As a business manager, you need to know which management style is most appropriate for your given context. In this presentation, learn how Blake & Mouton's Managerial Grid can catapult your managerial influence to the next level.

1. An Overview Presentation by Bryce Hantla (bhantla@sebts.edu)
BLAKE & MOUTON’S
MANAGERIAL GRID

2. Definition and Assumptions
• The Grid: A graphical depiction indicating the degrees
to which a manager’s Concern for Production versus
Concern for People interact based on three
Organizational Universals: Purpose, People, and Power.
• Assumptions:
– People do not accurately gauge their managerial style and
require quantitative assessments for better accuracy
– Individual Assumption drive managerial style
– Individual Assumptions can change through “formal
instruction or self-training” (Blake & Mouton, 1978, The
New Managerial Grid, p. 14)
– Behavioral Sciences Principles can indicate a “best way to
lead” (p. 15)

3. High 9
8
Concern for People
7
1,9
Country Club Management
Thoughtful attention to needs of
people for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable
friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo.
6
9,9
Team Management
Work accomplishment is from
committed people; interdependence through a “common
stake” in organization purpose
leads to relationships of trust
and respect.
5,5
Organization Man Management
Adequate organization performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get out work
with maintaining morale of
people at a satisfactory level.
5
4
3
2
Low 1
1,1
Impoverished Management
Exertion of minimum effort
to get work done is appropriate to sustain organization
membership.
1
Low
2
3
9,1
Authority-Obedience
Efficiency in operations results
from arranging conditions of
work in such a way that human
elements minimally interfere.
4
5
Concern for Production
6
7
8
9
High

4. Management Types
• 9,1 – Authority-Obedience: Old guard of management
with high productivity and high turnover. Often workaholics who
enjoy little life activity outside of work. Numerous health risks due
to stress.
• 1,9 – Country Club Management: Codependent
managers who fear rejection of subordinates. Ambiguous boss
relationship that avoids conflict, which loses out on the creativity
often deriving from conflict. Strong sense of security but high
turnover of ambitious, dedicated employees.
• 1,1 – Impoverished Management: Nondirectional
manager who does the minimum to “hold on” to his position.
Multiple situational factors contribute to the creation of a 1,1 (e.g.,
organizational system, personal issues, or interpersonal
interactions). Subordinates often leave, overachieve (further
masking manager’s inadequacy), or conform with manager’s style.

5. Management Types
• 5,5 – Organization Man Management: Socially popular
manager who “does not command or direct *…+ so much as he motivates
and communicates” (p. 76). His main goal is to typify the majority
sentiment, staying comfortably within the status quo. This manager is
often well-liked but may eventually feel a loss of identity. Subordinates
may drift into a 1,1 style or view manager as lacking integrity or
conviction.
• 9,9 – Team Management: Purposeful motivator, who aims to
include subordinates in open problem solving and to make excellent
decisions for the organization. Goals set are challenging enough to
increase productivity and engage creativity on part of
subordinates, maintaining a low turnover of motivated employees and
sometimes losing 1,1 or 5,5 employees. Teamwork encourages informed
free choice and active participation (as well as seven other “Behavioral
Science Principles” (p. 132-136)), which leads to greater job satisfaction
and higher productivity. 9,9 managers approach problems with
honesty, versatility, and perspective to arrive at the most excellent course
of action for any given situation.

6. Combinations and Criticisms
• Combining Styles
– Paternalism
– Wide-Arc Pendulum
– Counterbalancing
– The Two-Hat Approach
– Statistical 5,5
• Criticisms of The Grid
– Built around a Behaviorist Approach (may not be true for The Management
Grid III), which may change assumptions using a cognitive approach
– Uses a profit-loss paradigm to drive organizational purpose (not supported
by Daniel Pink’s latest research on motivation within organizations)
– Imposes rather broad strokes on how managers/subordinates might have
become the way they are through upbringing and situational scenarios
– Does not take into account spiritual motivating factors for work, and
although it is written for secular market, does not consider biblical
paradigm of excellence (although this could easily be superimposed over
The Grid)