0 _whole issue

European Journal of Business and Management www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1905 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2839 (Online)
Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Studying Efficacy of Organizational and Conceptual Factors
on Manager’s Decision
Amalendu Bhunia
Reader, Department of Commerce
Fakir Chand College, Diamond Harbour
and
IGNOU, Kolkata Chapter, India
South 24-Parganas – 743331
West Bengal, India
bhunia.amalendu@gmail.com

Received: 2011-10-23
Accepted: 2011-10-29
Published:2011-11-04

Abstract
The purpose of the present research is to investigate the impact of organizational factors on the styles of
manager’s decision makings and the difference between the perception of managers and employees of the
styles used by managers in India. On this basis, 100 manager and 500 employees has been chosen as
statistical sample. The analytical model of this study is based on General Decision Making Style by Scott
and Bruce. Questionnaire validity, content validity and compatibility based on 10 experts and professors as
well as the experimental implementation of the questionnaire between 20 managers and 100 employees and
also analyzing exploratory factor for both questionnaires were checked. According to the Kolmogorov -
Smirnov test results have confirmed the normal distribution of the data thus confirmed chi-square test,
one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and the two samples T of Friedman were used.
Keywords: General decision-making style, organization’s size, position of manager, perception difference,
government organizations

1. Introduction
Decision making in fact is the most difficult practice and sometimes the most dangerous work every
manager should do. A manager by an incorrect decision may cause irreparable damage to the body of his or
her organization (Atayi, 2010). Environmental changes and shifts results in that organizations look at their
managers as an important factor to overcome alterations, demands and environmental challenges ahead. In
such circumstances, managers need endless skills and capabilities (Gholi pour, 2008). Decisions are taken
along with achieving goals and by considering the available resources. Decisions determine the kind of
goals and the way to achieve them. Therefore decision making is a mechanism which encompasses all the
activities of the organization, and indeed affects all members of the organization as an individual or as a
member of the group. Organization collapsed without any mechanism to decide and to set its own target
1|Page
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

individuals who are looking for (Moorhead and Griffin, 2007).
Stephen P Robbins thinks of decision as something present and relevant in all tasks. According to Herbert
Simon's decision means management and management means decisions for efficient use of energy and
resources of an organization, which is essential for the manager. Kountz said the existence of plan; program
and policies depend on the existence of the decisions. Studying of decision making processes is not a new
topic. In recent years, numerous studies in various fields and surrounding areas took place about decisions
making as a subject that results in offering several classifications so far in relation to style and
decision-making models which have been presented by experts (Olivera, 2007). Each of these
classifications according to which categories of individual, organizational and environmental factors are
important in the kind of reaction and behavior on how people face decision making situations are different
from one another (Karls et al, 2003). Corporate managers considering various influential factors such as
their personal details and their workplace organizational structure and cultural backgrounds of the
environment use different decision making methods (Mortazavi, 2000).
Hafstead (1980) believes the continuing use of a method of decision making to a considerable degree
depends on the subordinates. According to Hafstead classification from the field of culture, managers
practicing in the collectivist culture use different decision making methods in comparison to individualist
culture. According to another study, four important environmental pressure factors, interaction with other
members of the organization, responsibility requirements and characteristic peculiarities is effective in
selecting the decision making method (Comer and Becker) decide how to respond to these four determining
factors of the style by his decisions making. (Gholi Pour, 2008). Scott and Bruce paid great attention in his
studies about decision-making styles of individuals and factors affecting its internal characteristics and
individual differences of the people. On this basis they introduced five styles of decision making as general
decision making styles. These five styles are: rational decision-making styles, decision making style of
intuition, dependent decision making style, instantaneous decision-making style and avoidance style of
decision making (Hadyzadh Moghaddam 2009).
Its aim is to find checking the effect of organizational factors like (size, position in the organizational
hierarchy) and the difference of perception between staff and managers about decision making.
2. Review of Related Literatures
On the subject of this study, the definition of decision making, decision making styles and empirical studies
of decision making are described as follows:
2.1 Decision making
Harrison (1987) defines decision making in this way: ((.... a moment in a continuous process of evaluation
options to achieve the goal of different expectations about how certain actions to decision makers choose the
option that is highly likely to achieve the goal one seeks)) (Roshandel 2009). Prediction, evaluation and
comparing the outcome of solutions available and choosing the available solution for certain to be able to
reach an optimal outcome is called decision (Atayi 2010). Decision making is a process which according to
that a specific way of practicing for problem solving is chosen (Astuner, 1982). Munday assign
decision-making process to find various aspects, evaluate and select one among them. This process is
obvious in all responsibilities of the manager and helps him in doing all those tasks. (Gholi Poor, 2008).
2.2 Decision making Style
2|Page
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Decision making Style has been defined as a habitual pattern that people use when deciding (Driver, 1971)
or is called special way of individuals to receive and respond to the decision-making tasks (Harn, 1979).
Drive, Bursiue and Mansakar (1990) have noted that the style of decision-making is defined by the amount
of information collected and the number of other solutions when the decision is considered. Although
others suggest that it is called the differences that people collect data (Hunt, Criztokhiat, Mindel, Viusery,
1989, Mackenny and Kane, 1974, 1983 Bruce and Scott 1995). In other words, each individual
decision-making style approach and procedure shows his personality and his reaction to the decision task
(Thunholm, 2003). Style of decision-making behavior from a perceptional point of view indicate the kind
of behavior and the way people encounter situations when the decision is made (Spicer and Smith, 2005).
2.3 Rational Decision Making Style
Rational decision-making style conceptually represents a decision to follow a completely logical process
when it is going to be made. According to rational style objectives are defined clearly, all possible solutions
are selected according to identified goals and finally the best solution is implemented. (Singh, Greenhouse
1, 2004).
2.4 Intuitive Decision Making Style
Intuitive decision-making style from a perceptual point of view shows the individual’s trust to his
awareness and internal intuition when deciding. Managers of the intuitive style when deciding without
needing rational reasons to be a just solution chosen, based on insights into consciousness and instincts
chose a solution that seems to fit.(Falloup and et al, 2006).
2.5 Dependent Decision Making Style
Dependence decision making style from a conceptual point of view represents the mere reliance of the
decision maker to help and guidance from others when faced with decision situations. People, who enjoy this
style due to weakness in consciousness and inability to receive information from their environment, are
totally dependent upon others while taking decisions. (Singh and Greenhouse, 2004)
2.6 Instantaneous Decision making Style
Instantaneous decision making style conceptually represent decisions as fast and short as possible and
instantly when facing decision situations.
2.7 Avoidance Decision Making Style
Avoidance decision making style from a conceptual point of view means dodge any person's decision to
adopt when faced with decision situations. In other words people who have this style when confronted with
issues and topics that require decisions on their behalf delay the decision as far as possible (Spicer and
Smith, 2005).
2.8 Difference between managers and staff perceptions of the style used by the manager
It means the existing level of disagreements about the usage of general decision making styles among
employees and managers. Style in terms of operational decisions is a score that a person gets on the
questionnaire of decision making style. Different perceptions of managers and staff in the style manager use
in the organization: The difference from the operational point of view would be the amount of disagreement
between two questionnaire of management and staff.
3. Methodology
This study made use of a quantitative research approach, and from the viewpoint of relationship between the
3|Page
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

variables (dependent and independent variables) is a type of correlation research.
3.1 Population and Sample
The population for this study includes all employees and managers in the counties, governorships and in the
general-governor of India in the years 2010.Which according to 2010 statistics is 920 people among which
352 are selected including 60 managers and 290 employees which have been classified through a random
sampling method with a simple proportional allocation.
3.2 Research Instrument
The measuring instrument used was a structured questionnaire which was developed and validated by
Bruce and Scott (1995); Hadyzadeh and Tehrani(2008) Of course with the help of this questionnaire the
content validity were also approved by professors and managers too where for the structural validity of
exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis and the KMO index was used. The KMO value equals 0.852
and the Bartlett test, even at a meaningful level of 0.99% (Sig = 0.000) is rejected. Note that the variances
are equal to 55.21 and specific values of each factor were greater than one, we conclude that the credibility
factor of this variable is appropriate.
3.3 Reliability
Reliability of questionnaires to measure the Cronbach's alpha was calculated that 0.817 of the reliability of
Cronbach's alpha showed good general decision-making style questionnaire. Regarding the use of
Kolmogorov – Smirnov test the normality of data distribution was confirmed and the appropriate tests were
used as follows. Chi-square test is used to check for the study of relationship status in decision making style.
MANOVA or multivariate one-sided is used to investigate the relationship between style of decision-making
managers and size of organization. The two sample T test was used to check for homogenization of styles
used by managers and the style diagnosed used by the staff for managers. Friedman test was used for showing
the ranking of decision-making from the perspective of managers and employees and Pearson correlation test
was used to determine correlation between the styles used by managers. Using two software SPSS 18 and
LISREL 8.5 analysis was developed and answers were codified with Likert’s range of five options.
The collections of questions are offered in two questionnaires. The first questionnaire for managers and
officials, and the second questionnaire for employees and manager’s assistant. Each questionnaire included
two set of questions, the first part of the questions related to demographic data of the respondent and the
second Part of the questionnaire to measure decision-making styles of managers and directors from the
perspective of staff which includes 25 questions. 5 of 25 questions are related to the rational style, 5 to
intuitive style, 5 to dependent style, 5 to instant style and 5 to avoidance style.
3.4 Validity
When assessing validity, researchers determines whether a measure used in the study actually does measure
what the researchers in tends in to measure. As already indicated, the measurement instrument developed
by Bruce and Scott (1995); Hadyzadeh and Tehrani (2008) was used in this study. The instrument was
considered valid for the purpose of the present study.
3.5 Research framework
Research framework developed in this study has used the theoretical principles which have been taken from
the ideas and opinions of experts, scholars and scientists in management science. In designing variables and
their dimensions we used Tanenbaum and Schmitt, path - goal theory, Heller theory, Fiedler leadership
4|Page
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

contingency theory and also to evaluate them in three stages by a number of university professors and a
number of senior managers. Dependent variables from general decision making styles that were introduced
by Bruce and Scott (1995) were used because of completeness and relative comprehensiveness to the
classification with highest usage of in internal and external research was.
Theories that have been mentioned above have been used as following in choosing the independent variables.
From Tanenbaum and Schmidt theory, largeness and smallness (the size of the organization), nature of
organizational tasks (institutional status and hierarchy) and the theory of perception were used. From the
path-goal theory (House and Mitchell) in order to determine the environmental variables such as position in
the hierarchy, variable and size like the perception of the style used for this theory. This theory has been used
in this context that differences in decision-making skills exists among managers and subordinates
(employees). Also under this theory, the leader and director’s responsibility is to match his actions to coup
with the contingency situations. But with using these cases, we recognize the importance of views and
perceptions of employees and managers with decision-making styles. we choose it as the independent
variable and from the theory of Heller the position of manager as variable is emphasized. Because,
according to Heller theory the importance of decision for the organization is crucial for choosing the style and
this related to the decision maker and his position.
According to Heller another effective cases for choosing the style is the gaps in the hierarchy which
emphasis manager’s position.
Heller mentions span of control as another important factor in choosing decision making style (Heler, 1998).
This will confirm the size and position variable because the position in the hierarchy and the size and
position as a place that can monitor more or Less effectively (In the general-governor example according to
the size and position success of surveillance area is larger than the county governor and the governor's staff
and area monitoring is more than the county administrator. According to Heller who conceded that the time
and place specific requirements is very important in selecting the style of decision making procedure and
also the nature of the tasks (Project and Association Managers) has been noticed again and place has been
emphasized.
3.6 Research Hypotheses
Hypothesis I
H0: There is relationship between organizational factors and management decision-making styles.
H1: There is relationship between the position of managers in organizational hierarchy and decision making
styles.
Hypothesis II
H0: There is relationship between organization size and the style of decision making.
H1: There is difference between managers and staff perceptions of decision-making styles
4. Empirical Results
According to chi-square test (Table 1) statistics and P-value = 0.015 which α = 0.05 is smaller, assumption
of zero meaning the independent position of managers and the tendency the type of decision making styles
rejected and meaningful correlation between these two will be accepted. Considering the above table it is
observed that most managers who are employed in the Governor-General (nearly 50 percent) use rational
style. It is seen that the dominant style in the governor's management style used is intuitive. In the county it
5|Page
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

is also observed that the dominant style used by managers is dependent style Links to organization size

Manager’s
Manager’s Position Governor-General Governor County Total
Decision making Style

Rational 50.0 20 20 41.7
Intuitive 44.1 53.6 25 36.7
Dependent 5.9 16.4 50 21.7
Sum 200 200 100 100
Chi-Square results 12.327
df = 4
P =0.017

Table-1: Adaptive table and chi-square test to evaluate relationship of the position of managers and
decision-making style

6|Page
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Table-2: Descriptive Statistics; Effect of Size of Organization on Decision Making Styles

Organization Mean Standard Deviation
Governor-General 2.71 0.64
Governor 3.30 0.63
Intuitive
County 2.58 0.70
Total Sum 2.86 0.68
Governor 2.93 0.83
Dependency
County 3.55 0.69
Total Sum 3.53 0.71
Governor 2.24 0.98
Rational
County 2.11 0.94
Total Sum 2.26 0.84
Governor 2.31 1.02
Instant
County 2.17 0.72
Total Sum 2.38 1.00
Governor 1.76 1.03
Avoidant
County 1.50 0.52
Total Sum 1.67 0.80

Table 2 indicates descriptive statistics based on the organization. It can be seen for each style based on
organizations means are not equal and a difference between them is observed. According to Table 2 it can
be seen that the rational style scores is greater for Governor-General, therefore it is said that
Governor-general Managers have greater tendency to use a rational style. For intuitive style mean scores is
greater for governor office, consequently it is said that governor managers have greater tendency to use
intuitive style. For dependent style mean scores for the county is larger, therefore it is said that county
managers have greater tendency to use the dependent style.
For two style of avoidant and instantaneous we can’t say which organizations uses this kind of style more
because approximately they have equal means.
Table 3 show the homogeneity of variance tests indicated that homogeneity of variance test here will be
accepted with regard to Sig = 0.142. Most often this test is rejected, in which the statistical population is
non-normal; but data in this study is normal. Two indexes of Pillai's Trace and Wilks' Lambda are used to
show this matter that weather the mean for the group offered are equal or not. Most social science studies
use Wilks' Lambda index. The Pillai's Trace is also a good substitute for this.

7|Page
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Table-3: Homogeneous variance test
Box's M 53.769
F 1.490
df1 30
df2 3658.630
Sig .142
Table-4: Multivariate analysis of one way variance to evaluate the relationship between the kind of
management decisions style and size of organization

Coefficients Coefficients F Valence Sig. Coefficient of
Degree relationship
between two
factors
a
Consta Pillai's Trace .987 811.083 5.000 .000 .987
a
nt Wilks' Lambda .013 811.083 5.000 .000 .987
Amoun
t
Age Pillai's Trace 1.202 8.212 10.000 .002 .401
a
Wilks' Lambda 1.802 7.238 10.000 .006 .405

In this section it can be seen that the Wilks' Lambda is equal to 1.802 and Sig = 0.006 showing that this test
is statistically meaningful. (F (10, 106) = 7.24, P <0.05) shows that the hypothesis of equality between the
average of three organizations for the styles used by managers can be rejected and it can be shown that in
any organization of which style is used more. Also according to the last column of Table 4 (the relationship
between two factors) can be seen this ratio is equal to 0.405 which show a good relationship between
organization size and type of style management use.
Hypothesis II: There is difference between managers and employees perception in the organization
decision-making styles.
To investigate this hypothesis, we first check it completely to decide if there is difference between
manager’s and the style of its managers told by the employees that there is a difference or not? If the
difference was meaningful we would use Friedman test and the gaps would be identified.
If in this test α = 0.05 P-value < the assumption of equal means is rejected and the assumption of existing
differences is accepted.

8|Page
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Table-5: Two sample T test to evaluate homogeneity of style used by managers and the style diagnosed
by the employees for the managers

p-value T Valence Mean Standard Mean Number Group Title
Degree differences Deviation
and
confidence
interval
0.001 3.32 384 .21, (.086 , .69786 3.24 100 Managers Homogeneity of
0.34) Style used by
.38379 3.03 500 Employees
managers and the
distinguished style
used by
Employees for
managers

According to Table 5 and test results it can be seen that according to values for t = 3.32 and P-value = 0.001 and
the value of the mean difference equaled to 0.21 the result is a meaningful difference between the style used by
managers and the type style used by Managers from employees viewpoint. As it is observed, the style managers
have offered about their decisions is different from the employees recognize for their managers.
To show this difference it was acted as follows:
Table-6: Friedman test ratings of decision-making styles from the viewpoint of managers and employees

Style Used with Managers from Employees Style Used with managers
Perspective Decision making Style
Rank Coefficient Rank Coefficient
3 2.99 1 3.98 Rational

1 3.97 2 3.84 Intuitive

2 3.52 3 2.98 Dependent

4 2.70 4 2.13 Instant

5 1.83 5 2.07 A

Table-7: Friedman test as a meaningful one on prioritizing the style used by managers and the style
used by managers through employee’s viewpoint

Style Used by Managers from Employees Viewpoint Style Used by managers
290 60 Number
319.291 102.385
4 4 Valence Degree
.000 .000
9|Page
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

The test results used for the styles of managers with value of chi-square = 102.385 and on the two-star level
(sig = 0.000) is meaningful. Also test to see the style used by managers from employees viewpoint were
checked. The test result value chi-square = 319.29 and with the value of 0.001 at the two stars level is
meaningful.
According to the coefficient table of Friedman test we can show the gap in the T-Test as indicated.
Considering the table it can be concluded that the rational style is of the first priority or the dominant style
used by the managers. So it is observed regarding the employees opinion that is given if the test result in
the desired employee is observed that this style is located in the third rank. Intuitive style is ranked second
in place by manager’s opinion but it is in the first place by employee’s. Also it can be seen that the directors
have declared that their third priority in the decision making process is the dependency style, while
according to employees in management decision making process this style is in the second priority. For
instant and avoidance style managers and employees ideas are the same, and they are given the same rank.
Now that the overall gap and the difference between the viewpoints of employees were identified in this
section we investigate the difference and gap between the viewpoints of staff and managers in different
organizations separately. In this test if α = 0.05 >P-value supposing equal means is rejected and the
assumption of existing data is accepted.
According to Table 8 and the test results, it is observed for the Governor-general according to t = 4.9 and
P-value = 0.000 and mean difference in the amount equal to 0.46, we can conclude that there is a
meaningful differences between the mean type of model used by managers and the average type of model
Used by managers from employees viewpoint. A model that managers offer for their decision making
process is different from what employees distinguished for their managers.
To show this gap and difference as before we use Friedman test as follow

Table-8: The two-sample T test to evaluate the homogeneity of style of manager’s used and
distinguished style used by employees for managers of Governor-General

Decision making Style used by Decision making Style used by
Governor-General managers through Governor-General managers
Employee’s Viewpoint
144 34 Number
141.945 63.130
4 4 Valence Degree
.000 .000

10 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Table-9: Friedman rank test, decision styles from the viewpoint of managers and employees of the
Governor-General
Style used by managers From Style used by managers Governor-General Decision
Employees perspective making Style
3 2.92 1 4.34 Rational

2 3.48 2 3.71 Intuitive

1 3.97 3 2.75 Dependent

4 2.69 4 2.65 Instant

5 1.94 5 1.56 Avoidant

Table-10: Meaningfulness of Friedman test on prioritizing the style used by managers and the style
offered for manager’s from employee’s viewpoint
Decision making Style used by Decision making
Governor-General managers through Style used by
Employee’s Viewpoint Governor-General
managers
144 34 Number
141.945 63.130 e
4 4 Valence Degree
.000 .000

The test results used for the styles of managers with much chi-square = 63.13 and at the two-star level (sig
= 0.000) is meaningful. Also test for the style used by managers from employees viewpoint were checked.
The test result value chi-square = 141.95 and 0.001 at the two star level is meaningful. According to the
coefficient table of Friedman test we can show the gap that was offered in the difference of T-Test indicated.
By viewing the table it is concluded that the prevailing style of management used and to have the first priority
allocated to is the rational style. As with the following test result about the employee’s opinion, it can be seen
that the rational style for managers from employee’s viewpoint is located in the third place. From manager’s
viewpoint dependency style have the third place in their decision making process; which employees in this
process are putting priority on dependency style for their managers. Intuitive style of the managers in their
decision making process and from the viewpoint of employees in the process of decisions is in second place.
There is no difference of opinion between managers and employees in both style avoidance and instantaneous
one and both groups have put them in the fourth and fifth priority.
In this test if α = 0.05> P-value, the assumption of equal means is rejected and the assumption of existing
differences will be accepted

11 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Table-11: Two sample T test to evaluate homogeneity of style used by managers and the style
diagnosed to be used by employees for their managers in the governorship

p-value t Valence Mean Standard mean Number Group Title
Degree differences and Deviation
confidence
interval
.003 2.99 127 .288, (0.097, .35 3.2857 14 Managers Homogeneity of Style
0.48) used by managers and the
.34 2.9974 115 Employees
distinguished style used
by Employees for
managers in the County
According to Table 11 and test results, it can be seen that the results for governorship according to t = 2.99
P-value = 0.003 and mean difference equal to 0.288, we can conclude that there is a meaningful difference
between the mean type of model used by managers and the average type style used by managers through the
employees viewpoint.
To show this gap and difference like the previous part we use Friedman test as follows.
Table-12: Friedman test for the ranking of the decision styles of managers and employees in the
governorship
Styles used by managers through Styles used by managers Decision making Style
employees viewpoint Governor
3 3.06 3 2.54 Rational
2 3.61 1 4.07 Intuitive
1 4.02 2 3.86 Dependent
5 1.66 4 2.34 Instant
4 2.65 5 2.00 Avoidant

Table-13: Meaningfulness of Friedman test on prioritizing style intended for managers; the intended
style for managers by the employee’s viewpoint
Styles used by managers Styles used by managers through employees viewpoint
(Governor-General) (Governor-General)
Number 14 115
18.964 158.019
V 4 4
.001 .000

12 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

The test results used for the styles of managers with value of chi-square = 18.96 and two-star level (Sig =
0.000) is meaningful. Also the test used for managers model used from the viewpoint of employees was
checked. The test result value is meaningful for chi-square = 158.019 0.001 in the two stars. According to
Table 13 Friedman coefficients test gap that has been indicated in T-Test exists a difference.
With observing table 12 we can conclude that the dominant style used by managers with the first priority is
the intuitive style. While by considering the outcome of this test about the opinion of the employees it can
be seen that employee’s intuitive style of the managers from employee’s viewpoint is ranked second. On the
other hand stuff believes dependence style to be in the first place, while the managers own opinion saw the
dependency style in the second place.
Managers have placed rational decision making style in the third priority and this is the same for employees.
Managers in their process of decision making have placed instant style in the fourth place and the
avoidance style in the last. In this test if α = 0.05> P-value the assumption of equal means is rejected and
the one related to existing differences will be accepted.
Table-14: The two sample T test to evaluate homogeneity of style used by managers and the style
distinguished by the employees for managers in the county
p-value t Valence Mean differences Standard Mean Num Group Title
Degree and confidence Deviatio ber
interval n
.013 -2.58 41 -.36, (.064-, -.07) .57 2.7 12 managers Homogeneity of
style used by
.33 3.03 31 Employees
managers and
styles diagnosed
by employees for
managers in the
county
According to the above table 14 and test results we can observe that for the county according to t =- 2.58,
and P-value = 0.013 and mean difference in the amount equal to 0.36-the result is a meaningful difference
between the mean type of model used by managers and mean type of model used by managers through
employee’s point of view.
To show this gap and difference as part of the Friedman test like before we act as follow

13 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Table-15: Meaningfulness of Friedman test on prioritizing the style used by managers and the style
used by managers from employee’s point of view

Styles used by Managers through Employees Styles used by managers County’s Decision
Perspective making Styles
3 3.02 3 2.79 Rational
1 3.76 2 3.50 Intuitive
2 3.39 1 4.67 Dependent
5 1.97 4 2.58 Instant
4 2.87 5 1.46 Avoidant

Table-16: Friedman test for ranking decision making styles from the view point of managers and
employees in the county
Styles Used by Managers from the view Styles Used by
point of Employees (Governor General) Managers
31 12 Number
23.747 28.157
4 4 Valence Degree
.000 .000
The results of this test is meaningful for the styles used by managers with value of chi-square = 28.16 and
two-star level (sig = 0.000). Also the test was checked for the model used by managers through employee’s
viewpoint. The test result is meaningful with the value chi-square = 23.75 and 0.001 in the two star model.
According to the Friedman coefficient table test we can show the gap that exists in different outcomes of
T-Test.
By observing this table we can conclude that most important and the first style in managers claimed to be
important in their decision making style is the dependency one. While this styles enjoys the second place
in the decision making process of the employees. Managers have stated that using intuitive style is in the
second priority in which employees have given it the first priority. At the county managers and staff have
placed the rational style in the third priority and in this case there is no difference of opinion between
managers and employees. Managers have placed the instant style in the fourth priority but employees claim
that managers use the as their last priority. Also managers have placed the avoidance style in the last place
but employee stated that they use this style as their fourth priority.
5. Discussion and Conclusion
The purpose of the present research is to investigate the impact of organizational factors on the styles of
manager’s decision makings and the difference between the perception of managers and employees of the
styles used by managers in the Governor-General Office in India. Finding this research indicate there are
relationship between position of managers in organizational hierarchy and decision-making style. The
following research results indicated that organizational factors such as size of the organization and position of

14 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

director of the organization in organization’s hierarchy influence the style of overall decision makings by the
manager. Also there is a meaningful difference between the perception of managers and staff about the style
of manager’s decisions.
To testing the hypothesis, both Chi Square and one sample t is checked and is used in the status of each
organization. Results of Chi Square test both with ((017 / 0 = P and 72 3 / 12 = X_14 ^ 2) showed that there is
meaningful relationship between the position of managers in organizational hierarchy and decision models.
According to the table of results it can be seen the largest percentage of managers in the Governorate-general
use rational style (50 percent) and the largest percentage of managers in the governor's use intuitive style (6 /
53) and the highest percentage for styles used by the managers in the county is the dependent style .(50
percent).
The t test results for each organization confirmed the chi-square test results. The average scores for the
Governor-General has the highest mean, which shows that in the governor-general rational style is used
which is the prevailing style. For the governor in the second row it shows that the majority of managers use
intuitive style. Also for the county it can be seen that the mean of opinion offered was less than average
which shows the usage of managers from the next style or the dependent one.

We survey relationship between the size of the organization (Governor – General, Governor and county) and
decision making styles. We used multivariate analysis of variance or MANOVA and due to this case that the
seen meaningful is smaller than acceptable meaningful level of value (005 / 0). Therefore supposing equal
means for all styles in any organization is rejected. So according to table results we can conclude that for the
rational style the highest mean is in the governor-general and for the governor the highest mean belong to
intuitive style and for dependent style the highest mean can be seen in the county section of the study. But for
two style of instantaneous and avoidant the meaningful difference between the organizations is not found. In
this regard, I couldn’t find a research to compare the finding with. Also this research indicates there is
difference between managers and the staff perception of decision-making models in different organizations.
To testing the above hypothesis in general the two-sample independent t-test and Freidman test was used.
Then these tests were repeated separately to incorporate organizational hierarchy to identify different
perspectives of each organization and the following results be obtained.
In the overall test the difference between the perception of management and staff from decision making style
with values (001 / 0 = p and 32 / 3 = (348) t) were meaningful. Friedman test result showed that from
manager’s viewpoint the rational style has the highest priority, intuitive style second priority and the third
priority belongs to dependent style. While from staff viewpoint intuitive style highest priority, dependent
style second priority and rational style is in the third priority. From the viewpoint of managers and employees
instantaneous and avoidant style are in the fourth and fifth place respectively.
Test results for the Governor-General with values (001 / 0> p and 9 / 4 = (76 / 0) t) has shown a meaningful
difference for management and staff perception. Friedman test results indicated in this regard, rational style
for managers in the highest priority, intuitive style in the second place and the dependence style on the third
priority. While from employee’s perspective dependent style in the highest priority, intuitive one in the
second and rational is placed in the third priority. In instantaneous and avoidant style from the perspective
of managers and employees are in the fourth and fifth place respectively.

15 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

The test for governor with a value of (003 / 0 = P and 99 / 2 = t127) show a meaningful difference between
management and staff perceptions of the decision model.
Freidman test result in this case shows from manager’s perspective intuitive style has the highest priority,
second priority belongs to dependent style, the third priority goes to rational style and instantaneous and
avoidance styles have the fourth and fifth priorities respectively. While the results of this test from the
perspective of employees showed that; dependent style in the highest priority, intuitive style in the second
priority, rational style in the third, avoidant fourth and instantaneous style is in the fifth priority. The results
showed that the in the governor, from the perspective of both managers and employees the dominant style
(rational) is in the third priority.
Test results for the county with values (05 / 0 = α> 013 / 0 = P and 58 / 2 - = t41 showed that there is
meaningful relationship between manager’s and staff perceptions of the managers decision models. Freidman
test results in this regard showed that from the perspective of managers in the county dependency style has
the highest priority, intuitive style in the second priority, rational style in the third priority, fourth priority goes
to instantaneous style and the fifth priority belongs to avoidance style. While from the perspective of
employees, the intuitive style has the highest priority, dependence one second, rational style third, avoidance
fourth and instantaneous style has the fifth place.
The results showed that in the county like governor, the dominant style used from the viewpoint of both staff
and managers is in the third priority.

References
Atayi, M. (2010). Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Shahrood, Deghat printing Company. Organizational
behavior, Grid Publishing, Columbus, OH.
Behling, o, Gifford, W.E, & Tlliver, J. M. (1980). Effects of Grouping Formation on Decision Making
under Risk. Decision Sciences, 11, pp. 272-283.
Driver, M.J. (1979). Individual Decision Making and Creativity, in Kerr, S. (Ed.), Harper Collins, pp.
61-62.
Driver, M.J., Brousseau, K.E. and Hunsaker, P.L. (1990). The Dynamic Decision-maker, Harper Collins, pp.
9-11.
Falop.janos, David, Roth, Sehweik, Charles (2006). What is Mean Decision Making in the Content of Eco
– Infarmatic, www. Google.com
Gholipoor Rahmatullah, (2008). Organizational Decision-Making and General Policy, Tehran, publisher
Samt.
Harren, V.A. (1979). A Model of Career Decision Making for College Students, Journal of Vocational
Behavior, Vol. 14, pp. 119-33.
Harn, Michael and M. Ramesh (2002). The Study of Public Policy Translated by Mansourian, Abbas and
Ebrahim Golshan Tehran, Government publications Education Center., pp. 76-81.
Hadyzadeh Moghaddam, Akram and Tehrani, Maryam (2008). Studying the Relationship between General
Decision Making Style in Governmental Organizations. Public Research Office, Pub 1, No. 1, Autumn and
Winter, From Page 123 to 138
Hatch, Mary Joe, Organization theory (2006). Translated by Danaifard Hassan, Termeh Publishing Company,
16 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

first published in Tehran, pp. 6-7.
Heler,Frank ; Drenth,Pieter ; Koopman Pool & Rus ,Velijko.(1988) .”Decision in Organization: A Three
Country Comparative Study” London, Sage Publication, P: 250
Jean Lublan Veex,Silvi George, Holyfield C N, Lisi Stephen, Broodrick Sun Ardis (2009). Translated By Dr.
Tahir Roshandel Arbtany, Tehran, Neil Printing Company.
Koontz, Harold & Weirich Heinz, (1998), "Management", 9th, ed, pp. 51-54.
Keen.P.G.W. (1973). The Implications of Cognitive Style for Individual Decision Making. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Harvard University Graduate School of Business, pp. 13-21.
Loizos Th. Haracleous, (1996). Rational Decision Making: Myth or Reality? Management Development
Review, vol 7, No 4, p 16.
Moreheadd and Griffin (2006). (Translated by Dr. Seyed Mehdi Alvani – Dr. Gholam Reza Memar Zadeh)
Twelfth Edition, Organizational Behavior, Tehran, Golshan Printing Company.
McKenney,J,.&Keen,P (1974). How Managers Minds Work. Harvard Business Review, 52, pp. 79-90
Mitroff, I.I. (1983). Stake-holders of the Organizational Mind, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
New man, Seer, (1994). Strategic, Information Systems Competition through Information Technologies,
New york: Macrmillan colleges,
Oliveira, Arnaldo, (2007). A Discussion Of Rational And Psychological Decision Making Theories And
Models: The Search For a Cultural-Ethical Decision Making Model, Electronic Journal of Business Ethics
and Organization Studies, Vol 12, No 2, pp 12-13
P. Robbins, Stephen, (2005). Organizational Behavior, Concepts, Theories and Applications, Translated by
Parsaiian, Ali, Mohammed, Arabi, Cultural Research Office, Eighth Edition, preface.
Spicer, David P. & Sadler-Smith, Eugene (2005). An Examination of the General Decision Making Style,
Journal or Managerial Psychology, Vol 20, No 2, pp 137-138.
Singh, Romila and Greenhouse jeffryh. (2004). The Relation between Career Decision Making Strategies
and Person-Tohfit, journal of vocational behavior Bruce and Scott, pp. 1995 -15
Scott, S.G. and Bruce, R.A. (1995). Decision Making Style: The Development and Assessment of a New
Measure, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 55, pp. 818-831.
Tehrani, Maryam (2006). Studying the Effect of Emotional Intelligence and General Style of Decision
Making for Managers in Iranian Oil Company, Master's thesis, University of Shaheed Beheshti.
Tatum, Charles B., Eberlin, Richard, Kottraba, Crin, Bradberry, Travis, (2003). Leadership, Decision
Making and Organization Justice, Journal of Management Decision, p 1007, The current issue and full text
of this journal is available at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0025-1747- html
Thunholm, Peter (2004). Decision-Making Style: Habit, Style or both?, Journal of Personality and
Individual Differences, pp 932-933.

17 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Healthcare Management and Leadership: Managerial
Challenges Facing Healthcare Professionals
Vincent Sabourin

GRES, University of Qué in Montreal (UQAM)
bec

School of Management, University of Qué in Montreal (UQAM)
bec

Correspondence: UQAM, ESG School of Management, 315 east St-Catherine Montreal Qc. Canada H3C
4P2. Suggestions are welcome: sabourin.vincent@uqam.ca

Received: 2011-10-23
Accepted: 2011-10-29
Published:2011-11-04

Abstract

This paper sought to study issues which may hinder leadership management by health care managers when
executing their management functions and objectives in practice. The managerial drivers included: rules,
initiatives, emotions, immediate action and integrity. This paper describes the drivers of management
leadership by managers in healthcare institutions to implement their organizational objectives. The findings
on perception towards delivery, performance and professional satisfaction by healthcare managers has put a
lot of emphasis on resistance to change and the lack of commitment of employees (the dimension of
emotions) to explain the obstacles faced by healthcare managers. The finding of our data suggests that a
driver of emotions is the most critical obstacle to healthcare management .

Purpose: This research was carried out to investigate on the impediments facing healthcare practioners with
regard to their delivery, performance and professional satisfaction. The study involved effective drivers of
management, which constituted individual obstacles that healthcare administrators and physicians face
during their leadership and managerial execution.

Materials and Methodology: A mixed method of qualitative (focus group discussion) and quantitative (a
survey with a questionnaire) approaches was applied to this study. These involved group discussion of
healthcare employees and administrators in public healthcare hospitals in a Canadian province. The total
number of surveyed healthcare managers was 182.

Results: The years of practice for most healthcare mangers was found to be a factor in delivery. Young and
fresh graduates though are very productive cannot deliver not unless they have accumulated relevant
experience to master those disciplines of healthcare management and administration. Additionally it was
also found that those managers who had held management position for over twenty years become less
productive. Thus from the responses of healthcare managers, there should be rotational leadership and
employee growth to prepare young but able future leaders. With regards to the drivers of management, it
was established that the driver of emotions holds the highest consideration to delivery, performance and
professional satisfaction with the kind of leadership exercised by healthcare managers. This driver had
85.67% of the respondents who agreed, 11% were neutral and 10% disagreed. Other drivers were; drivers
of rules, which after analysis, was found to have 80% respondents who agreed with it, 8.33% were neutral

18 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

while 11.57% disagreed with the driver. The driver of initiatives had 74.33% responses from agreeing
managers, 20% were neutral while 17% disagreed. The driver of integrity had 75.33% respondents who
agreed with the driver, 20.67% were neutral while 4% disagreed. The driver of immediate action had
66.67% of the respondents agreeing, 27.33% were neutral while 6% disagreed. The summary of the report
has been presents in table 4.

Conclusion: Our research discusses the significance of understanding the managerial obstacles faced by
healthcare managers when exercising their leadership roles so as to have effective delivery, performance
and professional satisfaction. We also discussed how the nature of healthcare managers’ measures varies
between the managers employed in government and private institutions. Using descriptive Analysis, our
research studied the managerial obstacles that hamper the healthcare managers in implementing their
objectives to achieve defined leadership. The findings supported our hypothesis that the main obstacles
faced by healthcare managers are related to the drivers of emotions. Further this study also indicates that
the category of immediate action such as too many emergencies and urgent issues going unresolved without
solutions would be perceived by healthcare managers as obstacles.

Keywords: Healthcare leadership, Managerial execution, Professional satisfaction,

1. Introduction

Health care systems in most countries are under pressure to deliver better healthcare services to wide
population of people. An improvement in healthcare services in any country requires a clear understanding
of the human resources characteristics as well as the current working of the healthcare systems. As recently
described by Fleishman et al., (1991), provision of an adequate health care workforce is now considered
one of the most pressing global human resource issues worldwide. To recruit and retain health care workers
attention to the professional satisfaction of these workers is essential. Professional satisfaction is now
associated with roles and responsibilities, interdisciplinary relationship, remuneration issues, and other
important factors like the public recognition of the health care discipline (Fielder 1967; Fiedler 1996).

The healthcare system in any country depends highly on how well its managers and administrators are
constantly working with their employees to improve the quality of their services, which in turn helps in the
improvement of the quality of the life of the citizens (Fleishman 1953; Fairholm 1996). This is to mean that
junior employees should be involved in key sectors of the hospital management despite having been
assigned routine tasks of treatment. This will help foster the morale of such usually less motivated staff
(Fleishman & Harris 1962).

A number of countries including Canada are hugely faced by staff turnover to other countries, and this is
widely contributing to a number of challenges in key areas such as healthcare systems. This therefore calls
for the healthcare administrators to understand, key employee factors such as push factors and pull factors
(Pointer et al., 1988). They ought to understand what motivates employees, in terms of morale, supervision,
career development and paths for growth, and job security (Morrissey et al., (1990). Accordingly, they also
need to be fully aware of pull factors such as better opportunities offered by other countries and NGOs so
as to retain their well qualified personnel. A clear orientation with the managerial drivers such rules,
initiatives, integrity, immediate action and emotions will be relative to administrators to better understand
the various obstacles that they face in their discipline (Becker & Huselid, 1998).

Healthcare management is an immediate task that is currently facing modern professionals in that field of
human perpetuity and sustainability against premature deaths and other health contingencies. These
managers have been faced with numerous challenges and obstacles which in management could be termed
as managerial obstacles facing healthcare leaders as argued by Zuckerman (1989). It is evident in any
organization that in order to achieve the organizational set goals and objectives, then effective strategy
executions have to be formulated.
19 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

1.1 Aims of the study

This research was carried out to investigate on the impediments facing healthcare practioners with regard to
their delivery, performance and professional satisfaction. The study involved effective drivers of
management, which constituted individual obstacles that healthcare administrators and physicians face
during their leadership and managerial execution. The researchers employed managerial drivers which
included; rules, initiatives, integrity, immediate action and emotions to better identify key obstacles that
face healthcare managers and administrators.

1.1.1 Conceptual Framework

Our conceptual framework is inspired by the work of Kolb (1984) and Kolb and Boyatzis (1995) on
experiential learning and additional work on the topic (Richard and Sabourin, 2009a; Sabourin, 2009a). We
found that the conceptual model of Kolb (1984) provided us with a completed spectrum of perspective on
the topic of strategy execution. Based on this perspective, our conceptual framework suggests that five
different, but complementary drivers could be obstacles faced by managers when executing their strategy. A
review of the literature in management and of the Kolb model (1984) and subsequent work (Richard and
Sabourin, 2009; Sabourin 2009) has led us to develop a conceptual framework of five drivers adapted to
management leadership in healthcare domain. We labeled these drivers as follows:

The first driver of rules deals with the clarification and alignment of the manager’s objectives. The first
driver gathers variables that refer to factual and rational analysis of given situations. This perspective leads
to concept forming and formulation of generalizations that integrate the observations and the reflections.
The economic planning and the analysis are prevailing in this dimension. Obstacles deal with figures,
figures and protocols. Decision-making is based on facts and abstract principles.

The second driver of emotions deals with getting a commitment to the manager’s objectives by its
employees. This driver gathers variable dealing with topic such as fetching a commitment, clarifying
problems, reconciling the divergent points of view and establishing consensus. In this second situation, we
make a thoughtful observation that consists of making observations on the experience lived by the persons
and of thinking about their meaning.

The third driver of initiatives deals with translating managerial objectives into concrete projects for
employees. It gathers variables dealing with introduction of new projects and ideas that results in more
willing and more capable employees. This third driver relies on the active experiment of initiatives; realize
projects and continuous improvements to the existing activities.

The fourth driver of immediate action gathers variables that reflect creating value-added action or
immediate actions in response to urgent matters in the execution of objectives. It addresses concrete action
and those that allows rapid actions on small scale to obtain quick results. Thus, the variables deal with
quick decision taking without respect to an established plan.

The fifth dimension of integrity deals with executing objectives in the context of integrity of values and
principles. It gathers variables associated with executing objectives in respecting organizational values and
principles. These variables refer to obstacles faced concerning organizational values. This is the capacity to
realize the organization objectives in the respect of the integrity under pressure. The summary of the drivers
has been presented in fig 3.

1.1.2 Hypothesis formulation

Based on the preceding research model developed from the conceptual framework of Kolb (1984), five
hypotheses are formulated.
20 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

With the assessment of the Kolb (1984) experiential learning model, there are a number of obstacles that
managers in any organization or institution would face while aiming to achieve their objectives and goals.
These therefore would lead to the formulation of the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 1: In the context of management leadership in healthcare administration, healthcare managers
would face five categories of management obstacles while executing their objectives.

Managers are always on the move to ensure that their employees are committed towards achieving set goals
and objectives. This involves reconciling divergent needs and ensuring that only organizational goals are of
priority as opposed to individual goals and interests. This therefore leads to the formulation of the following
hypothesis.

Hypothesis 2: With regards to the management obstacles faced by healthcare managers, the most
significant obstacle perceived would be the drivers of emotions.

Besides stimulating commitments, managers have an overall role of ensuring that all the obstacles faced by
their organization and employees in particular are given an equal measure and treatment so to have a
balanced performance in their work and objective attainment. This therefore leads to the following
hypothesis formulation.

Hypothesis 3: With the exception of drivers of emotions, the other categories of obstacles would be
perceived and given equivalent weight age in terms of importance among healthcare managers.

Managers have a greater role in taking immediate action and steps to settle urgent matters and decisions
when striving to achieve their objectives. These steps involve rather rapid decisions to meet whatever is to
be realised in the shortest time possible. This statement therefore leads to the formulation of the following
hypothesis.

Hypothesis 4: Given the volatility in healthcare environment, in the driver of immediate action, healthcare
managers would perceive a number of emergencies.

Managers dealing with their employees are at times forced to clarify their objectives in line with the
anticipated actual results. This clarity of issues helps to develop focus and attention and even higher
commitment by the employees, which are involved in the overall performance and execution of the set
goals. This therefore leads to the formulation of the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 5: Given the perception that no singular performance measure exist for healthcare managers in
government healthcare institutions compared to healthcare managers in private practice, lack of clarity in
the actual results expected would be perceived as a key obstacle under the driver of rules.

1.1.3 Research Methodology and Design

This study is a part of a broader research on managerial strategy implementation and implementation was
conducted in four major steps. In our study the dependent variable was strategy implementation and
implementation and the independent variables: (a) Dimension of rules, (b) dimension of emotions, (c)
dimension of initiatives, (d) dimension of immediate actions and (e) dimension of integrity. We present
briefly each of the major steps before examining them in details:

Firstly, in a previous research and before undertaking the study of this article, we surveyed a sample of 182
managers in organizations. This first step was completed to empirically support the four dimensions of
Kolb (1984) using its measurement instrument. These four dimensions had a significant degree of variance
explained.
21 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

Secondly, before undertaking this study, we developed a specific instrument capable of measuring
management leadership within their organization. To do so we completed a set of 12 focus groups with
managers working to survey from a qualitative perspective, the set obstacles that they faced. They were
gathered under the 4 categories of the conceptual framework of Kolb (1984). However, following this
qualitative survey of obstacles faced by managers, a fifth category of obstacle that did not fit within the
conceptual framework of Kolb (1984) was added: that is the one of integrity of values.

Thirdly, we used the qualitative survey of these 25 obstacles to develop a measurement instrument under
the form of a questionnaire to survey empirically the relative importance of the various categories of
obstacles. This questionnaire was previously validated with a sequential set of 5 small samples of managers
to improve the formulation of the various questions and insure its statistical reliability.

The following sections explain the details of each of these four methodological steps

Step 1: Empirical validation of the four dimensions of Kolb (1984)

The objective of this first step before undertaking our study was to validate empirically the four dimensions
of the conceptual framework of Kolb (1984). The validation was based on the Learning Style Inventory of
Kolb (1984) with some adjustments to the managerial context.

1. Data was collected by managers through structured training in the countries of the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Three regions of the world, namely, Europe, North
America and Australia, were randomly selected. 168 respondents completed the questionnaire.

2. The measuring instrument of (Kolb1984), which is the Learning Style Inventory, has been used since the
initial variables were related to the modes of learning. Our questionnaire was adapted to answer the
questions on the strategies of transformation, and we validated the questions during executive seminar with
the managers of the organization.

3. To make sure that each of the questions was understood, the validation was preceded by a pre-test
conducted on 15 referees of the Belgian Management Training Association. All questions were suitably
understood and adjustments were made with one to clarify its understanding from the respondents.

4. Descriptive analyses were completed to identify certain characteristics of the sample. Frequency analysis
and the test of Cronbach Alpha were completed. The results of R-square (degree of explained variance by
the model) and factorial analyses were used to verify the hypotheses. As shown in table 2, reference is
made to the Cronbach Alpha, an indicator of reliability with the measuring scale between 0 (not reliable of
the whole) and 1 (reliable).

5. Four of the five dimensions of our conceptual framework have been validated in previous research. The
first four dimensions had a positive Cronbach alpha and the fifth dimension (integrity) was added
afterwards following the qualitative research focus groups. Table 2 below presents the concept definition
along with the variance and reliability obtained as shown in the next table. Each dimension (with the
exception of the fifth one) was supported by a significant variance explained and a significant Cronbach
alpha.

Step 2: Focus groups with managers to identify managerial obstacles

In the second step, and before undertaking this specific study, we completed focus groups with managers to
list the various obstacles they face for each of the dimensions previously identified. Twelve focus groups
were conducted with an average of 15 managers per group to identify obstacles faced by managers. We
identified 5 obstacles for each of the 5 dimensions for a total of 25 obstacles. The obstacles were selected
22 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

based on the frequency among the participants for each of the focus groups. The obstacles identified were
used as input to elaborate the measurement instrument related to obstacles.

Step 3: Development of a measurement instrument

We further developed an instrument tool to measure the role of the 25 obstacles that were identified with
managers in focus groups. We used the verbatim of the focus group to elaborate a survey to validate these
obstacles. A pre-test of questionnaire was administered and the questions were sequentially adjusted with
five groups of approximately 25 managers per group before being rolled out to a larger sample of managers.
Several adjustments were made in these 5 pre-test to insure the statistical behavior of each questions. The
table below presents each of the 25 questions that were completed by the participants.

The step 4 consisted of surveying a group of 322 managers in a governmental Department of a Canadian
province. The participants were all managers and project managers with an information technology
background and were in charge of supervising information technology projects. The group was selected to
insure the homogeneity of the respondents in terms of origins, task and functions.

In the specific context of this research, we surveyed this specific group of managers to better understand
obstacles facing managers.

In our sample, an average of 36% of managers was responsible for 5 to 19 employees working under them.
Median years of service at the current organization have been 5 to 10 years of which a majority (76%)
having spent less than 5 years at their current managerial position. Majority of the respondents (80%) were
49 years old or younger. There were no significant differences between this sample of 182 and the broader
sample of managers (n=322) used in previous research.

A selection of other methods was used in an attempt to interpretation. The investigators had no vested
interest in the enhance response rates, including: 1) ensuring that the survey specific outcomes of the survey,
was user-friendly, 2) ensuring anonymity and uncensored responses from our neutral academic unit, 3) the
use of several contact methods (meeting, telephone, fax, email, newspaper articles) to solicit participation,
4) ensuring timely respondent access to survey results, and 5) promoting the potential benefits of the results
to the profession within the country. This was a voluntary anonymous survey. Completion of the survey was
considered consent for the participant.

1.1.3.1 Main outcome measures

The main outcome measures for this study were professional demographics and the extent of agreement to
positively phrased statements regarding their delivery, performance and professional satisfaction with
emphasis on the management drivers.

1.1.3.2 Data analysis

For the purpose of this research, data analysis was unfunded assessment solicited by the Canadian Supreme
Council of Health. To minimize any perception of potential bias and loss of anonymity, the researchers
were solely responsible for the administration of survey questionnaires, data collection, analysis and
interpretation. The researchers had no vested interest in the specific outcomes of the survey.

1.1.4. Findings and Results

One hundred and seventy two online survey accesses were recorded during the designated survey collection
period. This represents 58% of all healthcare managers practicing in Canada. Twenty two of the surveys
were found to contain no responses or respondent duplicated survey attempts and were thus neglected. The
23 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

remaining two hundred and fifty surveys contained responses to one or more questions and were included
in the analysis. We noted that not all participants provided responses to all the survey questions.

1.1.4.1 Respondent demographics

The socio-demographic and years of practice characteristics are summarized in table 2. This was based in
the years of practice in administrative and management positions since commencing the employment. 90
respondents reported to have held management position for a period of less than 5 years. This represented a
response rate of 30%. 100 respondents reported to have been in management position for periods ranging
from 6 to 10 years, thus netting a response rate of 40%. Between 11 to 15 years, there were 50 respondents
who scored a response rate of 14.67%. 32 respondents reported having held an administrative role in
healthcare institution for period of 16-20 years, and had a response rate of 10.67%. Those who had held
those positions for periods of over 20 years were 14 respondents, netting a response rate of 4.67%. This
information is summarized in table 2.

1.1.4.2 The perception towards delivery, performance and professional satisfaction and management
obstacles

Table 3 shows the extent of agreement with perception towards delivery, performance and professional
satisfaction with healthcare management under the different variables of the respective drivers of
management adopted from the previous researches and as outlined in the conceptual framework. In this
research, views and opinions were solicited from 182 hundred respondents who were in management or
administrative positions in healthcare institutions selected for study. The drivers were:1) rules, 2) emotions,
3) initiatives, 4) integrity and 5) immediate action.

Under the driver of rules, there were variables labeled; V 1, V2, V3, V4, V5 respectively. From the descriptive
analysis of variable V1, 92% of the respondents agreed with this variable, 2.67% were neutral and 5.53%
disagreed with this variable. With respect to variable V 2; 70.67% agreed, 9.33% were neutral while 20%
disagreed. V3; had 85% agreeing, 10.67% undecided and 4.35% disagreeing. V4 recorded 67.33% agreeing
respondents, 11.33% were neutral while 21.33% disagreed. Variable V 5 had 85.67% agreeing, 7.67%
neutral respondents and 6.67% disagreeing respondents.

Under the driver of emotions, there were variables labeled; V6, V7, V8, V9 V10 respectively. As per the
findings from the descriptive analysis, V6 had 84.67% respondents agreeing with the variable, 12% were
neutral while 3.33% disagreed. With regards to V 7, 87.33% agreed, 9.33% were neutral while 3.33%
disagreed. V8 recorded 87% agreement, 8% neutral and 5% disagreement. V 9 had 80% agreeing
respondents, 16.67% neutral and 3.33% disagreeing. V 10 had 87% agreeing, 8.33% were neutral while
4.67% were recorded as disagreed.

Under the driver of initiatives, there were variables labeled; V11, V12, V13, V14, V15 respectively. From the
descriptive analysis, V11 recorded 79% respondents agreed with this variable, 16.33% were neutral while
4.67% disagreed. V12 had 75.33% respondents agreed, 19.67% were neutral while 5% disagreed. V13 was
noted to have 78% of the respondents agreed, 18% were neutral while 4% disagreed. V 14 was found to have
65.67% respondents who agreed, 23.33% were neutral while 11% disagreed. Lastly V 15 had 73.33%
agreeing, 19.33% neutral and 7.33% disagreeing with the variable.

Concerning the driver of integrity, there were variables labeled as; V 16, V17, V18, V19, V20. V16 had 79%
respondents agreeing, 16% were neutral, and 5% disagreeing. V 17 recorded 72% respondents who agreed,
25% were neutral while 3% disagreed. V18 had 80% of the respondents agreeing, 16% of the respondents
were neutral while 4% disagreed. V19 scored 70% agreeing respondents, 27.33% were neutral while 2.67%
disagreed. V20 had 75% of the respondents agreeing, 19% were neutral while 6% disagreed.

24 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

With regards to the drivers of immediate action, there were five variables labeled as; V 21, V22, V23, V24 and
V25. As from the descriptive analysis, V21 was noted 73.33% of the respondents agreed, 21% were neutral
whereas 5.67% disagreed. V22 had 48% agreeing while 52% were neutral. No disagreement was recorded.
V23 had 89% of the respondents agreeing while 11% disagreed. V 24 had 42% of the respondents agreeing,
58% disagreed. V25 was after analysis found to have 81% agreeing respondents, 4.67% of the respondents
were neutral, while 14.33% disagreed.

1.1.4.3 Perception of healthcare managers and administrators towards the managerial drivers

The researchers developed five managerial drivers that were separately investigated to find out their
contribution towards effective delivery, performance and professional satisfaction. The managerial drivers
of rules, was after analysis, found to have 80% respondents who agreed with that driver, 8.33% were
neutral while 11.57% disagreed with the driver. As for the driver of emotions, 85.67% of the respondents
agreed, 11% were neutral and 10% disagreed. The driver of initiatives had 74.33% responses from agreeing
managers, 20% were neutral while 17% disagreed. The driver of integrity had 75.33% respondents who
agreed with the driver, 20.67% were neutral while 4% disagreed. The driver of immediate action had
66.67% of the respondents agreeing, 27.33% were neutral while 6% disagreed. The summary of the report
has been presents in table 4.

1.1.5 Discussion

The discussion presents an overview of the nature and behavior of healthcare managers and administrators
with respect to the various management obstacles encountered while discharging their leadership roles. This
part is divided into two parts; the specific section and the general discussion section.

1.1.5.1 General discussion section

Generally, well educated and nurtured employees will be very productive. Their delivery will be fostered if
management consider making junior employees part of management. The essence of employee engagement
is to provide a positive environment where employees are free to contribute, and desire to contribute, more
of their energy, efforts and thought processes in ways that significantly and favorably impact the goals of
the organization. People, who engage other people on behalf of their employer, as employees are required
to do in many service jobs, are expected to be courteous and pleasant to others. How can any leader or
manager expect such behavior from subordinates without, in turn, treating subordinates well?

In addition, it doesn’t make sense to treat subordinates poorly and expect them to become intrinsically
motivated. However, creating intrinsic motivation requires something different than merely a lack of
negative treatment. The key issue becomes one of how to inspire people to provide positive and
productive engagement toward their organization. We have learned that valuing the talents of subordinates
reaps better results. By ensuring that subordinates know we appreciate their thoughts, ideas, skills and
knowledge, we communicate a feeling of respect and importance. In doing so, it is not necessary to hand
over the reigns of authority or decision-making power. Yet situational leadership theory might indicate
that, at times, a participation in decisions by group members yields the optimal outcome.

Many managers think if they want positive employee engagement, then all they have to do is pay higher
wages. In other words, if an organization wants higher dedication from employees, all it has to do is give
workers more money. However, some studies have shown this is not true.

Herzberg’s hygiene motivator theory suggests that the absence of certain elements in the workplace will
serve to de-motivate employees, but the presence of these same elements does not serve to motivate
employees in the workplace. Therefore, Herzberg described particular elements as “hygiene” elements,
as opposed to true motivators. These hygiene elements include pay, security, status, peer relationships,
25 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

subordinate and supervisor relationships, company policy and administration, work conditions, and
supervision. In other words, according to Herzberg’s theory, the hygiene factors only affect job
dissatisfaction but do not improve job satisfaction.

Our analysis therefore brings to light, the contemporary perspective of five drivers of management for
healthcare managers. The analysis of the data highlights how healthcare management gathers
multidimensional practices with varying complementary facets. The following is a brief discussion of the
drivers.

The driver of emotions is considered as the foremost healthcare management driver. In other words,
motivated and engaged managers and employees contribute to the successful execution of management and
objective achievement. The findings related to the driver of initiatives can be applied in the area of
identification of training and developmental needs of healthcare managers and employees, to fulfill the
competency gap. Conversion of goals into concrete projects, techniques used for team based management,
techniques used as self resolution for solving healthcare managerial dilemmas all need a set of unique
competency.

The findings related to the driver of rules also have managerial and administrative implications. This driver
focuses on the clarity of communicating the expectations, systems to evaluate the results and supportive
parameters and the process used for regular reviews and it calls for precise identification, design and
implementation of communication systems, evaluation systems and monitoring systems respectively. Hence
the management should design perfect systems to ensure that the dimensions of rules are followed.

Though not all management skills has deadlines and contingencies, preparing for crisis and planning for the
same will also ensures the support of the driver of immediate actions. Though the driver of integrity was
not widely commented, with regards to this study on healthcare management and administration, there is
need that managers ensure that their actions are clean and focused on the overall attainment of the
organization’s objectives and goals.

1.1.5.2 Specific discussion section

This section examines and discusses all our five hypotheses formulated earlier. With respect to the findings
on the subject of exploring the obstacles faced by healthcare managers while executing their objectives, we
intend to examine to what extent each of our hypothesis was supported. The results of the empirical
analyses have provided answers to our research questions. Apart from examining the hypotheses formulated
we also wish to elucidate other potential observations of our research to existing literature on healthcare
management and administration.

Hypothesis 1: In the context of management leadership in healthcare administration, healthcare managers
would face five categories of management obstacles while executing their objectives.

Our first hypothesis refers to the five categories of obstacles developed in the conceptual framework on
management leadership in healthcare management and administration and emerged out of the conceptual
framework of Kolb (1984). The data analysis done supported this hypothesis. Though it is consistent to our
conceptual model, additional research with large samples would be needed to support the external validity
and to generalize all the five categories in different levels of healthcare management and administration
across geographic locations. In fact in different times, managers will be faced with management obstacles,
which can be detrimental to their leadership and work performance. This hypothesis is therefore proving
the previous findings about obstacles faced by healthcare leaders and other managers in general.

Hypothesis 2: With regards to the management obstacles faced by healthcare managers, the most
significant obstacle perceived would be the drivers of emotions.
26 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

Vol 3, No.7, 2011

In the context of management leadership in healthcare management and administration, our second
hypothesis states that the most significant category of obstacles faced by healthcare managers among the
five categories found in the conceptual framework is the driver of emotions and the factors related to it
including lack of commitment to goals, lack of trust and lack of awareness of the importance of objectives.
The descriptive analysis supports this hypothesis. In order to stimulate employees to focus on the
organizational goals, it is relative that senior managers be leaders, who can communicate necessary
objectives to their juniors. There should be trust and respect among employees and between seniors and
their juniors. This will help stimulate effective management approach and realizable tangible results.

Hypothesis 3: With the exception of drivers of emotions, the other categories of obstacles would be
perceived and given equivalent weight age in terms of importance among healthcare managers.

Our descriptive analysis did not support this hypothesis. In contrast to the hypothesis set based on our
conceptual framework, we found that the four other drivers excluding the driver of emotions did not have
an equal weight in their relative importance. Some drivers are applicable or appropriate at different times
and in different scenarios. So the hypotheses could not be supported since not all drivers will be exhibiting
similar variability or effects regarding management.

Hypothesis 4: Given the volatility in healthcare environment, in the driver of immediate action, healthcare
managers would perceive a number of emergencies.

Under the drivers of immediate action, our hypothesis states that healthcare managers would perceive many
emergencies and last minutes requests and changes as a key obstacle since there is volatility in the
healthcare environment. The descriptive analysis supported this hypothesis. It is always impossible to avoid
emergencies in an organization. Some decisions will always be made without having to settle for formal
meetings. This is what has made the hypotheses an important value in our research.

Hypothesis 5: Given the perception that no singular performance measure exist for healthcare managers in
government healthcare institutions compared to managers in private practice, lack of clarity in the actual
results expected would be perceived as a key obstacle under the driver of rules.

Our fifth hypothesis states that healthcare managers would perceive lack of clarity in their actual results
expected to be the key obstacle under the drivers of rules. It is consistent with the previous research studies
indicating that clear priorities and objectives. Our descriptive analysis supports this hypothesis. The
certainty with any management decisions is that managers whether in public or private, have to ensure that
the results to achieved are clearly defined to their employees.

1.1.5.3 Practical and Theoretical Implications

Motivated and engaged employees will be more committed to the goals. Out of the five obstacle categories,
driver of emotions and its factors such as; lack of commitment to the goals, trust, and awareness about the
importance of objectives are perceived as the most significant obstacles. It is an important observation for
the management in the sense that they have to adopt practices and policies to develop and sustain employee
engagement in healthcare sector.

Healthcare managers are expected to perform efficiently with multiple management measures since the
dynamics of performance and the competencies required for that are quite unique for professional
satisfaction. Their performance is expected to go beyond profit or wealth maximization when compared to
their counterparts. Given this scenario, the obstacles perceived by healthcare managers also would be
unique and different when compared to their counterparts. Research has to identify those set of obstacles
that are exclusively felt by healthcare managers. Our descriptive research confirms the existence of five
categories of obstacles faced by healthcare managers while discharging their healthcare goals and
27 | P a g e
www.iiste.org

0 _whole issue

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (9)

Ähnlich wie 0 _whole issue

Ähnlich wie 0 _whole issue (20)

Mehr von Alexander Decker

Mehr von Alexander Decker (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

0 _whole issue