Managerial curriculum

Student ID: 100327 42 In Figure 20, the CVF and the Armed Forces Managerial

Foundation can be seen in a mixed figure visualising the similarities of the CVF and the Managerial

Approach presented by the Danish Defence Command.

The ethic is described as the trademarks of good management. The nine trademarks are: strength, courage, vision, vigour, coherence, credibility, insight, community and development, which together describe the Armed Forces' leadership ethics. That is to say, the spirit under which management must be exercised in order to fulfill the nine characteristics of good

management. Any executive officer in the Armed Forces is faced with a number of requirements for the

exercise of management, but also contributes to creating conditions for the exercise of leadership by others (Danish Defence Command, 2008).

The trademarks presented can be compared with the areas of focus of the four quadrants presented in the CVF. Seeing the trademarks of courage, vigour, credabillity and community as the main characteristics of the four quadrants and the other four trademarks presents the transition between the quadrants, the functions.

Student ID: 100327 43 managerial approach. (McGregor, 1960). 2) Adize’s theory of the four managerial roles: integra-tor, entrepreneur, administrator and producer, by which a manager can be described. These are roles which, as is the case which the four quadrants within the CVF, all are present in the man-ager, with some, however, being more pronounced than others (Adizes, 2015). 3) McClelland’s theory of needs in relation to what drives the motivation of manager. McClelland presents three general motivations that drive managers: need for achievement, need for power and need for af-filiation (Harvad University, 2007). 4) Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership theory, or the Situational Leadership Model. The theory, as a two-factor theory, is composed of two main variables, being task behaviour and relationship behaviour. The theory presents four managerial styles in accordance to which a manager can behave: selling/directing, telling/coaching, partici-pating/supporting and delegating (Hersey, et al., 1969). 5) Tannenbaum and Schmidt’s contin-uum of leadership which as a simple model presents the level of freedom a manager gives to his/her employees/teams versus the level of authority he or she imposes (Tannenbaum, et al., 1957). 6) Presthus’s theory of legitimisation of the managers through either legitimacy through expertise, legitimacy through the formal role, legitimacy through sympathy and legitimacy through the manager's esteem (Presthus, 1960). 7) Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory, as a framework for cross-organisational communication. This describes the effects of a society’s cul-ture on the values of its members and how these values relate to behaviour. (Hofstede, 1980).

A common element in many of the theories presented in the curriculum for the managers within the Armed Forces is the two-factor theory, also known as Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory or dual-factor theory. In this theory it states that there are certain factors in the workplace that create job satisfaction while a separate set of factors cause dissatisfaction. The two are seen as influencing the employees and manager independently.

With McGregor the managers become aware of the way they view their employees and just as im-portantly how the employees look upon each other and the manager. Consequently, the upcom-ing managers will be better prepared to understand the given situations in the workplace and thereby act accordingly. The manager will understand that, as people, the employees and him- or

Student ID: 100327 44 herself will have a pre-set focal point of view in relation to how other persons are viewed, but by realising this, the managers will be better prepared to counter any inexpediencies as managers.

As with McGregor, so with Adizes. Realising that one, as a manager, has preferences in relation to how to enact management, the upcoming managers will have a broader perspective on them-selves as managers as well as their employees. Thereby, they will be able to exercise manage-ment in accordance to both the situation and the personnel. In relation to their preparedness for a Lean implementation this also gives them an understanding of how to support the implementa-tion in relaimplementa-tion to a managerial approach towards the teams and employees. The employees’

preferences in relation to Adizes’ model gives the manager input in relation to how best to sup-port the employees’ embrace of Lean.

Through the understanding of McClelland’s theory of needs, the manager comes to understand his/her preference’s as a manager. Consequently, the manager becomes aware of his or her own person, giving them perspective. In addition, the theory does not say that one motivation is better than the other. Instead it focuses on describing what drives the motivation in the three different fundamental needs. In relation to the four quadrants of the CVF, the fundamental motivational needs within the single manager can be seen to be connected to the four cultural types. Each of the four culture types has managerial preferences, and the motivational need within the manager could very well be seen having a say in relation to which culture the manager will feel most a home. For example, social needs as a main motivation do not match well with the management culture within a Hierarchy-focused culture.

In relation to finding oneself as a manager and subsequently acting as a manager, true to oneself and with the values and beliefs from one’s own person, Hersey and Blanchard, Tannenbaum and Schmidt, Presthus and Hofstede all give the same perspectives for upcoming managers. None of the theories speculate as to which managerial approach is the most successful. Instead, they all present perspectives of what good management could be, and perspectives on who the upcoming managers are themselves. The last one perhaps being the most important one, since the

Student ID: 100327 45 upcoming managers are hereby presented with a free choice in relation to how they wish to act as managers within the organisation.

Relating to the problem statement and CVF, it could thus be speculated that by not setting a clear direction in regard to which managerial style is the most suitable for the organisation, the organi-sations are not creating the best possible conditions for a successful Lean implementation. If the organisation at a strategic level introduces Lean, it can be argued that they also set the direction for how to do so, knowing what it takes in relation to managers and organisational culture.

Therefore, if one specified culture should be allowed to flourish within the organisation, in order to support the Lean implementation, the curriculum should perhaps be more targeted towards this goal.

On the other hand, the curriculum supports the aforementioned managerial foundation very well.

From this perspective, the curriculum supports the managerial approach in which the diversity of managers and employees is what drives the organisation towards future goals (Danish Defence Command, 2008). Moreover, by having diversity among its managers the organisation embraces the fact that sub-cultures will be present all over the organisation. Given the size of the Armed Forces, trying to enforce one single managerial style and culture throughout the organisation is most likely going to fail and will also create a rift between the employees and the management level, since the managerial approach will become impersonal and not adapted to the given situa-tions (Cameron, et al., 2006). Adizes describes a potential uniformity among managers as a po-tential threat to the organisation. If the managers all look alike and do not allow new perspec-tives among their ranks it could potentially become a cancer within the organisation (Adizes, 2015). From this perspective, the lack of one single direction in relation to the curriculum is per-haps not a sign of a disconnection to the overall organisational strategy, but more a question of embracing variation among the managers in order to ensure a healthy organisation.

Student ID: 100327 46