Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies http://jlo.sagepub.com/
The Evolution of the Concept of the 'Executive' from the 20th Century Manager to the 21st Century Global Leader Joyce Thompson Heames and Michael Harvey Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 2006 13: 29 DOI: 10.1177/10717919070130020301
The online version of this article can be found at: http://jlo.sagepub.com/content/13/2/29
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Midwest Academy of Management
Additional services and information for Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://jlo.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
>> Version of Record - Jan 1, 2006
What is This?
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 2006, Vol. 13, No. 2 The Evolution of the Concept of the ‘Executive’ from the 20th Century Manager to the 21st Century Global Leader
Joyce Thompson Heames - West Virginia University Michael Harvey - University of Mississippi
The purpose of this paper is to take an in-depth swamp the effort.” (McCall & Hollenbeck, look at the profiles of executive skills and 2002, p. 8) competencies drawn across the expanse of One of the fundamental questions asked seventy-five years framed in the backdrop of by scholars and business leaders today is, “How management philosophy changes. In the early can a company prepare to effectively compete in 1900’s, Chester Barnard outlined the the hypercompetitive, complex, global competencies he felt the executive of the future environment of the 21st Century?” One of the would need in the 20th Century. At the central precepts in the management literature is beginning of the 21st Century, Morgan McCall the necessity to have a well developed, and George Hollenbeck interviewed over 100 experienced management team at the helm, or in expatriates and reported a list of needed other words, experienced, well prepared competencies for the global executive of the 21st executives (Porter, Lorsch, & Nohria, 2004). Century. This paper chronicles the changes in However, what constitutes an executive with the the management arena over that 70 plus year “right stuff” is defined in a variety of ways period of time to frame the backdrop of these (McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002). There is two executive skill profiles. The journey is reasonable agreement that much of what interesting and the outcome is surprising at tomorrow’s executives need to know can be times. Just as organizations are a product of learned yet, how they gain that knowledge is their past, so to is the executive of today. He/she another matter and is not a simple ‘cookie is an anthology of all the things that an cutter’ formula. Each person has individual executive needed in early 1900’s, with a couple talents and strengths that have to be dynamic dimensions thrown in to maintain their amalgamated into finely tuned organizational sustainable competitive advantage in the new and market skills set (Kotter, 2001). millennium global marketplace. Key Words: It is necessary to continuously assess the leadership, executive development, global transformation from a good executive to a great management, 20th Century management executive, as well as how to develop leaders that training/development, 21st Century global are able to insure that organizations survive in managers, differences between traditional today’s multi-faceted multicultural global managers and global leaders marketplace. To gain insight into what it takes to be ‘great’ involves comparing past strategies “Systematic development of global for developing executives with the espoused leaders requires an even stronger, more focused formula for success today. In 1938 Chester commitment than does a domestic effort. You Barnard put forth his thoughts on the traits and have to know what you are doing, why you are skills of the executive in a ‘cooperative system’ doing it, and what you want to get out of it. in order to be successful (Wren, 1994). Without the clarity of commitment, the Recently, after completing an empirical complexity of the global environment will qualitative worldwide study, McCall and Hollenbeck (2002) described their vision of the
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 30 Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies Heames & Harvey
uintessential ‘global executive’ and the and procedural in nature, in 1836 James necessary skills needed to retain a competitive Montgomery wrote what is considered by some edge in today’s complex global business world. as the first text book on management (Wren, The purpose of this paper is twofold. 1994). In 1908, Henri Fayol responded to a call The first objective is to provide a brief historical for a theory of management by developing his review and draw a parallel of some of the more now universal ‘principles of management’ that prominent changes in the management allowed for what was thought to be an art environment across the last 70 years. As we (management) to be studied as a discipline in the enter the 21st Century, it would seem to be an classroom (Rodriques, 2001). appropriate time to examine the evolution of A glance back through the pages of desirable characteristics of managers compared management history illustrates that many to the past. Barnard’s seminal work in the 1930s management gurus of the early 20th Century had provides the backdrop for the historic their beliefs about what constituted the qualities representation of what was thought to be the of a top notch manager. Each writer supported necessary qualities of ‘successful’ managers. the viewpoint that management as a philosophy Secondly, we develop a comparative analysis of and practice, which helped to provide a Barnard’s ‘successful manager’ of the early 20th backdrop of executive education throughout the Century with that of McCall and Hollenbeck’s decades. Perhaps ahead of her time, Mary (2002) ‘global executive’ of the 21st Century. Parker Follet believed in the communities of Their empirical research can serve as the creative practice and suggested that employees foundation of what is thought to be needed for be considered an intrinsic part of the success in the global marketplace of the 21st organization that allowed it to be more Century and therefore, be used to foreshadow productive (Wren, 1994). Nobel prizewinner what qualities are necessary to succeed in the Herbert Simon held strong beliefs about the future. It is important to continue to look at decision-making process of executives and firms current phenomena through the lens of the past in general as he espoused his ideas about (Wren, 1994); thus the use of the comparison of “bounded rationality” (1945). Simon believed the two perspectives should be helpful in linking that no one person, including the executive, the 70 years of change and development in the could make the complicated decisions of management conceptualized by Barnard with the running an organization in isolation. He defined expectations developed by McCall and the organization as “the pattern of Hollenbeck about developing executives to meet communications and relations among a group of the challenges in managing in the global human beings, including the processes for marketplace. making and implement decisions”, (Simon, 1945, p. 19). And, not to be forgotten; Ralph C. Early Conceptualization of Davis (1951) wrote “Management is defined as Management & Management the function of executive leadership” (p. 12). Development Fayol, Follet, Simon, Davis, and many others made important contributions to our Discussion about what makes a good understanding of management skills and manager/executive/leader and how to develop competencies. But, it is the belief of many that one name prominently emerges from the early such archetypes of commandership has been an th ongoing debate for millenniums. As early as part of the 20 Century as having a significant 400 BC, Socrates noted that management skills impact on shaping the business landscape of his were transferable from one setting to another; it era and defining the roles that executives play in was just a matter of understanding the key areas creating viable thriving organizations. Chester of needs by a given group (Watson, 1869). In Barnard (1886-1961), as a great scholar, a the year 1513, Machiavelli penned the first ‘how notable successful businessman, and a to’ book for rulers (executives) and listed his consultant, through his imagery of the chief ‘must knows’ for the aspiring ruler (Swain, executive of the 1930’s set the foundation for 2002). Even though the content was technical many to view the development of a world class leader. Barnard attended Harvard Business
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 Evolution of the Concept of the Executive Volume 13, Number 2, 2006 31
School where he studied economics, but through methodology, the amount of data collected for out his life he earned seven honorary doctorates the study, and the attention given to the holistic for his contribution to the understanding of global executive. organizations (Wren, 1994). During his presidency of New Jersey Bell, he was noted for Managerial and Societal Transitions his ‘unbounded’ enthusiasm and concern for his across the 20th Century employees. As a consultant, Barnard assisted such organizations as the Atomic Energy Perhaps a constructive first step would Commission, the New Jersey Reformatory, and be to examine changes in society in general, and the United Service Organization, just to mention the business world specifically, to better a few (Wren, 1994). Barnard was known for his understand how and why current conceptions of belief that the executive “carried out his management might different from those of the functions in a cooperative and democratic early scholars. For clarity and to draw manner rather than in a unilateral autocratic distinctions between various stages in the way” (Gehani, 2002). development of management thought, we have Having acknowledged the contributions divided the 20th Century into five basic eras, of a few of the pioneers of management thought, between which paradigm shifts occurred in both it is useful to assess the picture as it is presented the business arena and more specifically in the today. A review of the recent literature on conventional wisdom among management developing executives revealed many prominent scholars as to what constituted the practice of names, too many to capture in this brief note. management and what managers needed to be Individuals who will no doubt go down in the successful: 1.) Era I, 1900-1945; 2.) Era II, 1945 history books as having left interesting and – 1970; 3.) Era III, 1971 – 1991; 4.) Era IV, monumental footprints in the sands of 1991 – 2001; 5.) Era V, 2001+. Harvey and management development include: Peter Buckley (2002) synthesized many of the Drucker, Michael Porter, and Victor Vroom, just changes in the economy and management to name a few. Drucker, the author of 30 books, philosophy very effectively over the 70 plus touted as being a candidate for being one of the years. Table 1 outlines the major tenets of their most influential observers in modern business piece in a way that parallels the 20th and 21st history was an advocate of giving employees Centuries. Our objective is to tie their responsibility and not empowerment (Galagan, observations of changes to these specific eras as 1998). Porter (1980) outlined the ‘Five Factor they emerged as an impetus of change in the Analysis’ that gave a clearer picture of the management arena. forces that impact profitability in an industry. Vroom promoted participative management and Era I: 1900-1945 matching decision processes to the nature of the In the early part of the last century, problem (Vroom, 2003). the United States experienced a major Also, at the start of the 21st Century, a number of management experts published transition from a basic agrarian economy to articles that specified the skills and an industrialized society. Technology competencies needed by senior executives in the focused on the mechanization and the future (see Aupperle & Dunphy, 2001; production of goods, the business and McKinsey, 2004; Porter, Lorsch & Nohria, economic sectors became contributors to 2004). However, McCall and Hollenbeck critical societal issues (i.e., employee rights, completed an extensive, qualitative, multi- child labor, health/safety in the workplace, country study in 2002 that generated an all- taxation of corporate entities and the role of inclusive list of the competencies of the global corporation in a society), and improvements executive. Their list was chosen for our basis of in communications and transportation the discussion of the 21st Century executive, broadened external perspectives from local because of the comprehensiveness of their
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 32 Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies Heames & Harvey
Table 1 Management Environment Transitions from the 20th Century to the 21st Century
20th Century 21st Century 1. High percentage of manufacturing industries 1. High percentage of service industries 2. Emphasis on functional expertise 2. Emphasis on management processes 3. Domestic market 3. Foreign markets & cultures 4. Legitimate authority in hierarchical 4. Virtual team & network organizational organizational structure structures 5. Clearly defined operating procedures 5. Fluid & reactive operating procedures 6. Well-defined industry boundaries 6. Ill defined industry boundaries 7. Fairly constant market 7. Turbulent market 8. Bricks & mortar 8. Virtual offices 9. Communication slow & unreliable 9. Communication instantaneous & continuous 10. Technology growth emerging 10. Technology growth exponential 11. Many employees with similar 11. Many employees with unique responsibilities responsibilities & skills & skills (Harvey & Buckley, 2002)
to national and indeed, international growth and importance of the trade unions in the concerns. Making things with machines United States. This trend of organizing by labor became known by a large segment of the provided the appropriate countervailing power society, as consumers demanded goods in a to the economic strength of the corporate world. quicker time frame. How to make money by This position was strengthen even more during borrowing to maintain and grow businesses was the depression of the 1930s where the rights of discovered, creating capital markets. America laborers was abused in many cases due to the discovered that unregulated markets could lead magnitude of need of those out of work/looking to monopolies and unfair business practices, and for work during the depression. also fought two World Wars. Business From a management perspective the organizations grew in wealth and size, growing size and complexity of organizations, management and ownership separated, and and the need to create a skilled labor force, led working for a wage became the norm in the to Fayol’s theories of structure and division of United States. labor (Wren, 1994). While many theorists were Unrestrained competition led to impressed with industrial technology and monopolies, unfair business, poor labor mechanization, management discovered that practices, and massive debt accumulated by human assets (largely focused on individuals) organizations. As a result, society demanded were also important. Management theories and reforms and the resulting legislation increased development began to focus on improving the the constraints on business practices. And the productivity of those human assets. The theories of economics taught managers acknowledged founder of a body of knowledge important lessons in the Great Depression of the known as scientific management, Frederick 1930s. New Deal programs formed by the Taylor, stated that training needed to be a part of government began to restore the faith in the the corporation’s responsibility to its employees, power of government to help individuals as yet he felt the best teacher for managers was Social Security and many other work programs experience (Taylor, 1911). Taylor also were established (Rue & Byars, 2003). postulated that the principal objective of Management’s view of its world was broadened management was to secure the maximum somewhat to include societal issues external to prosperity for the employer and the employee the business organization. This era of (Taylor, 1911). dominance by the organization also spawned the The 1920’s brought the end of World War I and the onslaught of more studies of the
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 Evolution of the Concept of the Executive Volume 13, Number 2, 2006 33 employee and his/her reaction to task and work war efforts and space race began to pervade the environments called the human relations economy. The computer was born during WW movement. Chief among these studies were II and greatly perfected during the space race of those conducted at the Hawthorne facility of the late 1950’s and throughout the 1960’s. Western Electric in Chicago between 1924 and While the computer was a product, its 1933 by a group headed by Elton Mayo (Rue & effectiveness was determined by the software Byars, 2003). The results highlighted the developed to make it useful as a data processor, importance of understanding the social as a reporting system, and in an increasing interaction of workers and the existence of number of situations as a data repository (Wren, informal organizational social systems 1994). (Dulebohn, Ferris, & Stodd, 1995). Kaufman While the industrial world was in full (1993, p. 24) characterized the human relations development mode, the philosophers and focus as “the incorporation of the human factor psychologists were in the ‘academic wings’ into scientific management.” Lewin (1935) analyzing the changes from the worker’s introduced a theory that human behavior is a perspective. Team or group dynamics became function of both person and environment. This the focus of management interest. Deutsch led to the thought that the work environment (1949) suggested that cooperation and needed to give the individual a sense of competitive spirit are ever present and belonging for him to function at maximum demonstrated that developing cooperative capacity and popularized the term group groups increased production. Trist and dynamics. Bamforth (1951) indicated that it was important to allow the social dynamics of the group to Era II: 1946-1970 exist and that the technical aspects of the job In the three decades following World need not denominate the success of the War II, large American corporations benefited workflow. Management continued to place from the weakened economies of other nations increasing emphasis on its human assets/capital, such as Germany and Japan. The United States now visualized in group or team dimensions, economy was strong, stable, and experienced rather than as individuals. The advent of the unparalleled prosperity. Producers benefited not civil rights movement also highlighted the only from the demand from American disparity among social/ethnic groups as to consumers, but also from the demand created opportunities in the workforce. The movement when the United States government committed continues to this day having a direct as well as to rebuild war-torn Europe, as well as the an indirect impact on the diversity and vitality of Philippines and Japan (Tuma, 1971). United businesses. States corporations grew into mega-corporations While the computer clearly had a role in that started exploring international holdings to business organizations, it also made significant meet both worldwide demand and to locate contributions to the development of management closer to new markets created. Two wars (e.g., theories and practice. Computers made it Korea and Vietnam) and the continuing cold- possible to process larger amounts of data and war arms race continued to fuel the economy coupled with a growing body of statistical whenever recessions threatened (Library of techniques, management researchers turned to Congress, 2004). empirical studies with greater frequency. The tremendous economic growth and Moreover, as a data repository, computers made prosperity of these three decades, while it possible to collect and store large volumes of beneficial to the industrial sector of the data on economic transactions, which economy, led to a shift away from reliance on complemented research needs and theory this sector to an emphasis on the development development (Hammer & Champy, 1993). and delivery of services (Goldstein, 1991). Two factors explain this shift. First, as Americans Era III: 1971-1991 enjoyed high earnings and prosperity, they The years from the early 1970’s through began to add services to the ‘goods’ demanded 1991 were a period of economic adjustment for on a daily basis. Second, technology born in the the United States and much of Western Europe.
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 34 Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies Heames & Harvey
The oil and gas crisis of the 1970’s played a value-chain, which led many to create inter- major role as the increased cost of energy made organizational alliances with suppliers and the United States and many European companies buyers to increase competitiveness. TQM and less competitive in the manufacturing arena business process re-engineering tools were used worldwide. Companies in the United States to drive out costs and improve quality, speed, faced an increasingly competitive and rough and responsiveness. Many companies turned economic environment laced with technology more to global markets in an effort to expand advancements, government interventions, and markets and gain added competencies. many international dynamics (Ferris, Working dynamics were also changing. Schelenberg, & Zammuto, 1984). Struggles to Teamwork and the subsequent social facilitation survive became the mantra of many boards-of- were recognized as important features, but directors. Casio (1993) reported that in the negative behaviors were also being identified. 1980’s United States based manufacturing firms Social facilitation highlighted the point that the cut more than two million workers with a presence of others could sometimes motivate seventeen percent of the dismissals being from individuals and spur them to greater efforts. middle management. However, the opposite pattern was also found in However, the demand for services grew that sometimes individuals worked less hard in exponentially, and as technology spread the presence of others than they did alone. This globally, an increasing number of enterprises effect became known as social loafing. Two from countries other than the United States primary reasons were given for social loafing 1) became “best in the world” in various industries. feeling of anonymity (Harkins & Szymanski, And, because the United States’ consumer 1988) and 2) perception of easy or not market was the world’s largest, many of these challenging task (Jackson & Williams, 1985). foreign enterprises entered the United States The 1980’s presented a change in market and experienced phenomenal success. philosophy and organizations found that it was Domestic consumers, ever egalitarian in their important to foster a sense of mutuality and trust purchasing choices and experiencing some belt- in the relations between management and tightening of their own, bought foreign goods workers, to develop employees as assets with the and services because they were less expensive view of increasing competitiveness, and to assist and in many cases of higher quality (e.g., the organizations’ compliance with the increased automobiles, electronic equipment, watches, government regulations (Kochan, Katz, & cameras, and the like). McKersie, 1986; Walton, 1985; Beer & Spector, Companies in the United States faced an 1984). The influence of the Japanese increasingly competitive and difficult economic management style was being felt through out the environment laced with dramatically changing American corporate landscape. The successful industry boundaries, increasingly rapid application of the Theory Z concept contributed technology advancements, government to the recognition that employees represented a interventions, and many international dynamics vital resource just as important as capital and (Ferris, Schelenberg, & Zammuto, 1984). should be managed to facilitate competitive Companies in all sectors faced tough strategic advantages (Dulebohn, et al., 1995; Carnevale, decisions such as downsizing, restructuring, and Gainer, & Meltzer, 1990). rightsizing (Casio, 1993) as well as adopting new employment philosophies. During this Era IV: 1992 – 2002 time, diversity increased due to the increase in The economy of the 1990’s could best women and minorities in the main stream of be summed-up by a statement made by Larry management. This increased diversity provide Chimerine, former Managing Director and Chief the foundation for improving the skill set and Economist at the Economic Strategy Institute in management capabilities of the organization but an address to the Fibre Box Association's (FBA) also created a tension and in some cases a 63rd Annual Membership Meeting on April 27, conflict among those in the organization. 2003 in Phoenix, AZ. "The 1990s was the Michael Porter (1980; 1985; 1986) argued that longest period of uninterrupted growth in United business organizations needed to focus on their States history, with no inflation, low
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 Evolution of the Concept of the Executive Volume 13, Number 2, 2006 35 unemployment, and record corporate profits. One of the primary methods of growth Inflation has been taken-off the counter for a utilized by organizations is that of employing an very long time. We're in a permanent dis- acquisition strategy. This mode of gaining inflationary economy now." market power, diversifying risks, and gaining a The need to increase speed and broader consumer base has been an inordinately responsiveness led to increasing use of virtual popular corporate strategy over the last several teams, new forms of organization, virtual decades. In 2005, it was an estimated $2.9 offices, and more adaptive policies and trillion worth of acquisitions made globally. In procedures. As gaining a competitive edge what appears to be an unrelenting quest for became increasingly important throughout the limited resources; the need to capture unique 1990’s management researchers began to rethink combinations of human resources (i.e., old theories and reframe them in a modern management team tacit knowledge) to gain context (Wren, 1994). Pfeffer (1994) argued competitive advantage; the necessary speed of that gaining the skill to effectively manage getting products to a market to remain people was one of the most competitive tools. competitive; the growing importance of Corporate strategy theorists (Birkinshaw, 2001; relational marketing efforts and the resulting Mintzberg, 1991; Prahalad & Hamel, 1990; synergistic marketing channel strategies, an ever Whitney, 2004) argued that the core increasing number of firms are focusing on competencies of organizations rest in the human acquisitions to address these marketplace assets and knowledge base of the organization. challenges more than ever before. Throughout this period, management organizations and specifically the human Era V: 2002-Date resource management function within them The dawn of the 21st Century found the changed their philosophy and turned to a more United States facing more economic uncertainty incorporative mindset (Dulebohn, et al; 1995; and increased government regulation. The Harvey, Buckley, & Novicevic, 2000). Sarbanes Oxley act, terrorist attacks, and the Pfeffer (1994) argued that gaining the subsequent war on terrorism have left executives skill to effectively manage people was one of the of this new day concerned and very cognizant of most competitive tools. But, with a diverse the fact they are facing new tumultuous times. workforce that faced more complex problems Kiechel and Sacha (1999) listed the following as and group dynamics than ever before it was not trends that will reshape the workplace an easy task. Diverse workforces brought throughout the next decade. opportunity and advantage along with • The average company will become considerable challenges (Ferris, Frink, Bhawuk, smaller, employing fewer people. Zhou, & Gilmore, 1996). The need for • The traditional hierarchical organizations to more proactively use organization will give way to a cooperative and self managed teams to improve variety of organizational forms, the their competitive position was recognized by network of specialists foremost many managers. Those teams were being drawn among these. from across functions, from various business • Technicians, ranging from computer units, and even from external market sources. repairmen to radiation therapists, Rodrigues (2001, p. 82) posited that, “United will replace manufacturing States based organizations rely more heavily on operatives as the worker elite. the multi-boss, ad hoc organization than in the • The vertical division of labor will be past.” Teams – the size of teams, the kinds of replaced by a horizontal division. teams, the dynamics of teams, the member • The paradigm of doing business will diversity of teams, and the processes of teams – {continue} to shift from making a became the central focus of training initiatives product to providing a service. for employees and managers. Marks, Matthieu, • Work itself will be redefined: and Zaccaro (2001) created the team process constant learning, more high-order taxonomy to try and assist in the research on thinking, less nine-to-five. teams.
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 36 Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies Heames & Harvey
Buckley (2002) would postulate that it is time to It is obvious that the role of the future recognize those changes and make some tough CEO will be riddled with surprises, seven major decisions about what still works for the manager issues will dominate according to Porter, Lorsch, of today and discard the concepts that no longer and Nohria (2004). These authors listed the apply. With that thought a look at a comparative following as possible pitfalls for future model of the two executives that reside at the executives: 1) you can’t run the company solo (it polar ends of the time continuum is in order. takes a team of talented people); 2) giving orders is very costly (using power to unilaterally issue A Cross Century Comparative orders or reject proposals by senior staff will Assessment of the Concept of the cost in social capital); 3) hard to know what is Executive really going on (a magnitude of information and sources of information); 4) always sending a 20th Century Manager/Executive message (always being scrutinized both inside Chester Barnard developed his concept and outside the organization); 5) you are not the of what a manager/executive needed to learn to boss (still report to board of directors); 6) remain a viable part of the organization and to pleasing shareholders is not the goal (activities guide those for which he was responsible. He and strategies supported by shareholders may outlined five key competencies (see Table 2) not be in best long term interest of the firm); and that every executive of ‘the future’ (as perceived 7) recognizing that managers/leaders are still in the early part of the 20th Century) needed to only human (bound by human joys, fears, hopes, brace themselves with beyond their formal and personal limits). These seven tenets speak institutional instruction: 1) broad interests and to the dynamic changes of the multi dimensional wide imagination and understanding, 2) superior environment in which future executives must intellectual capacities, 3) an understanding of the operate. field of human relations, 4) an appreciation of How do the changes discussed above the importance of persuasion in human affairs, affect management development? Burns and and 5) an understanding of what constitutes Stalker (1994) would argue that the movement rational behavior toward the unknown and the has been from a ‘mechanistic’ management to an unknowable (Barnard, 1948). ‘organic’ management. While Harvey and
Table 2 A Comparative View of 20th Century Manager with the 21st Century Global Leader
20th Century Manager 21st Century Global Leader (early 1900’s) (early 2000’s) 1. Broad interests & wide imagination and 1. Open minded & flexible understanding 2. Superior intellectual capacities 2. Value-added technical &business skills 3. Understanding of the field of human relations 3. Cultural interest & sensitivity 4. Appreciate the importance of persuasion in 4. Resilient, resourceful, optimistic, & energetic human affairs 5. Understand what constitutes rational behavior 5. Able to deal with complexity toward the unknown & the unknowable 6. Stable personal life 7. Possess and engender honesty and integrity (Barnard, 1948, p. 195-204) (McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002, p. 35)
1. Broad interest and wide imagination: company president, he arranged a series of Barnard felt that having a well-rounded liberal lectures and readings that were non business arts education beyond business made related and lasted up to six non consecutive managers/executives more ‘flexible and weeks for all of the top management, many of adaptable’ in their thinking. While in his role as who had college degrees (Barnard, 1948). His
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 Evolution of the Concept of the Executive Volume 13, Number 2, 2006 37 position was that education could not be agree with management perceptions. He overemphasized. expressed the need to for adequate written and 2. Superior intellectual capacities: oral persuasion skills when dealing in human Having survived the Great Depression, World affairs. War I, and World War II, Barnard saw the future 5. Rational behavior: Perhaps the more of businesses to be a ‘closer integration of social difficult of his concepts to understand or that activity’ (Barnard, 1948, p. 195). Moreover, he might be misinterpreted is the last; ‘an felt “without education the supply of leaders of understanding of what constitutes rational organization competent for conditions of the behavior toward the unknown and the modern world would be wholly inadequate” unknowable’. After having waxed on so (Barnard, 1948, p. 194). He drew on that eloquently about the need for superior intellect, advance understanding when he spoke to the here he adds the intuitive piece. The business concept of intellectual capacities (Barnard, 1948, world is full of unknowns and many situations p. 197). are faced with incomplete knowledge of all the There is no doubt in my mind that facts and thus require the executive to takes training in the more logical disciplines tends to leaps of faith based on past experiences, signals foreclose the minds of many to the proper from the business environment, or just gut appreciation of human beings. Nevertheless, for instinct. Barnard prophesized that it is just as executives, as well as many others, the world of important to be able to exercise wisdom and the future is one of complex technologies and instinct as well as intellect (Novicevic, Hench, & intricate techniques that cannot be adequately Wren, 2002). comprehended for practical working purposes He definitely was a man of vision and except by formal and conscious intellectual saw dimensions of the future that many of his processes….to deal appropriately with time could not comprehend. All five of his combinations of technological, economic, competencies are still needed today, as will be financial, social, and legal elements; and to demonstrated in a subsequent section of this explain them to others so manifestly call for paper as parallels are drawn between Barnard’s ability in making accurate distinctions, in list and the more modern interpretation of what classification, in logical reasoning an competencies are needed by modern global analysis….This means that the student needs leaders. All five items drawn from the pages of rigorous training in subjects of intellectual his 1948 book are reemphasized today. difficulty, thereby to provide himself with the tools and mental habits for dealing with 21st Century Global Leader/Executive important problems. As stated earlier it was hard to choose 3. Human Relations: Barnard was clear one set of leader characteristics from the list of on his position of understanding social systems noted scholars. However, the McCall and and recognizing formal organizations as ‘organic Hollenbeck (2002) empirically based qualitative and evolving social systems’. He used the study conducted interviews with over 100 global analogy of organizations not being like executives stationed throughout the world. The machines, static and fixed; instead they were insight of such seasoned leaders was thought to compilations of employees who would be add to the richness and insights derived from different from location to location. Interaction their research efforts. Their extensive interviews and experiences with a given group of people is lead to the following list of competencies: 1) needed to fully understand their physical and open-minded and flexible in thought and tactics; psychological needs. This too requires constant 2) cultural interest and sensitivity; 3) able to deal and consistent communication to get to ‘know with complexity; 4) resilient, resourceful, your people’. optimistic, and energetic; 5) honest and 4. Persuasion: Barnard’s belief s that authentic; 6) possess stable personal life; and 7) one important managerial function was the value-added technical or business skills (p. 35) process of explaining their actions and beliefs (See Table 2). Each of these points will be about company activities. The art of persuasion discussed in more details as comparisons and is paramount in getting others to accept and even linkages are drawn between the two lists in the
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 38 Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies Heames & Harvey
next section. McCall and Hollenbeck would be positioned juxtaposed. A close look at the list the first to say that no one list can depict a reveals a number of parallels between the way universal set of competencies as there is no Barnard described the 20th Century Executive ‘universal global job.’ “Global competencies, and how today’s leaders of the 21st Century like global jobs, must be thought of as a mix, depict their roles as articulated by McCall and depending on the job” (McCall & Hollenbeck, Hollenbeck. First, broad interest and wide 2002, p. 34). The world is just too complex and imagination seems to be another way to say multi-dimensional. However, their list is open minded and flexible. Barnard realized in comprehensive, thought provoking, and 1948 that the market place was getting more empirically created. competitive and changes would come more One additional interesting and quickly. He spoke of staying flexible and apparently new facet to the development of the adaptable to allow for the changes that were global executive is the importance of personal occurring in the marketplace. The global leader responsibility for their career paths. They seem of today is faced with changes at a faster pace to agree with Peter Drucker who advocates and has more information to deal with than any learning ‘personal management’ is as important manager in history. Technology puts more as learning to manage other people (Galagan, information at their finger tips than the average 1998). McCall and Hollenbeck address the person can process. Therefore 21st Century organizational and personal responsibilities in leaders must also remain alert and responsive to the development of the 21st Century leader. the hypercompetitiveness and fast changes of today’s global business arena. “Although global executive Second, Barnard spoke of superior development is more intellectual capacities, where the leaders of complicated and uncertain than today reference value-added technical and its domestic counterpart, it is business skills. It would appear that getting an not impossible. The problem is education and additional training as a foundation not a lack of know how – in to success is still a must. Both sets of authors fact, many processes for speak extensively about honing intellectual managing the difficulties of abilities by continuously pursuing diverse cross-border assignments have educational opportunities. While it is clear that been well known for years. The computer and technical skills are more of a problem is the complexity and necessity in the 21st Century, that does note risk; few organizations have preclude other forms of education. Life long adopted a model robust enough learning seems to be their motto, which they to fit the challenge and then allude to being as much an attitudinal issue as it committed the time and is as it is a skill. resources necessary to Third, perhaps the human relations in implement it… Given the Barnard’s day were framed in a more domestic added challenge of developing backdrop and focused on respecting employee global talent, a substantial and employer relations. Yet he still realized that burden for development falls on each organization was unique by virtue of the set the person who aspires to a of employees that happen to make up the global career. Individuals with employee base. He spoke of organic and ever such aspirations need to seek evolving systems because of the human element. out international exposure, not The same is true today, however the multi- wait for it to find them.” national multi-cultural dimensionality of today’s (McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002, organization requires global leaders to be p.13) sensitive to respecting people from around the world from very diverse backgrounds, beliefs, Parallels and morés. Table 2 provides an insight into how The fourth comparison evolves around these two executive profiles compare when personal attitude, both the manager of the 20th
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 Evolution of the Concept of the Executive Volume 13, Number 2, 2006 39
Century and the leader of the 21st Century need when leaders were faced with ethical decisions to understand the importance of persuasion, (Novicevic, Davis, Dorn, Buckley, & Brown, optimism, and resourcefulness in dealing with 2005). However, he did not list it as one of his others. Good communication skills, both oral competencies. Again, perhaps he felt it was so and written, are a necessity as the executive is basic it was expected. It still leaves one to always acting as a spoke person for the wonder if these personal dimensions (stable organization and must be able to persuade others personal life, honesty, and integrity) are just to accept and support organizational objectives. talked about more today or are they seen as Both sets of authors also stress the need to be fading standards that need to be recaptured. optimistic and caring when dealing with others in order to have true relationships with Common Themes constitutes. Two common themes run through the The fifth and last direct parallel between two lists. First, both executive images capture the authors addresses the need for dealing with the value of and the human relational skills ambiguity. McCall and Hollenbeck speak to the needed to succeed. Each seems to echo the Dale issue of complexity distorting the facts that Carnegie philosophy of understanding your leaders have to deal with on a daily basis. fellow man and mastering the art of influence Barnard talked about how the executive needs to and persuasion (Carnegie, 1936). A second understand that the facts needed for decision commonality that ties the two together is the making is not in ‘black and white,’ clearly thought that first-hand experience in the lead spelled out. He explains there will be times role as CEO is still the most helpful step in the where intuition is needed to make decisions development of an executive. It appears that because executives have to deal with the nothing can replace being in the trenches. ‘unknown and the unknowable.’ People learn to be global from doing global It is interesting that two additional work (McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002). The 21st characteristics are explicitly discussed when Century global leader lives and operates in a describing the leader of the 21st Century and yet more complex, faster paced, culturally diverse were not given as descriptives for the 20th business arena. Yet he/she should start with the Century manager/executive: 1) stable personal principles that Barnard’s 20th Century life and 2) honesty and integrity. Perhaps, manager/executive lived by and then add a keen Barnard felt these two items were innate or such understanding of the traits and competencies that essential characteristics that he did not find it ensure success today as expressed by McCall necessary to put them on paper. Whereas the and Hollenbeck. Moreover, this paper suggests authors of today may have recognized the that it is necessary to use today’s profile as a changing demographic trends of blended basis for growth for tomorrow. families such as ‘dual–earner lifestyles’, and situations where both marital partners are Final Thoughts sharing the burden and responsibility for family care. There is an emerging stream of literature The major contribution of this paper is that discusses the stress issues related to work- the parallelism drawn between the changes in family conflict (Eby, Casper, Lockwood, the management environment and the profiles Bordeaux, & Brinley, 2005). When addressing thought to be necessary for the the issues of honesty and integrity, McCall and executives/leaders of the early 20th and 21st Hollenbeck (2002) stated that is necessary for Centuries. The changes that occurred in the the leader of today to not only possess these marketplace over the past 70 plus years are characteristics, moreover to ‘engender’ them in exceptional and represent significant shifts in the others. Furthermore, they found in their way executives run global hypercompetitive research that consistent authenticity was crucial enterprises. This comparative analysis helps to for one to stimulate honesty and integrity in draw on the heritage of the past, while moving others. There is evidence that Barnard believed forward into the future, with eyes on changes in and promoted an authentic approach to still occurring at an ever increasing rate in the leadership and that was an important concept market place. The review of the last 70 plus
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 40 Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies Heames & Harvey
years leaves the realization that it is necessary to Dulebohn, J.H., Ferris, G.R., & Stodd, J.T. (1995). proactively and methodically develop global The history and evolution of human executives and continue to add to their store of resource management. In G.R. Ferris, S.D. talents and skills. Rosen, & D.T. Barnum, Handbook of human resource management, Cambridge (pp. 18-41), Mass.: Blackwell Publishers. References Eby, L.T., Casper, W.J., Lockwood, A., Bordeaux, C., & Brinley, A. (2005). Work and family Aupperle, K.E. & Dunphy, S.M. (2001). Managerial research in IO/OB: Content analysis and lessons for a new millennium: Contributions review of the literature (1980-2002). from Chester Barnard and Frank Capra. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 124- Management Decision, 39, 156-164. 197. Barnard, C.I. (1948). Education for executives. Ferris, G.R., Frink, D.D., Bhawuk, D.P.S., Zhou, J., Organization and Management: Selected & Gilmore, D.C. (1996). Reactions of Papers. In K. Thompson (Ed) The early diverse groups to politics in the workplace. sociology of management & organizations Journal of Management, 22, 23-44. (pp. 194-206) New York: Routledge – Ferris, G.R., Schellenberg, D.A., & Zammuto, R.F. Taylor & Francis Group. (1984). Human resource management Barnard, C.I. (1950). The Functions of the Executive. strategies in declining industries. Human Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Resource Management, 23, 381-94. Beer, M. & Spector, B.A. (1984). Human Resource Galagan, P.A. (1998). Peter Drucker. Training & management: The integration of industrial Development, 52, 22-28. relations and organization development. In Gehani, R.R. (2002). Chester Barnard’s “executive” K.M. Rowland & G.R. Ferris (Eds.). and the knowledge-based firm. Management Research in Personnel and Human Decision, 40, 980-991. Resources Management, 2, 261-98. Goldstein, I.L. (1991). Training in work Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. organizations. In M.D. Dunnette & L.M. Birkinshaw, J. (2001). Why is knowledge Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and management difficult? Business Strategy organizational psychology, (2nd Ed). Palo Review, 12, 11-18. Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Burns, T. & Stalker, G.M. (1994). Mechanistic and Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering organic systems. The Management of the corporation. New York: Harper Collins Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Publishers, Inc. Press. Harkins, D.G. & Szymanski, K. (1988). Social Carnegie, D. (1936). How to Win Friends and loafing and self-evaluation with an objective Influence People. New York: Harper & standard. Journal of Experimental Social Brothers. Psychology, 24, 354-365. Carnevale, A., Gainer, L.J., & Meltzer, A.S. (1990). Harvey, M.G., & Buckley, M.R. (2002). Assessing Workplace basics: The essential skills the ‘conventional wisdoms’ of management employers Want. San Francisco, CA: for the 21st Century organization. Jossey-Bass. Organizational Dynamics, 33, 368-378. Casio, W.F. (1993). Downsizing: What do we know? Harvey, M.G., Buckley, M.R., & Novicevic, M.M. What have we learned? Academy of (2000). Strategic global human resource Management Executive, 7, 95-104. management: A necessity when entering Casio, W.F. & Zammuto, R.F. (1987). Societal emerging markets. In: G. Ferris (Ed.), trends and staffing policies. Denver, CO: Research in personnel and human resources University of Colorado Press. management, (pp. 173-241). New York: Davis, R.C. (1951). The fundamentals of top Elsevier Science, Inc. management. New York: Harper & Jackson, J.M. & Williams, K.D. (1985). Social Brothers. loafing on difficult tasks: Working Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of cooperation and collectively can improve performance. competition. Human Relations, 2, 129-152. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 937-942. Kaufman, B.E. (1993). The origins and evolution of the field of industrial relations in the United Sates. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012 Evolution of the Concept of the Executive Volume 13, Number 2, 2006 41
Kiechel, W., & Sacha, B. (1999). How will we work Rodriques, C.A. (2001). Fayol’s 14 principles of in the year 2000? Fortune, 127, 21-44. management then and now: A framework Kochan, T., Katz, H., & McKersie, B. (1986). The for managing today’s organizations Transformation of American Industrial effectively. Management Decision, 39, 880- Relations. New York: Basic Books. 889. Kotter, J. (2001). What leaders really do. Harvard Rue, L.W., & Byars, L.L. (2003). Management: Business Review, 79, 85-91. Skills and application. (10th Ed.), New Lewin, K. (1935). A Dynamic theory of personality. York: McGraw-Hill, Irwin. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Simon, H.A. (1945). Administrative behavior: A Library of Congress, (2004). www.loc.gov study in decision-making processes in Marks, M.A., Mathieu, J.E., & Zaccaro, S.J. (2001). administrative organizations. (4th Ed. - A temporally based framework and 1997). New York: The Free Press. taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Swain, J.W. (2002). Machiavelli and modern Management Review, 26, 356-376. management. Management Decision, 40, McCall, M.W., & Hollenbeck, G.P. (2002). 281-287. Developing global executives: The lessons Taylor, F.W. (1911). The principles of scientific of international experience. MA: Harvard management. New York: Harper Brothers. Business School Press. Trist, E.L. & Bamforth, K.W. (1951). Some social McKinsey Special Quarterly Report (2004). What and psychological consequences of the long global executives think. wall method of coal-getting. Human Mintzberg, H. (1991). Learning 1, Planning 0: Reply Relations, 4, 3-38. to Igor Ansoff. Strategic Management Tuma, E.H. (1971). European economics history: Journal, 19, 464 - 466. Tenth Century to the present. Palo Alto, CA: Novicevic, M.M., Davis, W., Dorn, F., Buckley, Pacific Books. M.R., & Brown, J.Q. (2005). Barnard on Vroom, V.H. (2003). Educating managers for conflicts of responsibility: Implications for decision making and leadership. today’s perspectives on transformational and Management Decision, 41, 968-978. authentic leadership. Management Decision, Walton, R.E. (1985). The future of human resource 43, 1396-4109. management: An overview. In R.E. Walton Novicevic, M.M., Hench, T.J., & Wren, D.A. (2002). & P.R. Lawrence (Eds.), HRM trends and “Playing by ear”… “in an incessant din of challenges. Boston, MA: Harvard Business reasons”: Chester Barnard and the history of School Press. intuition in management thought. Watson, J.S. (1869). Translation: Xenophon, the Management Decision, 40, 992-1002. anabasis or expedition of Cyrus and the Pfeffer, J. (1994). Competitive advantage through memorabilia of Socrates. New York: Harper people. Boston, MA: Harvard Business & Row. School Press. Whitney, K. (2004). Steve Kerr: Managing the Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques Business of Learning. Chief Learning for analyzing industries and competitors. Officer, August, 34-37. New York: The Free Press. Wren, D.A. (1994). The Evolution of management Porter, M. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating thought, (4th Ed.) New York: Wiley. and sustaining superior performance. New York: The Free Press. Porter, M. (1986). Competition in global industries. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Porter, M.E., Lorsch, J.W., & Nohria, N. (2004). Seven surprises for new CEOs. Harvard Business Review, Oct, 62-72. Prahalad, C.K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, May-June 1990, 79-91.
Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at COLUMBIA UNIV on February 9, 2012