned informally by engaging in dialogue with employees.
The participants used the term dialogue to refer to a process of talking with others to
share ideas and gain new perspectives. This process was characterized by questioning and
careful listening. Sam and Kyle, for example, both reported engaging in dialogue with
employees when trying to ﬁnd new ways to accomplish departmental tasks during
particularly heavy periods. During this process, Sam and Kyle each asked the employees
in their departments what was working well, what was not working well, and what
changes should be made. The employees’ suggestions for change were implemented to
the extent possible.

Sam and Kyle’s approach to needed change represents a view of employees held
by all of the study participants. This shared view is that it is the employees, rather than
the managers, who possess the greatest insight and understanding of the work processes.
All of the participants used dialogue to varying degrees. Mary referred to the learning
that occurred through these dialogues as “a group learn,” where employees and managers
together created new knowledge.

Alicia reported that she frequently learned new ways to structure work or perform

speciﬁc tasks through listening to employees’ ideas. She respects the employees’

58

 

expertise to the extent that she has adopted employees’ suggestions, even when they were

dissimilar to her own preferences.

It may not be the same thing that I would do or the same way I would do it. I like
ﬂexibility because that is going to make you grow. That is going to be make me
grow.

The participants also used the employees’ performance appraisal meetings as an
opportunity for their own development. Alicia explains.

You can sit down with the employee during performance review process, and

have a good exchange that will get some dialogue going between you and the

other person. And, it is friendly, and you are probably going to learn a lot of facts
about things you didn’t know but that you are going to be grateful for when the
process is over. So, you can become a better supervisor or manager.

The participants in this study valued lifelong learning. The primary method of
learning that they engaged in was informal in nature. They built opportunities for learning
into their daily activities by taking time each day to remain current in their professional
ﬁelds. These daily activities included reading work-related journals, technical manuals,
and professional websites. They also used dialogue to learn from, and create new
knowledge with, the employees in their departments. In addition, the participants
engaged in formal, work-related, training programs. Participation in these programs was
generally in response to a felt need to improve their supervisory and interpersonal skills.
Fostering Employee Lifelong Learning

In addition to engaging in lifelong learning themselves, the participants also
facilitated the employees’ learning. As with their own learning, much of the learning
they facilitated was informal in nature. These informal learning opportunities took a

variety of forms such as engaging in dialogue and by recognizing and acting on teachable

moments. The participants understood teachable moments as those situations that

59

occurred in the workplace that supervisors could use to help employees learn. These

situations included times when an employee made an error in a work task or process,

failed to perform up to expectations, or was attempting to learn a new task or

responsibility. Teachable moments also included situations where an employee

experienced feelings of stress or frustration, or interpersonal conﬂict in the workplace.

Rather than responding with disciplinary action or by solving problems for employees,

the managers used the situation to help the employee learn, grow, or develop personally i

or professionally. Mary explained:

.‘ Ask ‘vﬁ '
Al
1

1

Part of what I want our staff to understand is that you’ve got to teach people, use
teachable moments. . .I think it happens everyday. I mean it really does. Instead of
me jumping in and saying, ...let me resolve it. My teachable moment was ‘I am
not going to be your big sister... You solve this one yourselves.’

Teaching employees to solve problems for themselves, as Mary did in the case
above, is one example of the managers’ recognizing and acting upon a teachable moment.
Alicia provided another example when she described how she helped an employee deal
with her frustration through dialogue. She asked a series of questions to help the
employee discover the root cause of her frustration. This understanding facilitated the
employee’s ability to develop strategies for minimizing the frustration. Alicia stated that
she engaged in this type of informal teaching on a regular basis.

I try to teach on a day-to-day basis. Issues come up and I go back through the

questioning process, and say, ‘Laurie, show me what you are ﬁnding so

frustrating.’ And as you begin to tell me that, then I begin to question it.

The employee learning fostered by the participants did not focus primarily on job
skills to enhance employees’ current job performance. Rather, it was primarily in the

form of personal development or the learning of skills for upward mobility, both

personally and professionally. It was accepted by all of the participants that the

60

acquisition of new skills might have led to valued employees leaving the department or
University. Rebecca explained that although a valued employee might leave the
department, this did not minimize the value that lifelong learning brings to both the
employee and the University.
I will help them get training or do whatever they think or they feel and I feel they
will need in order to move to that next level. It may be a realization, however, on
their part that that next level is not here.

Sam shared a similar view. He explained that even though an employee may leave

the department, encouraging the employee’s growth and development was in the best

 

interests of both the employee and the department.

Sometimes, you get such a good employee and you let them kind of strut their
stuff and everybody wants them. I have a couple of people on my staff right now
that I am lucky I still have them because they are so good at what they do. But,
they could go somewhere else in this ofﬁce or beyond, but they are choosing to
stay here. I talk about it a lot with them. You know, to let them know if that is
what they want to do that I will support it 100 percent. But I am keeping my
ﬁngers crossed that they won’t want to leave.

If you don’t support them growing, the growth that they want, then I think you
lose them anyhow. You have an employee who is not motivated because they
feel stiﬂed or they will look elsewhere where they feel that they can, you know,
move up the ladder or have some growth or whatever, so. . .I think it is a win-win
for the ofﬁce as well as the employee to try to facilitate growth.

The possibility of job loss has provided the impetus for the participants’
encouraging an employee to seek out more formal learning opportunities. When his
department was facing layoffs, Kyle encouraged employees to take advantage of the
many different training programs offered by the University, thus enhancing their job
prospects should they be laid off.

We had, a couple two or three years ago, layoffs within the office. And we did, at

that time, really encourage people to go out and get as much training as they

could. We did not know what the budget was going to be like, and more than
that, [we knew] we were going to have more [employees] laid off. So, we worked

61

hard to get people to get as much training as they could. Taking medical classes,
Excel classes, whatever. Just in case something opened up somewhere else.

Other times, the impetus for learning came in the form of a speciﬁc problem an
employee was facing. Kyle shared his experience with Molly, an employee who found
the extremely busy season at work to be profoundly stressful. In response to Molly’s
sense of overwhelming stress, Kyle talked with her to provide a sense of community and
to offer suggestions for dealing with the stressful workload. Kyle related his conversation

with Molly:

 

Okay, we know we are here in this time period of the year when we are all busy.
All we can do is what we can do. So you can’t worry about what you are not
getting done. Let’s not worry; let’s just do what we can do. Everything will be
here tomorrow when we come back. We are going to have to take it one day at a
time and deal with what we have one day at a time. And she would go home and
not sleep at night, and I would talk to her about that many times, you have to
leave this here when you leave at night. You cannot do this. You are going to
make yourself ill if you do this.’

The participants also facilitated employee growth and development by helping
them ﬁnd ways to overcome perceived barriers to continuing their education. Alicia
described how she has helped employees ﬁnd time to study.

I have had people tell me that their barriers are their children because they do not
feel that they dedicate the time to their professional career because they are torn
between raising a family or not. I tell them that they need to look at it just the
opposite way. That it is because of their children that they are here, trying to
create an opportunity to be successful and ﬁnancially be able to provide. And by
pushing yourself. . .how much time do you give me? Eight hours a day. How
much do you give your family? You still got two hours; you don’t have to stay
[at work for] eight hours. You can stay six. Hit the books for two hours. Get
through this program and then come back in here and we can ﬁnancially reward
you by giving you a promotion. And now you can do this for your family. You
try to take that negative at that moment as they see it, and try to turn it around and
see the positive that can be extracted from it.

Mary also offered encouragement to employees who were struggling to continue

their educations. She did this by asking about their progress and what barriers they are

62

facing. Mary allowed ﬂexible work schedules to help employees ﬁnd the time needed to
complete their studies. Sometimes, Mary also pushed employees who were struggling to
complete their formal educations. Her example of encouraging an employee to ﬁnish her
dissertation is illustrative:

I really pushed the hell out of her to do it because she wasn’t getting it done.

Finally I said, ‘take time off. You do what you got to, but I want this done.’ And

she ﬁnished it.

Facilitating learning in the performance appraisal process.

In addition to facilitating informal learning opportunities and supporting
employees’ efforts to continue their formal educations, the participants also used the
University’s annual employee performance appraisal process to facilitate employee
development. The performance appraisal form used by the University to evaluate staff
performance is brief and open-ended. The supervisor and employee whose work
performance is being evaluated are required to discuss the employee’s professional
development goals. The open-ended nature of the evaluation process allows the managers
a great deal of latitude in how to structure the evaluation meeting. While each participant
conducted the employee performance reviews according to his or her own individual
preference, all of the participants reported asking employees what types of training they
would like to engage in during the upcoming year. During the performance appraisal
meeting, Alicia, for example, asked employees where they wanted to be in one, ﬁve, and
ten years. Alicia and the employee would then discuss developmental experiences that
would facilitate the employee meeting his or her stated goals. Kyle, Rebecca, and Sam
also reported that they explicitly asked employees in what areas they wanted to have

additional training.

63

 

Mary explained how she used the performance appraisal meeting to encourage
employee growth and development.

In the yearly performance evaluations, the last question is, Okay, what are you

going to do for yourself this year? What is this about? You know this is a

wonderful job that you enjoy and you get to be on campus, but what more is there

to it? What do you want to do? Is there something you want to learn? Is there
something I should be doing to help you do that? Is there something that you are
already doing?

Rebecca, Mary, and Alicia all reported using questioning during the performance
appraisal meeting to encourage employees to think about what they would like to learn
and how that learning might be facilitated.

The participants in this study engaged in and facilitated lifelong learning. They
did this in a variety of ways that were primarily informal in nature. These activities
included reading, recognizing and acting upon teachable moments, and engaging in
dialogue. More formal activities to facilitate learning included attending and encouraging
employees to attend work-related training workshops and discussing manager and
employee development opportunities during the annual employee performance review
meeting. The speciﬁc examples identiﬁed in the preceding paragraphs illustrate the
variety of approaches used by the participants to engage in and facilitate lifelong
learning.

Trusting Employees and Treating Them with Respect

Underlying the participants’ facilitation of employee learning was a sense of trust
in, and respect for, the employees with whom they worked. Each of the participants
stated that the employees know how to perform their jobs and perform them well. The

managers viewed the employees as the job experts. This is evidenced by the managers’

practice of asking employees for their suggestions regarding how to deal with heavy

64

workloads and how to improve work processes. As reported earlier in this chapter, the
participants implemented employees’ suggestions when possible, even when they were
dissimilar to the managers’ own preferences.

The participants treated employees with respect and strove to develop
relationships with employees based on openness, respect, and trust. These types of
relationships were viewed by participants as facilitating the sharing of information and
ideas between employees and managers. This sharing of ideas, acting on teachable
moments, and the willingness to learn from employees, are indicative of the trust and
respect that the participants had for the employees with whom they worked.

All of the participants reported that they routinely asked for suggestions and
feedback from employees. By acting upon these ideas when possible and genuinely
listening to employee feedback, the participants created non-threatening work
environments in which employees were able to comfortably and conﬁdently share their
ideas and concerns. The reported give and take in departmental staff meetings is
illustrative. As Sam explained, “I believe that pretty much everybody in this ofﬁce knows
that they are permitted to speak their minds and offer suggestions.”

Each of the participants in this study reported having a high level of trust and
respect for the employees with whom they work. This trust and respect was reﬂected in
their willingness to learn from employees as well as their desire to help the employees
grow personally and professionally. It was also reﬂected in the empathetic and ﬂexible

manner in which they responded to employees’ needs and concerns.

65

Empathy and Flexibility

The empathy that the participants reported having for employees and the
ﬂexibility with which they responded to employees’ needs was indicative of the trust and
respect that they had for employees. The participants viewed empathy as responding in an
understanding and respectful manner when employees had personal issues that interfered
with their ability to perform their work. When an employee called in absent from work,
for example, the participants actively attempted to alleviate any feelings of guilt that the
employee may have been experiencing. The participants all reported trying to create
supportive work environments where employees could miss work because of a sick
family member or personal crisis without feeling guilty. When an employee called in
absent due to such a situation, the managers responded with empathy, letting them know
that it was okay to miss the work and telling the employee not to worry about the work or
the workplace during their absence and by creating ﬂexible work arrangements to help
the employee deal with the situation. The managers also attempted to create a sense of
mutuality among all members of the department. This sense of mutuality was evidenced
by the number of times and ways in which employees responded to their coworkers
experiencing personal problems that interfered with work performance.

To minimize feelings of worry and guilt, and to create a sense of mutuality among
the employees, Kyle would tell employees who were calling in absent to rest assured that
the work would get done and that the employee need not worry. Alicia also took steps to
minimize feelings of guilt that an employee may have experienced due to missing work.
She did this by reminding employees that everyone has personal situations that may

prevent them from being at work. She also reminded the employee that everyone in the

66

department helped each other as needed. The strong sense of mutuality evidenced in
Alicia’s department was striking.

We had a supervisor who had four sons and they were all wild kids. Inside of
probably eight months he had lost three of them to car accidents, one on a railroad
track, and he just couldn’t work. He ultimately went through a divorce because of
the stress at their home. But, these guys [the other employees in the department]
paid his paycheck, made up his paycheck for better than six months. Every
Friday the box went on the counter and every Friday the guys dumped their
money in it. Every Saturday somebody delivered it to them and said, ‘We hope
this helps.’ That is this place.

The participants encouraged employees to talk with them when they were

 

experiencing personal problems that had an impact on their work performance. They
would then create ﬂexible work arrangements to help the employee better meet those
needs while also meeting the needs of the department. Rebecca’s example is illustrative.

I think you have to be ﬂexible to the point that there are times you need to
approach work differently. For example, the person that handles our website for
me does not work 40 hours a week in his ofﬁce here. There are times that he will
spend a day working from home. He is dealing with some elder care issues right
now that have necessitated, especially within the last couple of weeks, him
physically not being here but being in his home. But, you know, we’ve got a
laptop for him, he’s got a good connection and I think he’s now got broadband at
the house but basically he’s doing what he would have done if he were physically
here, most of it from home. He does have students that report to him that work on
the web and he interacts with them via phone and via the web but he’s not
physically here as much.

Mary, somewhat timorously, explained how she was able to allow an employee to
take needed time off without losing any pay. The work that she was allowed to take home
has been changed here to ensure that the identity of the department is not discemable.

One of our staff members has a mom who is terminally ill and it is really a

challenge for her because she is a new person. She has no time, I mean in terms

of sick time. She is the primary caregiver. She is right now facing unpaid days.

And HR is not right now in the position to allow us, uh.. there are a lot of us with

sick days that we can’t use, but we would like to build a bank to give to her, but
we are not getting the clearance to do that and we won’t. So, what I have done is

67

cut a deal for her. I am sure that Human Resources would not be excited if they

knew that I did this so this probably is where I’d better be anonymous. But, what I

said is, take the work with you. While you are gone, [do this amount of work]

and I’ll say that [that amount of work] was a workday. Because if you are in here,
you would never get through [that much work]. And that is helping out one of the

colleagues who is behind [in his work]. So, the thought is, I’ll give you a

workday for it. I’ll just say you were not around that day. You were working.

In this way, Mary was able to meet the needs of the department, getting more
done than if the employee were physically in the ofﬁce and helping out another employee
who was behind in his work.

This ﬂexible work arrangement served to meet the needs of the department, the
employee who had to miss work, and of another employee in the department who was
behind in this work. As noted in Mary’s narrative, however, this arrangement was in
violation of University policy. Mary felt that the University’s policy prohibiting
employees from giving their paid time off to an employee in need was inappropriate and
hindered her ability to respond to the employee’s needs. Each of the participants voiced a
willingness to be ﬂexible with work arrangements if so doing would allow them to meet
the needs of the employee and the department.

The above narratives should not be construed to mean that the participants were
unconcerned about the needs of the department. Indeed, each reported that the empathetic
and ﬂexible manner with which they responded to employees’ needs created a greater
sense of dedication among the employees. Kyle explained, “That is what makes people
more willing to come in and do their jobs.” Alicia explained her viewpoint.

I think business ﬁrst, too, but there is a parallel with that that if you don’t know

your employees and what they are going through, it is hard to maximize the

productivity of that employee or the motivational side of that employee to where
they can excel to their fullest ability.

68

The participants in this study are cognizant and respectful of the fact that
employees may experience personal situations that impact their ability to perform their
jobs. They respond to these situations with empathy and ﬂexibility, striving to minimize
feelings of guilt, helping employees deal with personal situations, and creating a sense of
mutuality among employees. Each of the participants reported engaging in such activities
and each possessed the view that doing so allowed them to better meet the needs of the
department through increased employee motivation and dedication.

Ways Past Experiences Inform Participants’ Understanding
of Their Supervisory Role

The participants’ perceptions of their past experiences play an important part in
how they understand their supervisory roles. For example, Kyle recalls his supervisors
treating him as if he were stupid and making him feel guilty when he called in absent
from work. In contrast, Rebecca recalled how her supervisors were supportive and
sympathetic when she had to miss work because of a sick child. While the experiences
with previous supervisors vary, each of the participants reported drawing on these and
other experiences from their own lives to help them better understand what the employee
was experiencing.

For the participants, recalling personal experiences, and reﬂecting upon their own
feelings during those experiences, informed the ways in which they understand and enact
their supervisory roles. They reported primarily reﬂecting on these past experiences in
two types of situations: (a) when they were thinking about the type of managers they

wanted to be, and (b) when they were faced with non-routine situations in the workplace.

69

Three types of past experiences were reported as being the most informative in
both types of situations. These experiences included their childhood experiences, their
family experiences as adults, and their past work experiences. Although to a somewhat
lesser degree, the participants also reported that participating in workplace training
programs also informed the ways in which they understand and enact their supervisory
roles.

Childhood Experiences

Four of the 5 participants reported that their childhood experiences strongly
inﬂuenced how they see themselves as managers. Kyle, Mary, Sam, and Alicia all shared
instances of reﬂecting upon their childhood experiences as they considered what
management meant to them; how, as managers, they wanted to treat employees; and how
to respond to non-routine employee interactions. These experiences included experiences
that were both pleasant and those that were painful. The basic values of listening, of
treating every individual with dignity and respect, of the treating employees as they
themselves would like to be treated, are all issues considered by participants as they
thought about their managerial roles and their relationships with employees.

Parental role models appeared to have been particularly inﬂuential. This inﬂuence
was exhibited as the participants both attempted to emulate, and to avoid, the parental
role model’s behavior. Alicia again drew on her painful childhood experience with her
father. She explained that she always tries to teach employees important lessons, such as
the value of listening, without inﬂicting pain in the process. While Alicia attempts to
avoid repeating his father’s behavior, Sam and Mary emulate their fathers. Sam recalled

how, as a child, he would visit his father at work. Even as a child, he recognized that the

70

employees with whom his father worked treated his father with admiration and respect.
Sam attempts to treat employees in such a manner so as to garner that same level of
respect ﬁom the employees with whom he works. Mary also reported that her father was
highly respected by his colleagues and highly successful. She has built her own
management style in part by watching and learning from her fathers’ example.

Sam and Mary both spoke of how admired and esteemed their fathers were in
their respective workplaces. Both had many opportunities as children to see their fathers
interacting with employees. Both also reported that they seek to be the type of
supervisors they believe their fathers to have been. For Mary, this desired emulation has
created a sense of tension, “1 am my father. I mean I know that. And sometimes it really
isn’t a pleasant thought. Other times it is really a point of pride.”

Mary clearly attributed her supervisory style to her parents and her blue-collar
upbringing.

It is blue collar. Strictly blue collar. I had some wonderful coaches along the way.

One of them was my father. Another was my mother. Another was one of my

baseball coaches. I had people who cared about me. A community that cared

about me. I grew up, you know, laugh about Hilary Clinton and the fact that it
takes a community to raise a kid, but it does. I grew up in a very secure
environment. If you screwed up, okay, you screwed up. Don’t make it a big to
do. What are you going to do to make it right? It is very blue collar.

Kyle also attributed his views on management to his own upbringing. This was
particularly evident with respect to his strong views on family. Kyle reported that even if
it interferes with an employee’s ability to perform at work, family is rightfully the highest
priority. He explained how his background inﬂuenced this strong sense of family.

I always considered myself poor. Not dirt poor or that we were on welfare or

anything like that. My mom didn’t work and my dad was in construction. So,

when there was no work, he didn’t work. So, we never had a lot of money. What
we had was family and we did things with the family. You know, some days we

71

would go out back and sing songs as a whole family and stuff like that. I think it
is better that way.

Kyle also reported that growing up with a mentally ill sister and a mother with a
life-threatening illness has helped him understand the fragile nature of life. His mother’s
strength during these personal crises continues to serve as a source of inspiration for
Kyle.

Like Alicia, Sam, and Mary, Kyle drew on his childhood experiences as he
considered whether or not to enter management, on the type of manager he wished to be,
and on the types of relationships he hoped to have with employees.

In contrast to the other participants, Rebecca stated that she had not previously
considered how her childhood inﬂuenced her supervisory identity. When asked, she
opted not to consider her childhood, explaining that there were some things she was
uncomfortable talking about. Whenever the topic of her childhood arose, she stopped
herself and repeated that she was uncomfortable talking about her childhood. Her limited
comments about her childhood and the tension that she exhibited when the subject arose,
led me to believe that there might be issues from her childhood that remain unresolved.

F arnily backgrounds appeared to create tensions for the other participants as well
as for Rebecca. Although Mary was clearly proud of her heritage and tried to remain true
to her blue-collar background, she experienced tension between this background and her
educational attainment. This tension was evident in Mary’s reﬁrsal to earn an advanced
degree even though it would enhance her career. This tension is further evidenced by
Mary’s conﬂicting claims that she both values and does not value education. This conﬂict

appears to arise from a fear of denigrating or distancing herself from her blue-collar

72

background. When considering aloud why one of the employees with whom she works
was hesitant to continue her formal education, she surfaced a number of concerns.

I mean there are so many cultural issues. She is ﬁrst generation kid. She is the
only one of her siblings to get a college degree. Her mom and dad have eighth
grade educations. She very much lives in a blue-collar environment with her
family. Everyone in her life thinks she is a hero because she’s got her bachelor’s
degree. She is so smart. She is the smartest person in her family. She is the most
accomplished person in her family. And to get another degree may almost
distance herself further from her roots, and I think she struggles with that.

After a pause of several moments, Mary realized that she was voicing her own
concerns. She gave voice to the fact that she struggles with a reluctance to distance
herself from her blue-collar background by seeking an advanced degree. Her comments
below highlight this tension between the value of education and a desire to stay true to
her heritage.

I don’t value education very much, very well. I really don’t. I do value education

tremendously, but I have a father-in-law who has an eighth grade education and

who is one of the brightest men I know. He’s world smart. My dad. . .my mom

didn’t go to college. I have two sisters who have been out of education for a

while that never ﬁnished their master’s degrees. And yet, I am in an environment

where people are saying, ‘you don’t have a master’s degree.’ And it is one of
those behaviors, a self-defeating behavior; I refuse to get a master’s degree ...I
am going to do it without it.

Sam also experienced tension between his educational attainment and his family
background. This tension has led to feelings of separation between himself and the rest of
his family as he has “gone farther educationally, emotionally, and geographically” than
his parents or siblings.

I just think I have different tastes than they do, and not that we don’t ﬁnd

common ground to talk about and enjoy getting together. But, we have just had

different life experiences. And the gap between my mother and I as far as what

she thinks of my life. I don’t think she really has any concept whatsoever about
what my work entails or anything, and it is kind of hard to even share it with her.

73

In addition to leading to feelings of tension, the participants’ childhood
experiences have led them to hold certain principles, assumptions, values, and beliefs that
form their working philosophy. This phiIOSOphy appears to serve as the foundation for the
ways in which they understand and enact their supervisory roles. To this foundation are
added their experiences as adults. Two types of adult experiences appeared to be the most
relevant to the participants’ understanding of their supervisory roles, their family
experiences and their work experiences.

Family Experiences as Adults

The participants’ experiences as adult family members also informed the
participants’ understanding of their supervisory roles. These included experiences as
parents, spouses, and as adult children. Sam credited his experience of being a single
parent for his ability to make difficult workplace decisions.

I have been a single parent since my son was 10 years old...knowing what

decisions you have to make for the sake of your child kind of works in the

workplace, also. It might not be necessarily the decision you would make for
yourself, but you think about your employees.

For Kyle reﬂecting on his experiences as a parent served to remind him that
children get sick. Reﬂecting on his experiences as an adult child of a seriously ill parent
reminded him that when children grow up, parents get sick. In either case, child and elder
care issues often require an employee to be present at home instead of present in the
workplace. Critical consideration of his mother’s treatment in the workplace has also
inﬂuenced Kyle’s understanding of management and the appropriate manner in which to

treat employees.

I see my mom working in a shop. She has worked there some thirty-some years.
And, you know, makes less than I do, and it is hard. She is on her feet all day.

74

They treat her like she is on her way out because she’s been there for so long.
They don’t care if she is happy or not because she is going to retire soon.

The participants reported reﬂecting on their experiences within their families as they

framed their supervisory roles. They also reported referring to and considering these

experiences when faced with non-routine situations and employee interactions.
Participants’ Past Work Experiences

The participants’ past experiences as employees have also inﬂuenced how they
understand and enact their supervisory roles as staff managers in the University. Each of
the participants in this study worked his or her way up through the ranks, holding non-
managerial positions prior to entering management. The experiences encountered as an
employee have had a strong inﬂuence on their conceptualization of their supervisory
roles and their relationships with employees.

When non-routine situations were encountered, the participants drew upon their
foundational working philosophies, their familial experiences, and their experiences as
employees. For example, Kyle drew upon his previous work experiences as he reassured
an employee whose child was sick.

You have this daughter that you have to care for, and we are going to be all right

here. Don’t worry about us. Don’t worry about your job. She [the employee]

does miss a lot of work. It is not her. . .she can’t help her being sick. Her own
mother passed away from asthma in the past year or 2 so you know... you know,
she has just had a rough time. And, you know, she is really good about making
sure she brings in doctor’s excuses and everything. She is good about being here
when she can. I guess that is all I can ask. She does the best she can and that is
all I can ask of her. She likes her job. It is not her fault she has a sick daughter.

Kyle related that he held this view because he could clearly recall how he felt

when, before he was a supervisor, he had to call in absent from work because his child

was sick. He recalled that his supervisor made him feel guilty for taking care of his child

75

and how much he resented that feeling. Prior to taking on his supervisory role, Kyle made
a conscious decision that, if he were ever in a supervisory position, he would let
employees know that their families were important and that it was acceptable to miss
work to care for a family member when necessary. As he explained.

I guess part of it is that I came in this ofﬁce, and you know, I was really low on
the totem pole. The old mindset of the office really wore on me because they
really had the old, ‘You are here to work and you better have a good reason for
not being here.’ It made you feel like if your child was sick you felt guilty, scared
to call in because they were going to be angry with you. It was just really hard. I
just really dreaded calling in. I just hated that feeling. I hated feeling like the
whole office thought my job was more important than my family.

Prior to accepting his current position, Kyle also reﬂected upon work experiences
in other organizations. His consideration of these and other experiences facilitated his
conceptualization of management and his supervisory role.

The other jobs I had before I came here were always ‘You are here and you do

this.’ They didn’t really care about you... the customer was important to them

but employees were not. I guess I have seen that everywhere I worked, and I

really thought, what is this? Why am I not important? I feel it is important for

people to feel special, you know. Even if you don’t think I am special, treat me

like I am somebody. You don’t have to treat me special, just treat me like a

somebody.

Like Kyle, Rebecca’s previous work experiences before becoming a manager also
inﬂuenced her conceptualization of the role of managers in the workplace. She recalled
an unpleasant experience during her ﬁrst internship while in college.

I interned for a semester. I had gone down to the staff Christmas party as kind of

the ﬁrst thing and then my internship was to start after that. And the day that I was

down there, just prior to the Christmas party, they ﬁred somebody. I mean this
person during the Christmas party was cleaning out their [sic] ofﬁce and being
escorted out of the building.

Each of the participants reported that their work experiences prior to entering

management helped to inform their understanding of management, how managers should

76

interact with employees, and how they themselves would enact their supervisory roles
within the university. Although to a lesser degree, 4 of the 5 participants, Kyle, Mary,
Rebecca, and Sam reported that formal training programs were also informative as they
attempted to construct and enact their supervisory roles. Those programs that encouraged
self-reﬂection, sharing of experiences, and enhanced self-knowledge were found to be
particularly informative.

Experiences with Formal Training Programs

An analysis of the data revealed that formal training programs, although to a
lesser degree than reﬂection upon personal experiences, did have an impact on the way
participants enact their supervisory roles. Interpersonal training programs such as
employee empowerment, understanding personality preferences, and interest-based
negotiations, which incorporated self-reﬂection, the sharing of experiences with others in
the program, and that led to enhanced self-knowledge had the greatest amount of
inﬂuence.

Sam and Kyle identiﬁed employee empowerment training as inﬂuential in
changing the management style in their departments. Both Sam and Kyle reported that
the training content validated their fundamental views about management.

Sam also reported that other training programs have helped to shape his
management practice. He reported frequent use of the negotiation skills that he learned
in a University training program. Sam explained that, although he does not consciously
consider nor name it as such, he has integrated the negotiation skills that he learned in the
workshop into his daily activities. He reported frequent use of negotiations skills when

faced with workplace challenges.

77

Participants also reported that programs focusing on an enhanced understanding
of self, and of others, were informative to their management practice. Both Rebecca and
Sam cited experience with the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the DISCl instrument as
informative, particularly when they were faced experiencing interpersonal difﬁculties or
with non-routine interactions with employees. Rebecca explained. “What it [DISC] really
did was help me get a sense of how to communicate with other people.”

Sam stated that he gained self-knowledge when he took the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator. This helped him learn more about his own preferences and how he might
interact more effectively with others.

This exercise divided the staff into drivers, supporters, ﬂexible, and so forth. I can

remember that just so clearly. . .then we went through how to deal with a pure

driver, how you deal with a supporter, ﬂexible or a whatever. It was just like I

saw the light and okay., you know, this is the way I am.

An analysis of the data did not suggest that formal training programs are of
primary importance to the participants’ understanding of their supervisory role. It did
reveal, however that certain types of programs did inﬂuence the participants’
conceptualization and enactment of their supervisory roles. Programs that had the greatest
impact were those that encouraged self-reﬂection and enhanced self-knowledge.

The Role of Reﬂection

The managers in this study reported that engaging in reﬂection facilitated their

understanding of management and of their supervisory roles. Reﬂection was also cited as

informing the decisions that they made and the actions that they took in the performance

of these roles. The employees’ engaged in reﬂection primarily in a self-directed manner

 

' DISC is a personal assessment tool based on the 1928 work of psychologist William Moulton Marston.
The DISC Personal Proﬁle System is personality behavioral testing proﬁling using a 4 dimensional model
of normal behavior

78

although some workplace training programs also included opportunities for reﬂection.
Self-directed reﬂection was cited as being used in primarily two distinct types of
situations. These situations included when, prior to entering management, they engaged
in reﬂection to determine the meaning of management, what type of manager they would
be, and what this meant for their relationships with employees. The participants also
reported engaging in reﬂection when faced with non-routine situations or interactions
with employees. All 5 of the participants reported consciously engaging in reﬂection to
determine an appropriate course of action in such situations. Alicia described the
reﬂective process she engaged in as similar in nature to an index or card ﬁle.

i I think it is an index or card ﬁle system of different events in your life that have a
major impact. We index these events and catalog them in our mind. And
depending on our given day-to-day situations and experiences we begin to pull
them out of the card ﬁle and we play them again.

I am thinking about the loss of my family members, or my ﬁrst son, and I am

sitting here today dealing with 2 employees. One lost a brother-in—law and one’s

brother killed himself. And ...these guys need time off for these reasons. Do I

think business comes ﬁrst, or do I think compassion and telling these folks to do

what they’ve got to do and take care of problems at home and to just come back
with a clear mind? I pull out a card ﬁle and [think] how did I feel at that time?

How compassionate do I want to be today?” Even though I know that business

has got to get done. . .what are our other alternatives to getting it done [other] than

being a hard-ass and not being compassionate at this point in time with good
employees, trusted and bright employees.

Reﬂection upon a variety of experiences informed the participants’ construction
of their supervisory roles as managers within the University. Participants reported
reﬂecting on their past experiences when considering the type of managers they wanted
to be and when faced with non—routine employee interactions and situations. When faced

with non-routine situations, they engage in reﬂection to select an appropriate course of

action. This reﬂection often included a critical consideration of the working philosophies

79

 

that developed from their early life experiences such as Kyle’s placing a high value on
family and Alicia’s painful lesson in listening, their previous work experiences, and their
experiences as adult family members.

Chapter Summary

As the preceding paragraphs indicate, the participants in this study viewed the
facilitation of employee learning, growth, and development as integral to their
conceptualizations of their management roles. None of the participants viewed activities
that facilitated employee learning, growth, and development as separate roles or functions
that they were required to perform. All of the participants held a holistic and humanistic
view of employees, affirming the value of employees’ needs, concerns, and
responsibilities beyond the workplace. The conceptualization of management held by
participants differs from other constructions of management. The primary difference
between this and other constructions of management lies in the integration of employee
learning, growth, and development opportunities.

Four major themes undergird this construction of management. These themes
include striving to get to know employees as individuals with valid needs and concerns
beyond the organization, engaging in and facilitating lifelong learning, trusting and
treating employees with respect, and demonstrating empathy and ﬂexibility to assist
employees’ efforts to engage in learning opportunities and fulﬁll their multiple life roles.
Together, these themes form the framework of developmental management.

While each of the participants in this study exempliﬁes the developmental
manager construct, it is important to be mindful that each is a unique individual. Each

brought his or her own unique experiences, perspectives, views, and preferences to their

80

roles and to their relationships with employees. Sam, for example, viewed himself as an
introvert and did not engage in small talk with employees. Kyle, in contrast, saw himself
as an extrovert. He reported regularly engaging in small talk with employees. He also
provided a listening ear when employees needed to share their frustrations, fears and
concerns.

The desired distance between management and employees was also unique to
each of the participants. Mary, for example, encouraged employees to view her as a
coworker. She let employees know that she was one of them, and that while she had
additional responsibilities, she would not ask employees to do anything that she would
not do and that the employees should view her as a colleague. To varying degrees, Alicia
and Kyle also encouraged employees to consider themselves colleagues and attempted to
minimize the distance between themselves and the employees with whom they worked.
In contrast, Rebecca and Sam preferred to maintain clear distinctions between themselves
and the employees with whom they worked.

Despite these unique characteristics, the participants in this study held a common,
developmental view of management. This developmental view is primarily deﬁned by the
integration of employee learning, growth, and development into the managers’ daily
activities and interactions with employees. Rather than being viewed as a separate task,
role, or function, facilitating employee learning deﬁnes the ways in which the participants
enact their supervisory roles.

Another striking similarity among the participants is the role that reﬂection has
played in their understanding of employee supervision as a developmental construction of

management. Whether formal or self-directed, each of the managers engaged in reﬂection

81

to help them understand their supervisory roles and their relationships with employees.
They used reﬂection primarily in two areas: (a) when considering the meaning of
management and the type of manager that they aspired to be, and (b) when faced with

non-routine situations in the workplace.

82

Chapter Six
Discussion, Implications, and Recommendations for Future Research

The purpose of this study was to explore the lived experiences of staff supervisors
within the context of higher education, focusing particularly on their relationship with
employees and their roles in the facilitation of employee learning, growth, and
development. Three major themes related to adult learning informed my approach to this
study: (a) “. . .education and development continue throughout working life” (Poell and
Van der Krogt (2003, p. 252); (b) the workplace has a signiﬁcant role in adult growth,
learning, and development (Dirkx, 1996; Rainbird, 2000; Watkins, 1989; Wexley &
Latham, 2002); and (c) managers can exert considerable inﬂuence on employee learning,
growth, and development (Ashton & Maguire, 1985; Ellinger, Ellinger, and Keller, 2002;
Ellinger, Watkins, and Bostrom, 1999; Grace & Straub, 1991; Grugulis, 2003).

Two primary ﬁndings emerged through the data analysis: (a) the role of
reﬂection, and (b) the integration of employee learning and management. These ﬁndings
show a developmental perspective that is fully consistent with the role of management.
Rather than being in conﬂict with the role of management, as previous research (Ellinger
& Bostrom, 2002) has found, employee development is integral to the participants’
understanding of their management role.

Conceptualization of Management

An analysis of the data, gathered via in-depth interviews with ﬁve staff
supervisors in a large American university, indicates that developmental management is
an alternative construction of management. This conceptualization differs from

traditional, command and control models of management where employees are valued

83

 

only for their productivity and the goal of employee training is solely to enhance
productivity and the attainment of organizational goals (Coopey, 1998; Dirkx, 1999).

Osterberg( 1993) has suggested that organizational hierarchies themselves are a
barrier to employee development because they lead to fear and a lack of trust. Partly in an
attempt to overcome these and other organizational barriers to learning, the concept of the
manager as facilitator of learning has placed responsibility for employee learning on
managers. The developmental management construct, as reported in this study, also
differs from this facilitator of learning model of management.

Recent research on managers as facilitators of learning (Ellinger & Bostrom,
2002) found that the managers who had been given formal responsibility for employee
learning viewed employee development as a separate task, responsibility, or function.
This separate function was viewed as being in addition to, rather than integrated with, the
managers’ other supervisory responsibilities. In contrast, the data in this study indicate
that the participants have integrated employee learning, growth, and development into
their supervisory roles. Employee development is viewed as deﬁning the manner in
which they fulﬁll their supervisory roles, rather than as a separate task or role that must
be fulﬁlled in addition to their other responsibilities. They routinely engage in employee
development as they interact with employees and view facilitating learning as being
integral to the manager employee relationship.

The participants in this study facilitated employee learning primarily through
informal means. These took a variety of forms including engaging in dialogue,
recognizing and acting upon teachable moments, and encouraging and providing support

for employees. These and other behaviors reported by the participants in this study have

84

been identiﬁed in the literature as developmental interactions (D’Abate, Eddy, &
Tannenbaum, 2003) that “involve exchanges between two or more people where the goal
is personal or professional development” (p.364). These behaviors are integral to the
enactment of the participants’ conceptualization of developmental management.

The developmental management construct is both holistic and humanistic in
nature. It reﬂects humanistic assumptions and attention to adult learning as suggested by
Bierema (1996):

Holistic development integrates personal and professional life in career planning,

development, and assessment. Holistic development is not necessarily linked to

the present or future job tasks, but the overall growth of the individual with the

gesc)ognition that this growth will have an effect on the organizational system (p.

At the core of the participants’ conceptualization of management is the view that
employees have multiple, valid roles and responsibilities; are intelligent adults from
whom they can learn and who add value to the organization, and that employees deserve
to be treated with empathy and respect. These fundamental views provide the framework
for managerial decision-making, problem-solving, and employee interactions. Key
concepts of developmental management include:

1. Respecting employees as intelligent adults and viewing employees as
subject matter experts from whom others can learn.

2. Striving to get to know employees as individuals with important roles
beyond that of employee.
3. Affirming the value of employees’ multiple roles and the importance of

meeting the requirements of these multiple roles by responding with
empathy and ﬂexibility to employees’ needs.

4. Engaging in lifelong learning.

85

5. Facilitating employees’ lifelong learning. Such learning opportunities
include both personal and professional learning, growth, and
development with the employee’s needs being of primary importance.
6. Recognizing and acting upon teachable moments. This includes
responding to employee errors and problems as learning, rather than
disciplinary, opportunities.
Developmental managers are also cognizant of the needs of the organization.
They recognize that they are responsible for ensuring that the work of the department be
accomplished effectively and efﬁciently. They view facilitating employee learning,
growth, and development as a way to beneﬁt both the employee and the organization.
Fostering employee learning is seen as an effective way to achieve organizational goals
by promoting employee motivation and performance while also meeting the employees’
learning needs.
How this Conceptualization Ditfersﬁom Other Conceptualizations of Management
Two primary elements set this conceptualization apart from other
conceptualizations of management: (a) employee development is integrated into the
supervisory role; and (b) reﬂection informs managers’ understanding and enactment of
their supervisory roles.
Employee Development is Integrated into the Supervisory Role

The participants’ conceptualization of developmental management differs from
previous conceptualizations of management. It clearly differs from traditional command
and control models of management. Of greater interest is how it differs from the
facilitator of learning conceptualization of management. Ellinger and Bostrom (2002)

reported that facilitators of learning viewed “managing and coaching” as separate and

distinct roles (p.158). It was viewed as something that was done in addition to, rather than

86

integrated with, other supervisory responsibilities. This view (Ellinger, Watkins, &
Bostrom, 1999) led the participants to experience role conﬂict. The participants in
Ellinger and Bostrom’s study deﬁned managing as “telling, judging, and controlling, and
coaching was perceived to be a way of empowering learners, helping learners to
understand, and removing obstacles that inhibited their ability to understand” (p.157). In
contrast, the managers in this study deﬁned managing as “helping employees learn,
engaging in teachable moments, encouraging and supporting employees. They viewed
employee development as “how” they enacted their supervisory roles rather than as a
distinctly separate role.

Although the ﬁndings of the current research appear to contradict this previous
research, careful consideration reveals that this may not be the case. Ellinger et al. (1999)
suggest that the adoption of what they referred to as the facilitator of learning role is a
transitional process that occurs along a continuum in which the manager moves from
viewing him or herself as a manager to “fully identifying with the role of coach or
facilitator of learning” (p. 113). Using the Ellinger et al. model, the participants in this
study could be said to fully identify with the facilitator of leaming role. In contrast to the
previous research (Ellinger, Watkins, Bostrom, 1999; Kraut, Pedigo, McKenna, &
Dunnette, 1989; Mintzberg, 1973, 1990, 1994), the participants in this study did not
report experiencing role conﬂict. This is to be expected since the participants in this study
perceived employee development as a deﬁning characteristic of their role rather than as a
signiﬁcantly different and separate role.

It must be noted that the previous research by Ellinger and Bostrom (2002)

focused on organizations engaged in becoming learning organizations. In contrast, the

87

University in this study was not striving to become a learning organization as understood
in the literature. The participants in this study did not refer to themselves as facilitators of
learning, coaches, teachers, or any of the other myriad terms that have been used in the
literature to label managers’ roles in employee learning, growth, and development. The
managers in this study labeled themselves managers. Also, in contrast to the participants
in previous research, they had not been given formal responsibility for employee
learning, While all of the participants had engaged in formal management training
programs of one sort or another, none had had formal training in employee development.
Reﬂection Informs Managers’ Understanding and Enactment of Their Supervisory Roles

The act of reﬂection informed the developmental managers’ conceptualization of
management. The participants engaged in reﬂection when considering the meaning of
management, how they would enact their management roles, and how they would interact
with employees.

Reﬂection, as used by the participants in this study was experientially, rather than
academically based. It was primarily self-directed and free ﬂowing rather than guided.
This understanding of reﬂection is congruent with Siebert and Daudelin’s (1999)
deﬁnition of management reﬂection: “cognitive activity managers engage in to make
sense of an experience. The process of stepping back from experience to careﬁrlly and
persistently ponder its meaning to the self” (xvii).

The study participants reﬂected primarily upon their experiences from childhood,
previous work experiences, and their experiences as adult members within their families.
The participants in this study reﬂected upon their past life experiences as they formed

their conceptualization of developmental management. The lessons, values, assumptions,

88

and principles that they learned in childhood formed the basis of their working
philosophy. Reﬂection on past experiences as adult family members and their past work
experiences have had a substantial inﬂuence on how they understand and construe their
managerial roles. Work experiences that they had had as employees prior to entering
management were particularly inﬂuential to their conceptualization of management.

Formal management training programs appear to have had only minor impact on
their conceptualization of developmental management. Programs that focused on self-
knowledge and interpersonal skills were recognized by the participants as having greater
inﬂuence than did skill-based training programs. Rather than learning what it means to be
a manager from management training, the participants learned what being a manager
meant to them by reﬂecting on their life experiences, including the experience of being
supervised at work.

When transitioning from the employee role to a management role the participants
reﬂected upon their experiences as employees. Recall from Chapter Five Kathy’s desire
to be treated as “If I am somebody” and her commitment to treat employees better than
she was treated. This learning how to be a supervisor from ones’ experiences as an
employee is similar to ﬁndings in the teachers’ beliefs literature that suggests that
prospective teachers learn what it means to be a teacher in large part by being a student
(Zeichner & Tavachnick, 1981).

The participants also engaged in reﬂection in response to non-routine situations.
Recall Alex’s index card ﬁle metaphor:

I think it is an index or card ﬁle system of different events in your life that has a

major impact. We index these events and catalog them in our mind. And

depending on our given day-to-day situation and experiences we begin to pull
them out of the card ﬁle and we play them again.

89

By drawing on their own experiences, managers appear to form a “folk
pedagogy” (Bruner, 1996. p.2) that they bring to their management roles. Just as teacher
educators are encouraged to acknowledge the folk pedagogy that they bring to teaching,
so too, must managers take into account the folk pedagogy that they bring to the act of
supervising. Just as teachers “cannot help but teach what they believe,” (Yero, 2001 -
2002. p 3) so too do managers act based on their conceptualization of management.

Implications for Theory and Practice

In the knowledge age, Americans are faced with changing technologies on a daily
basis. They interact with new technologies when they use a touch screen to conduct
banking transactions at an automatic teller machine, when they respond to voice activated
computers when ordering goods and services on the telephone, and when seeking
information on the Internet. These technological advances change the requirements for
success in society in general and in the workplace in particular. In order to meet these
changing requirements, individuals must engage in lifelong learning. Likewise,
organizations must foster and harness the talent of all employees and, as an organization,
continue to learn in order to remain viable.

Facilitating employee learning adds value to the organization through enhanced
creativity, problem solving, and the ability to adapt to the changing environment. From a
business standpoint, then, it is in an organization’s best interests to facilitate employee
learning, growth, and development. In response, the workplace has become a signiﬁcant
site for adult learning opportunities.

The beneﬁts of facilitating lifelong learning reach far beyond the workplace. As a

society, we all beneﬁt from a citizenry that is able to meet the challenges of rapidly

90

changing technologies, the changing nature of work, demographic changes, and changes
in the nature of international relations among others (Daly, 2000). The demands placed
upon adults by these and other changes have been referred to as the “hidden curriculum
of adult life” (Kegan, 2000. p. 45). Skills identiﬁed as required content in this hidden
curriculum include communication skills, decision-making skills, interpersonal skills, and
lifelong learning skills (Stein, 2000). These skills are also necessary for success in the
workplace.

Through a culture of learning, and supportive management practices,
organizations can provide learning opportunities that facilitate the acquisition of these
essential skills. Organizational policies can provide such opportunities through paid time
off to participate in education and training, ﬁnancial assistance in the form of tuition
reimbursements and waivers, and by providing training programs and workshops for
employees. Of primary importance to employees’ ability to learn, however, is the nature
of the work environment. An environment that is “dialogic, challenging, and supportive”
(F ishback & Polson, 1998) facilitates employees’ continued ability to learn. The
employee’s immediate supervisor plays an important role in creating such an
environment. The inﬂuence that an employee’s immediate supervisor has over the
employee’s learning is signiﬁcant (McGregor, 1960; Siebert & Daudelin, 1999) as the
immediate supervisor allows or denies employee access to organizational policies that
foster learning. This is similar to an immediate supervisor’s ability to provide or limit
employee access to work-family policies (Palthe & Kossek, 2003). In addition, the
manager’s level of support impacts the employees’ access to training and development

opportunities within the organization and their ability to be absent from work to engage

91

in other learning opportunities. It is generally the immediate supervisor who responds to
employee errors, developmental needs, concerns, and problems. The ways in which the
immediate supervisor responds to these issues impacts the employee’s ability to learn
from them.

Managers who facilitate employee learning by granting access to organizational
policies in support of education, who take an educative, rather than disciplinary, approach
to employee errors and problem solving, and who otherwise engage in developmental
activities, are referred to in this study as developmental managers. Developmental
managers recognize the importance and value of lifelong learning and integrate employee
learning, growth, and development into their daily activities. Developmental managers
view errors and problems as teachable moments. They help employees learn problem-
solving skills, rather than solving employees problems for them. In addition, they provide
support and encouragement for employees’ multiple roles and encourage them to engage
in educational opportunities to better meet the demands of these multiple roles.

The participants hold such a developmental perspective of management. For these
developmental managers, employee learning, growth, and development is integral to their
understanding of what it means to be a manager. They came to hold this view without
being given explicit responsibility for, or training in, the facilitation of employee
learning. Reﬂection was found to be a primary factor in the participants’ understanding of
management and of their roles as supervisors within the University. These ﬁndings add to
our understanding of the workplace as a site for adult learning and have implications for

both theory and practice.

92

The participants’ conceptualization of developmental management exempliﬁes
what Drucker (2001) was advocating for as necessary in the knowledge age, that
“[m]anagement must also enable the enterprise and each of its members to grow and
develop as needs and opportunities change. Training and development must be built into
it on all levels — training and development that never stop” (p. 11). An analysis of the data
indicates that, for the participants, employee development is indeed built into their
supervisory roles and serves to deﬁne their relationships with employees.

The ways in which the participants in this study responded to non-routine
situations are congruent with Model 11 behaviors (Argyris, 1987), striving for (a) win-win
solutions, (b) working with the employee to develop goals, (c) surfacing and exploring
negative feelings, (d) fostering inquiry and dialogue and (e) validating emotionality.
Management educators should develop programs to foster this kind of behavior in the
workplace. Given the role of reﬂection in developmental management, encouraging
managers to critically examine their understanding of management and where these
understandings have their roots would enhance foster Model 11 behaviors, managers’
ability to foster employee learning, and their knowledge of themselves as managers.
Parker Palmer (1998) eloquently stated:

When I do not know myself, I cannot know who my students are. I will see them

darkly, in the shadows of my unexamined life. And when I cannont see them

clearly, I cannot teach them well. (p. 5).

Those with supervisory responsibilities must also know themselves so that they
can truly see the employees they supervise. Given the increasing role of the workplace as
a site of adult learning and the inﬂuence that supervisors can exert over employee

learning, growth and development, such self-knowledge is critical.

93

The inﬂuence of reﬂection on developmental management has several

implications for human resource and management development, for the practice of

management, and for organizational policy. The primary implications for practice

include:

1.

Managers should be taught the value of reﬂection and the use of guided
reﬂection as a way to inform their practice. Critical reﬂection of the
managers’ working philosophies should be encouraged.

Managers should be encouraged to seek similarities between their own
experiences and those of the employees with whom they work.
Organizational leadership should encourage and support the use
reﬂection in managerial practice.

Scarce resources should be used to conduct training programs that

include reﬂection and encourage self-knowledge.

In addition to the implications related to the importance of reﬂection in

developmental management, the integration of employee learning as a normal part of the

supervisory role also has several practical implications.

Although the integration of employee learning, growth, and development into the

supervisory role minimized feelings of role conﬂict for the participants in this study,

another form of conﬂict was recognized by the participants. In their efforts to be

supportive and accommodating to employees’ needs, the participants were sometimes

confounded by organizational policies that limited their ﬂexibility. In these instances, the

participants experienced conﬂict, as they desired to both comply with University policies

94

and meet the needs of the employee. The practical implications of this conﬂict for the
organization include:

1. Foster a developmental view of management that incorporates
employee learning into supervisors’ daily activities.

2. Provide training to facilitate managers’ desire and ability to view
employee errors and problems as teachable moments.

3. Look broadly at all organizational policies to ensure congruence
between creating supportive, learning, environments and other business
policies. Speciﬁc questions to be addressed include:

a. Do managers have the ﬂexibility to create supportive environments
that foster learning?

b. Are managers encouraged to, and rewarded for, facilitating
employee learning, growth, and development?

c. Do avenues exist where managers can surface and explore areas of
conﬂict without fear of negative repercussions?

An additional area of interest arises from the overlap of the developmental
management construct and two other organizational constructs: work-life integration and
the learning organization. Many of the behaviors identiﬁed in the literature as
developmental, such as supporting, calming, and encouraging, also serve to facilitate
employees’ ability to integrate their work and family lives. Indeed, supervisors have a
substantial impact on an employee’s access to both learning and work-family policies
within an organization. In addition, just as reﬂection is an essential element of the

concept of the learning organization, it is also an essential element of developmental

95

management. Recognizing the intersection of these three constructs; developmental
management, work-life integration, and the learning organization, will provide
organizations with opportunities to enhance the impact of organizational initiatives in
each area. By working together to look for commonalities and to ensure congruence,
human resource, work-life, and learning organization champions can substantially impact
employee and organizational learning and success.
Summary

The participants in this study hold a note-worthy construction of management in
which employee learning, growth, and development are integrated into their supervisory
roles. Their decisions and interactions with employees informally facilitate learning as
they respond to errors and problems in a dialogic, supportive, and educative manner. The
implications of these ﬁndings are signiﬁcant for organizations seeking to beneﬁt from a
workforce that is creative, is adept at problem solving, and engages in lifelong learning.

Suggestions for Future Research

The growth of the workplace as a site of learning has led to a signiﬁcant body of
literature on the ways in which managers can facilitate employee learning. Missing from
the literature has been an understanding of how managers conceptualize their employee
development role and how they come to hold this conceptualization. This study has
begun to ﬁll this gap by exploring these issues as perceived by ﬁve staff managers within
the context of higher education.

The data in this study revealed that childhood experiences continue to be

processed in the workplace and that these early experiences inﬂuenced the participants’

96

conceptualization of management. The impact of these early experiences needs to be
explored further.

The participants in this study shared several common characteristics. For
example, all are over 40 years of age, all come from working class families in the
Midwest, all work in the same university, and all have worked in the university for more
than ﬁve years and worked their way up through the ranks to their current managerial
positions. Conducting similar research with individuals from more diverse backgrounds
would add to our understanding of developmental management.

In addition to further research into the experience of managers, exploring the
phenomenon from the employee’s perspective would add needed depth to our current
understanding of the phenomenon. Whether employee learning actually occurs and what
learning outcomes occur must be examined as we seek to understand how adult learning
occurs in the workplace and the inﬂuence that managers can have on that learning.

The Supervisory Recognition Award that was used in the purposeful sampling of
participants is an imperfect indicator of the presence of behaviors indicative of the
developmental manager phenomenon. While the employee nomination of the supervisor
seems to imply that the employees view the supervisors’ management style in a positive
manner, other factors such as politics and power may inﬂuence such nominations. Further
study of supervisors within the University who have not received the Award is necessary
to see if receipt of the Award inﬂuences the developmental management
conceptualization.

Two of the participants have asked me to help create a space where reﬂection and

dialogue about the meaning of developmental management can continue. The creation of

97

 

a praxis group of supervisors at the University will be part of my continuing education on
the developmental manager phenomenon.
Conclusion

This study has brought to light a unique conceptualization of management that
differs from traditional views of management, instrumental views of facilitating
employee development solely to achieve organizational goals (Dirkx, 1999), and the view
of managers as facilitators of learning. The ﬁndings of this study also illustrated the
important role that reﬂection has in the practice of management.

In addition, this study has provided a voice for an often-ignored community
within the academy, the support staff. Little attention has been given to staff in the
literature on higher education, in spite of the fact that it is the staff who have the
institutional knowledge to get students enrolled, to keep the lights burning, and work to

attract and provide funding for students.

98

Appendices

99

APPENDIX A
Interview Protocol

There will be three, 90-minute interviews with each participant. The purpose of the

interviews will be to explore the history, experience and place the participant within

his or her individual context, exploring the meanings attached to these experiences

and the connections between these experiences and the individuals understanding of

his or her role as a manager and views regarding the emerging developmental

manager phenomenon.

Role of the Researcher
To help participants feel comfortable and at ease and encourage the sharing
experiences. Asking open-ended, non-leading questions while actively listening to
participant responses will facilitate this process. To foster understanding, follow-up
questions and requests for clariﬁcation will be asked. The interviews will be audio-taped
and the researcher will also take interview notes.
Introduction to the Participant
Thank you for agreeing to participate in this study. Because I am interested in

what we can learn from the lives of managers, we will talk about your experiences as a
manager and being managed by others. In addition, we will explore the experiences that
have impacted your view of yourself as a manager. I will be asking you to share speciﬁc
events in your life and education that have inﬂuenced this understanding. I will ask you
to complete a brief biographical background questionnaire that we will build upon during

this and the two following interviews. We will not go beyond the 90-minute time frame.

100

The key topical areas to be explored are identiﬁed in the questions below. It is

anticipated that the questions will be asked over the course of the three interviews and

the actual interview in which they are asked will vary by participant.

l.

2.

10.

Please share with me what you actually do as a manager.

What to you understand to be the responsibilities of a manager?

How do you see your role as a manager?

What do you consider to be important in a manager?

How do you know when you see good management in action?

Please tell me about a typical workday in your life, from the time you wake up
until you fall asleep at night.

Please tell me a story that highlights your relationship with the employees
with whom you work.

How did you ﬁrst become a manager?

What were your subsequent management responsibilities or experiences?
What events or experiences do you feel had a signiﬁcant impact on how you

understand your role as a manager?

The following questions will provide participants with an explicit opportunity to reﬂect

upon the meaning of their experiences.

1.

Given what you have shared about your life before you became a manager and

what you have said about your work now, how do you understand what it is to be

a manager? What sense does it make to you?

Given what you have shared in these interviews, where do you see yourself going

in the future?

101

Appendix B
Informed Consent

Exploring the Developmental Manager Phenomenon within the Context of Higher
Education

The purpose of this study is to gain deeper understanding of how managers
experience and understand their organizational role. You are being asked to think about
and discuss your experiences, thoughts, and feelings about management in 3 individual
interviews with the researcher. The individual interviews will be audio-taped and notes
will be taken. The researcher may contact you by phone with additional questions and for
clariﬁcation purposes.

Your participation is totally voluntary and can be discontinued at any time. You may also
reﬁrse to answer any question. Additionally, you may ask that the audiotape be stopped at
any time.

All information obtained will be kept conﬁdential and any written reports will not use
actual names or other identifying data. Pseudonyms will be used is during analysis and in
any written report. Your privacy will be protected to the extent allowable by law. The
audiotapes, notes, and transcripts will be kept in a locked ﬁle cabinet that is accessible
only to the researchers.

Questions for the researcher may be asked at any time during the process. Additional
information about the project may be obtained from Tina Riley, M.L.R.H.R. (517/432-
2799) or John Dirkx, Ph.D. (517/353-8927.

You will be given an opportunity to review the written comments that are recorded or
documented during the interviews to ensure that they are correct. The researcher will
phone you to share the preliminary data analysis, to conﬁrm the information obtained
during the session, or to ask any follow-up questions. This call will be made to the phone
number that you provide below.

We foresee no psychological or emotional trauma from participation in this project, but
you are encouraged to ask questions about this study and your participation in it at any
time.

We anticipate that your participation in this study will take about 4.5 hours. To show our
appreciation for your time and energy, we will present you with a copy of a book,
selected by the researcher, on management or adult learning. We will be happy to do so
even if you decide to discontinue participation part way through the project.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding your rights as a study participant, or are

dissatisﬁed at any time with any aspect of this study, you may contact - anonymously, if
you wish - Peter Vasilenko, Ph.D., Chair of the University Committee on Research

102

Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS) by phone: (517) 355-2180, fax: (517) 432-4503,
email address: ucrihs@msu.edu, or regular mail: 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824.

I voluntarily agree to participate in this research project. A copy of this consent form will
be made available to you for your records.

Signature of participant

 

I voluntarily agree to participate in audio-taped interviews with the researcher during this
research project. I understand that the tape recorder will be turned off at any time that I so
request.

Signature of participant

 

Name Date

 

Phone Number for follow-up calls

 

103

Appendix C
Questionnaire
Thank you for agreeing to participate in this research project. Please take a

moment to answer the following information.

Biographical Information:

1. Full name:

2. Date of birth:

3. Place of birth:

4. Amount of formal education:

Professional Practice

1. Years of management experience:

2. Years in current position:

3. Years with the University:

4. Number of employees you supervise:

104

Appendix D
Data Management and Analysis
Initial reﬂective notes will be created as soon as possible after each interview.
Audiotapes will be listened to in their entirety after each interview and repeatedly during
the data analysis process. Transcripts will be read repeatedly throughout the process.
Member checking will be used to strengthen the validity of the ﬁndings. It is anticipated
that the process described below will be used to analyze the data.
Moustakas’ Modiﬁcation of the Van Kaam Method of Analysis of Phenomenological
Data (Moustakas, 1994, p. 120 — 121).
1. Listing and Preliminary Grouping (italics in original)
List every expression relevant to the experience (Horizonalization)
2. Reduction and Elimination (italics in original) To determine the Invariant
Constituents:
Test each expression for two requirements:

a) Does it contain a moment of the experience that is a necessary and
sufﬁcient constituent for understanding it?

b) Is it possible to abstract and label it? If so, it is a horizon of the
experience. Expressions not meeting the above requirements are
eliminated. Overlapping, repetitive, and vague expressions are also
eliminated or presented in more exact descriptive terms. The
horizons that remain are the invariant constituents of the
experience.

3. Clustering and Thematizing the Invariant Constituents:

105

Cluster the invariant constituents of the experience that are related into a
thematic label. The clustered and labeled constituents are the core themes of
the experience.

4. Final Identiﬁcation of the Invariant Constituents and Themes by Application:
Check the invariant constituents and their accompanying theme against the
complete record of the research participant. (1) Are they expressed explicitly
in the complete transcription? (2) Are they compatible if not explicitly
expressed? (3) If they are not explicit or compatible, they are not relevant to
the co-researcher’s experience and should be deleted.

5. Using the relevant, validated invariant constituents and themes, construct for
each co-researcher an Individual Textural Description (italics in original) of
the experience. Include verbatim examples from the transcribed interview.

6. Construct for each co-researcher an Individual Structural Description (italics
in original) of the experience based on the Individual Textural Description and
Imaginative Variation.

7. Construct for each participant a Textural-Structural Description of the
meanings and essences of the experience, incorporating the invariant
constituents and themes.

From the individual Textural-Structural Descriptions, develop a Composite

Description of the meanings and essences of the experience, representing the

group as a whole (italics in original).

106

References

107

References Cited

Altman, Y. & Iles, P. (1998). Learning, Leadership, Teams: Corporate Learning and
Organizational Change. Journal of Manageﬂnt Development, 17(1), 44 -56.

American Society for Training and Development, (2003). State of the Industry Report.

Antonioni, D. (1994). Managerial Roles for Effective Team Leadership. Supervisory
Management. 39(5): 3.

Argyris, C. (1987). Reasoning, Action Strategies, and Defensive Routines: The Case of
OD Practitioners, in Woodman, R.A. & Pasmore, A.A. (eds.). Research in Organizational
Change and Development. Volume 1, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Argyris, C. (1993). Education for Lifelong Learning. Organizational Dynamics. 21 (3),5-
17.

Argyris, C. & Schdn, D. (1978). Organizational Leming: A Theory of Action
Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Ashton, D. N. & Maquire M. J. (1986). Yogg Adults in the Labour Madge;
Department of Employment Research Paper No. 55, London, England: Her Majesty’s
Stationary Ofﬁce

Bandura, A. (1986). Socialf Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive
Theog. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Bennis, W. & Nanus, B. (2003). Leaders: Strategies for Taking Charge. New York, NY:
Harper Business Essentials.

Bensimon, E.M. & Newmann, A. (1993). Redeﬁning Collegiate Leadership: Teams and
Teamwork in Higher Edrgtion. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press.

Bergquist, W. (1992). The Four Cultures of the Academy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.

Bierema, LL. (1996). Development of the Individual Leads to More Productive
Workplaces. New Directiorls for Adult and Continuing Education. 72, 21-28.

Bimbaum, R. (2000). Management Fades in Higmr Education: Where They Come From.
What They Do. Why They Fag. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Block, P. (1993). Steward:s_hip: Choosing Service Over Self-Interest. San Francisco, CA:
Berrett-Koehler.

108

Bolman, L. & Deal, T. (1997). Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice. and
Leadership (2"‘1 ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (Eds) (1985). Reﬂection. Turning Experience into
Learning. New York: Nicholas Publishing.

Boyd, E. & Fales, A. (1983). Reﬂective Learning: Key to Leaming from Experience.
Jouml of Humanistic Psychology; 23(2), 99 - 117

Bradﬁeld, L. D. (1992). A Comparative Study of Supervisor Impact on the Transfer of
Training as Measured by Job Productivity, Effectiveness, and Satisfaction (Doctoral
Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1992).

Bruffee, K. A. (1999). Collaborative Learning: Higlgr Education, Interdependence, and
the Authority of Knowlede (2nd ed). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press.

Bruner, J .S. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.

Burke, W. W., Trahant, W. & Koonce, R. (2000). Easiness Climate Shifts: Proﬁles of
Change Makers. Wobum, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Burgyone, J. & Jackson, B. (1997). The Arena Thesis: Management Development as a
Pluralistic Meeting Point in Burgoyne, J ., & Reynolds, M., (eds) Management Learning,
London: Sage.

Clutterbuck, D. (2000). How to Select a Business School Partner. People Management,
7(12), 40 — 42.

Cohen, E. & Tichy, N. (1998). Teaching: The Heart of Leadership. The Healthcare
Forum Journal. 41 (2), 20.

Cooke, M. L. (1910). Academic ﬂl Indusrtrial Efﬁciency: A Report to the Carnegi_e
Foundation for the Advmment of Teachiag. New York, NY: Carnegie Foundation.

Coopey, J. (1998). Learning to Trust and Trusting to Learn: A Role for Radical Theatre.
Management Learnig, 29(3), 365 — 382.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). QualiLative Inquiry arnd Research Design: Choosing AmongFive
Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

D’Abate, C.P., Eddy, E.R., & Tannenbaum, 8.1. (2003). What’s In A Name? A
Literature-Based Approach to Understanding Mentoring, Coaching, and Other Constructs

that Describe Developmental Interactions. Human Resource Developanent Review. 2 (4),
360 — 384. ABI/INFORM Global.

109

Daly, K. (2000). It Keeps Gettig Faster: Changing Patterns of Time in Families. Ottowa,
Ontario: Vanier Institute of the Family.

Davidson, M. J ., & Burke, R. J. (Eds.). (1994 — 2000) Women in Management: Current
Research Issues. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think. A Restatement of the Relation of Reﬂective Thinkﬂg
to the Educative Process. New York, NY: D. C. Heath.

Dirkx, J. (1996). HRD as adult education: Fostering the educative workplace: In R.
Rowden (ed.) Debating the future of educating adults in the workplace. New Directioa§
in Adult and Continuing Education. San Francisco: J ossey-Bass.

Dirkx, J. (1999). Invited Reaction: Managers as Facilitators of Learning in Learning
Organizations. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 10(2), 127 - 134.

Douglas, C.A. & McCauley, CD. (1999). Formal Developmental Relationships: A
Survey of Organizational Practices. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 10(3), 203
— 220.

Driver, M. (2002). The Learning Organization: Foucaldian Gloom or Utopian Sunshine?
Human Relations [0018-7267(200201)55:1] 55(1): 33-45:020605. The Tavistock
Institute. Sage Publications.

Drucker, PF. (1954). The PreLtice of Management. New York, NY: Harper.

Drucker, P. F. (2001). The Essential Druck_eg. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Eden, D. (1990). Pygmalion in Management: Productivity as a Self-Fulﬁlling Prophecy.
Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

 

Eden, D. & Shani, AB. (1982). Pygmalion Goes to Boot Camp: Expectancy, Leadership,
and Trainee Performance. Joumg of Applied Psychology. 67 (2), 194 — 199.

Ellinger, A. D. & Bostrom, RP. (2002). An Examination of Managers’ Beliefs and their
Roles as Facilitators of Learning. Management Learning, 33 (2), 147 - 179.

Ellinger, E. E., Ellinger, A. D., & Keller, S. B. (2002). Logistics Managers’ Learning
Environments and Firm Performance. Journwf Business Igistics. 23 (1), p. 19-38.

Ellinger, A. D., Watkins, K.E., & Bostrom, RP. (1999). Managers as Facilitators of

Learning in Learning Organizations. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 10(2),
105 —125.

Enarson, H. L. (1975). The Art of Planning. Educational Record, Summer 1975, 170 —
175.

110

Fishback, S. J. & Polson, C. J. (1998). The Cognitive Development of Adult
Undergraduate Students. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual Midwest Research-to-
mctice Conference in Adult. Continuing and Community Education. G.S. Wood, Jr. and
M. .M. Webber (Eds), pp. 81-86. Muncie, IN: Ball State University, 1998 (ED 424 419)
http://www.bsu.edu/teachers/departrnents/edld/conf/cognitive.htrnl.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.

French, R. & Bazalgette, J. (1996). F rom “Learning Organization to “Teaching-Learning
Organization” Management Learning_27 (l), 113 — 28.

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 Practices. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.

Good, T. L. (1987). Two Decades of Research on Teacher Expectations: Findings and
Future Directions. Journal of Teacher Education. V38 (4) p. 32-47.

Grace, P. & Straub, C. (1991). Managers as Training Assets. Training & Development.
June: 49-54.

Grugulis, I. (2003). Putting Skills to Work: Learning and Employment at the Start of the
Century, Human Resources Management Journal. 13 (2), 3-12. ABI/Inform Global.

Harris, RR. (1985). Future Work 11, Personnel Journal 64(7), 52 — 57.

Heifetz, R.A. (1994). Leadership Without Easy Anawers. Cambridge, MA: Belnkap Press
of Harvard University Press.

Herzberg, F ., Mausner, B., & Snyderrnan, B. (1959/1993). The Motivation to Work New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Hogan, E. A. (1987). Effects of Prior Expectations on Performance Ratings: A
Longitudinal Study. Academy of Management Journal. 30: 354-368.

hooks, b.(l994). T_eachingato Tran_sgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. New
York: Routledge.

Johns, C. (2000). Becoming a Reﬂective Practitioner: A Reﬂective and Holistic
Approach to Clinicﬁ Nursing, Practice Development and Clinical Supervision. Malden,
MA: Blackwell Science.

Kaiser, T. (1996). Supervisory Relationships: Explorirthhe Human Element. Paciﬁc
Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.

111

Kegan, R. (2000). What ‘Form’ Transforms? A Constructive-Developmental Approach to
Transforrnative Learning, In Learning as Transformation: Critical Perspectives on a
Theory in Progress, by Mezirow, J. 35-69. San Franscisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kerry, T. (2001). Working with Support Staff: Their Rolesﬁ and Effective Management in
Schools. London, England: Pearson Education Publishing.

Knowles, MS. (1970). The Modern Practice of Adult Education: Andragpgy Versus
Ped_agogy. New York, NY: Association Press.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning. Experience aa the Source of Learningd
Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

 

Kossek, E. E. (In Press). Workplace policies and practices to support work and families:
Gaps in implementation and linkages to individual and organizational effectiveness, To
appear in S. Bianchi, L. Casper, R. King (Eds.), Wchforce/Workplace Mismatch? Work,
F_amily. Health. and Well-Being Erlbaum Press.

Kossek, E. E. & Ozeki, C.1999. Bridging the work-family policy and productivity gap.
International Journal of Community, Work, and Family, 2 (1): 7-32.

Kraut, A.I., Pedigo, P.R., McKenna, D.D., & Dunnette, MD. (1989). The Role of
Manager: What’s Really Important in Different Management Jobs. The Academy of
Management Executive. November, 3 (4), 286 -293. ABI/IN FORM Global.

Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. (1999). Desigpjpg Qualitative Reseagl. (3”. Ed).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Marsick, V.J. (1990). Action Learning and Reﬂection in the Workplace. In Mezirow, J.
and Associates Fostering Critical Reﬂection in Adulthood. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.

Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and Persrmalitv._New York, NY: Harper and Row.

McGill, M. E. & Slocum, J. W., Jr. (1998). A Little Leadership Please? Organizational
Dmamics: 39-49.

McGregor, D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

McManis, G.L. & Parker, WC. (1978). Implementing Management Informaaion Systems
in Colleges and Universities. Littleton, CO: Ireland Educational Corporation.

Merton, R. (1949). Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

112

Milliken, F. & Dunn-Jensen, L. (2005). The Changing Time Demands of Managerial and
Professional Work: Implications for Managing the Work Life Boundary. In Kossek, L. L.
& Lambert, S. (Eds) Work Life Integration: Organizational, Cultural and Psychological
Perspectives. Erlbaum Associates Press.

Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Name of Managerial Work. New York, NY: Harper and
Row.

Mintzberg, H. (1983). Structure in Fives: Desigpiag Effective Oganizations.
Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Mintzberg, H. (1990). The Manager’s Job: Folklore and Fact. Harvard Business Review.
163-175.

Mintzberg, H. (1994) Rounding Out the Manager’s Job. Sloan Management Review. Fall.
11-25.

Moustakas, c. (1994). Phenomenolagical Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Nasisbitt, J. (1984). Megatrends: Ten New Directions for Transforming Our Lives. New
York, NY: Warner Books.

Newstrom, J. & Davis, K. (1997). Organizational Behavior: Human Behavior at Work
(10»: ed. ). New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Companies.

Osterberg, R.V. (1993). A New Kind of Company with a New Kind of Thinking. In Ray
and Rinzler (eds.), The New Paradigm in Bu_siness: Emerging Strategies for Leadership
and Organizational Change. New York, NY: Putnam.

Osterrnan, P. (1995). Work Family Programs and the Employment Relationship.
Administrative Science Quarterly. 40: 681-700.

Owneby, P. H. (2002). Organizational Learning Communities and the Dark Side of the
Learning Organization. New Direction_s for Adult and Continuing Education. No. 95, p.
51-60.

Palmer, P. (1998). The Courage to Teach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Palthe, J. & Kossek, E. (2003). The role of organizational subcultures and employment
modes in the translation of HR strategy into HR practice, J oumg of Organizatioaal
Change Management, 16(2): 287-308.

Pearson, C., Chatterjee, S. & Okachi, K. (2003). Managerial Work Role Perceptions In

Japanese Organizations: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Management. 20
(l),101-108.

113

Phillips, A. & Dipboye, R. (1989). Correlational Tests of Predictions From a Process
Model of the Interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 14, 41 —52.

Poell, R.F., & Van der Krogt, F .J . (2003). Learning-Program Creation in Work
Organizations. Human Resource Development Review. 2 (3), 252- 272. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.

Pugh, Lyndon. (2001). Leadership and Learning: HelpingLibraries and Librarians Reach
their Potential. Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press.

Rainbird, H. (Ed.). (2000). Training in the Workplace. New York, NY: St. Martin’s
Press, Inc.

Rosenthal, R. & Jacobson, L. (1968). Bygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectation
and Pupila’ Intellectual Development. New York, NY: Rinehart and Winston.

Rosenthal, R. & Rubin, DB. (1978). Interpersonal Expectancy Effects: The First 345
Studies. Behaviorﬂnd B;ain Sciences, 3, 337-386.

Rourke, F. & Brooks, G. (1966). The Managerial Revolution in Higher Education.
Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press.

Rowden, R. (1996). Current Realities and Future Challenges. New Directioas for Adult
apd Continuing Education. 72, 3-10.

Rosow, J .M. & Zager, R. (1989). New Roles for Managars Part III: The Manager as
Trainer. Coach and Leader. Scarsdale, NY: Work in America Institute, Inc.

Salleh, M. & Grunewald, D. (2001). Supervism Managementand its Link to the Human
Resources Function. Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press.

Schtin, D. A. (1983). The Reﬂective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action.
New York, NY: Basic Books.

Schon, D. A. (1987). Educatiag the Reﬂective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for
Teachingand Learningin the Professiona San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Seibelt, K. W. & Daudelin, M. W. (1999). The Role of Reﬂection in Managerial
Learning: Theory. Research. and Prﬂice. Westport, CT: Quorum.

Seidman, I. E. (1991). Interviewing as Qualitative Regarch: A Guide for Researchers in
Education and the Sociaﬁciences. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning
Organization New York, NY: Currency Doubleday.

114

Stein, S. (2000). Equipped for the Future Content Standards. What Adults Need to Know
and be Able to Do in the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.

Stewart, R. (1989). Studies of Managerial Jobs and Behaviour: The Ways Forward. ﬂag
Journal of Management Studies (1), 1-10.

Taylor, F. W. (1911). The Principles of Scientiﬁc Management._ New York, NY: Harper
& Row.

Taylor, F. W. (1972 edition). Scientiﬁc Management, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Trist, E.L., Higgin, G.W., Murray, H, & Pollack, AB. (1963). Organizational Choice,
Capabilities of Groups (a the Cog Face Under Changing Technologies. London:
Tavistock Publications.

United States Bureau of the Census (1999) Statistical Abstract of the United States.
Washington, DC.

Usher, R. et al (1997). Adult Education and the Postmodern Challenge; London:
Routledge.

Van der Krogt, F. J. & Vermulst, AA. (2000). Beliefs About Organising Learning: A
Conceptual and Empirical Analysis of Managers’ and Workers’ Learning Action
Theories. International Journal of Trainingand Development 4(2).

van Mannen, Max (2000). Phenomenology Online. Glossary Section. Retrieved July 17,
2005, from http://www/phenomenologyonline.com. University of Alberta.

Van Velsor, E. & Hughes, M. W. (1990). Gender Differences in the Development of
Managers: How Women Managers Learn from Experience. Greensboro, NC: Center for
Creative Leadership.

Watkins, K. (1989). Business and Industry. In S. Merriam and P. Cunningham (eds.),
Handbook of Adult and ContinuirgEducation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

 

Weaver, R.G., & Farrell, J .D. (1997) Managers aal'r‘acilitators: A Practical Guide to
GettingWork Done in aChanging Workplace. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Welton, M., (1991) Toward Develgrment Work: The Workplace as a Learning
Environment, Geelong: Deakin University Press.

Wexley, K. N. & Latham, G. P. (2002). Developing and Training Human Resources in
Organizations. (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Yero, J .L. (2001-2002). Beliefs. Teachers Mind Resources:
http://www.TeachersMind.com.

 

115

Zeichner, K. & Tabachnick, B. (1981). Are the Effects of University Teacher Education
‘Washed Out’ by School Experience? Journal of Teacher Education, 32 (3), 7-11.

116

lllllllllllllllllllll