Personal Management Skills Assessment and Development Plan

Introduction

Developing optimally effective managerial skills can be a challenging enterprise in any industry, and it is axiomatic that measuring individual strengths and weaknesses is essential in order to identify areas to build on as well as opportunities for improvement. To this end, this paper provides a review of the relevant literature concerning effective management practices in general and how these practices can be leveraged to contribute to the creation of a high-performance organization. In addition, a self-administered Personal Assessment of Management Skills (PAMS) questionnaire developed by Whetton and Cameron (2010) is used to determine what steps are needed to optimize management skills in the future. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings concerning effective managerial skills and the need for ongoing personal assessment are provided in the conclusion.

Because a growing body of evidence confirms the relationship between effective management practices and organizational performance, a number of researchers have sought to identify more generalized managerial skills that are regarded as critical for practitioners today. For example, based on his systematic review of the relevant literature, Schachter (2010) emphasizes that, "Not only do [managers] need to know [their] organization and the industry within which it operates, [they] have to be skilled at planning, organizing, supervising and leading staff through difficult times" (p. 33).

Critical Management Skills

These so-called hard skills assume even greater relevance and importance during periods of adversity or economic downturns, when these conditions can result in ineffective managerial practices and the loss of market share (Schachter, 2010). Although every manager's working environment is unique, researchers have identified three critical skill areas: communication, empowerment, and political acumen (Schachter, 2010). These three critical management skills are described further below.

Communication skills are closely associated with virtually all other areas of professional and personal development as well as all types of managerial skills (Schachter, 2010). Described as a "soft skill" by Singh (2013), communication skills are as important as hard skills for managers today. In order for managers to be proficient at hard skills, they must first become proficient at communication. Becoming proficient in this area means more than simply sending and receiving messages; it also involves developing and sustaining a positive attitudinal approach to communication. In this regard, Schachter emphasizes that, "This means managers must be aware of the need to communicate and be willing and able to share information with others who need it in a meaningful way" (p. 33).

Effective communication skills also reflect the ability to take time to actually focus on what others are saying before formulating a response. According to Singh (2013), "It is important to think before reacting, listen actively, assure a fair process of problem solving, attack the problem rather than the person, accept responsibility and use direct communication" (p. 22). In addition, one of the most important communication skills needed by managers today is the ability to use a wide array of communication channels in order to ensure that all intended recipients not only receive the message but understand it as well (Schachter, 2010). This is an especially critical skill when large numbers of recipients come from diverse educational, experiential, and cultural backgrounds who may understand communications in different ways — or not at all (Schachter, 2010). Consequently, a concomitant of this skill is the ability to identify what communication strategies tend to work best with different groups and to determine how suboptimal strategies can be improved (Schachter, 2010).

Another managerial skill commonly described as critical in the management literature is the ability to empower others. In this regard, Schachter reports that, "Managers must empower staff to improve customer service and maintain a competitive edge" (2010, p. 34). Because empowerment begins with access to requisite information, managers must be proficient at determining what information is required in order for subordinates to make informed decisions, formulate problem-solving strategies, and be accountable for them (Schachter, 2010).

Sometimes referred to as "people skills," managers need finely tuned political skills in order to be effective in the workplace because these skills provide the ability to persuade and influence others toward desired outcomes, as well as the ability to interpret nuanced communications (Schachter, 2010). According to Moss and Barbuto (2010), "Interpersonal political skills include the ability to accurately assess social situations, communicate in a believable manner, network both inside and outside the organization, and use influence effectively" (p. 155).

Some managers, however, disdain the need for political skills because they regard them as manipulative (Moss & Barbuto, 2010). An important point made by Schachter is that, "Political skills do not mean manipulating others but rather facilitating personal and professional relationships and enable managers to see the big picture as well as the details" (2010, p. 34). When viewed from this perspective, it is apparent that political skills represent an essential part of a manager's critical skills repertoire.

In many ways, political skills may be the most difficult for many managers to develop because the analyses they involve typically transcend the conventional practices to which managers are accustomed — yet these skills are also among the most important for true effectiveness. For example, one aspect of political skills is the ability to identify those within an organization who can provide the power base needed to effect meaningful change, even if these individuals lack the formal authority to approve such change (Schachter, 2010). In sum, finely tuned political skills not only facilitate more effective communications by helping managers better understand the views of others, they can also help managers formulate more effective strategies for overcoming resistance and gaining additional support and resources (Schachter, 2010).

Other experts agree that the foregoing critical skills form the foundation of effective management in the modern workplace, but add several additional critical skills as well, including the following:

Taken together, it is clear that managers today require a comprehensive skills portfolio to compete effectively, communicate accurately and in a timely manner, and contribute in meaningful ways to the success of their organizations. In order to evaluate any manager's skill set, it is first important to measure it. Therefore, an analysis of the author's profile of managerial skills using the PAMS questionnaire is provided below.

The results of the Personal Assessment of Management Skills (PAMS) questionnaire are presented below, organized by scale.

The PAMS mean for self-disclosure and openness was slightly higher than for awareness of self (5.5 vs. 4.66, respectively). Moreover, the score of 3 on question 4 — "I have a good sense of how I cope with situations that are ambiguous and uncertain" — was significantly lower than the overall PAMS mean of 4.66 for this category. This is an important component of an overall management skills profile because truly effective managers must be able to respond appropriately even in times of ambiguity and uncertainty. For instance, Sambasivan (2012) emphasizes that, "Dealing with uncertainty is very important as a component of the management style or repertoire. The individual has to have greater tolerance to the ambiguity of uncertainty and yet be able to steer the business with success" (p. 57). Although the overall score for this PAMS scale was relatively strong, the low score in this particular area may warrant additional professional development attention in the future.

Profile of Managerial Skills: PAMS Results

The means for the eliminating stressors and developing resiliency measures were slightly lower than for short-term coping (5.5 vs. 6, respectively). These relatively strong scores across the entire scale reflect a management strength, since unmitigated stress can adversely affect managers' workplace performance as well as their physical and psychosocial health (Rabindra & Pradhan, 2014). This management strength has the potential to help offset, at least in part, the relatively low score on the uncertainty and ambiguity issue discussed above.

The results of the creative problem-solving scale show that the mean for the rational problem-solving category was the highest at 6, the mean for the creative problem-solving category was second highest at 5.6, and the mean for the fostering innovation and creativity category was the lowest at 4.75. The lowest score was 3 for question 23, "I encourage informed rule-breaking in pursuit of creative solutions." This low score was attributable perhaps to the precise wording of the statement, which suggests that the ends justify the means in some cases and invokes the well-worn adage, "It's easier to seek forgiveness than permission."

Managers at all levels are faced with this type of dilemma on a regular basis. Seemingly arbitrary rules and policies can prohibit the implementation of what managers may believe is precisely what their organizations need to survive and prosper, and breaking these rules may appear justified. However, managers may not always be privy to the rationale behind existing rules, policies, and processes, and they run the risk of doing far more harm than good by intentionally violating them — even for well-intentioned purposes. Indeed, notwithstanding the compelling need for creative solutions, even major organizations such as Google that place a high priority on creativity and innovation have corporate rules in place that employees and managers must follow or risk losing their jobs or being disciplined. Therefore, the low score on this question likely reflects the belief that any rule-breaking is fundamentally violative of the trust extended by executive leadership and that there are optimal administrative approaches to any situation that do not require breaking the rules.

The means for the coaching and counseling and effective negative feedback categories were highest at 5.5 and 4, respectively, followed by the communicating supportively category with a mean of 3. The lowest outlier was a score of 1 for question 31, "I don't talk down to those who have less power or less information than I."

The low score on this question may be attributable, at least in part, to the semantics used to frame the statement. According to Merriam-Webster (2016), the term "talking down" simply connotes "speaking in a condescending or oversimplified fashion." If others have less information, it is important to frame messages in terms they will understand — by avoiding project-specific jargon, acronyms, and phrases — which may be regarded as "oversimplified." As Schachter (2010) emphasized, however, it is essential to communicate in different ways with different audiences to ensure the communication process is effective. Nevertheless, these relatively lower scores in this scale warrant additional professional development attention.

The scores on the power and influence scale were highest for the gaining power category with a mean of 6, followed closely by a mean of 5.6 for the exercising influence category. These relatively strong scores across the entire scale represent a management strength, as they reflect the critical political skills needed by managers that are described above.

The mean for the motivation scale was 5. The lowest scores were a 2 for question 46, "Only as a last resort do I attempt to reassign or release a poorly performing individual," and a 4 for question 44, "I make sure the person gets timely feedback from those affected by task performance." The former low score may reflect a reluctance to adversely affect anyone's livelihood, especially during periods of economic uncertainty, and a firm belief that everyone's performance can be improved with appropriate support and training.

The latter second-lowest score may be attributable to the precise wording of the question, since corporate policy at most organizations requires that performance appraisals be conducted only by direct supervisors; stakeholders are generally encouraged to communicate directly with managers rather than with employees who may have performed poorly. These policies are intended to prevent employees from being subjected to unwarranted criticism or personal attacks from people within and outside the organization.

The results of the conflict management scale showed that the highest mean was for the responding category with a score of 6 and mediating with a mean of 5.66. There was a low outlier of 4 for question 52, "I make a specific request, detailing a more acceptable option." The relatively high score on the conflict management scale represents a management strength, while the second-highest score reflects the above-described emphasis on following established administrative protocols rather than attempting to circumvent the rules to achieve goals.

Although the mean for the empowering category was higher at 5.75, the mean for the delegating category was significantly lower at 4, with an outlier score of 1 for question 66, "I avoid upward delegation by asking people to recommend solutions, rather than merely asking for advice or answers, when a problem is encountered" (tied for the lowest score of any question). As noted above, empowering others is widely regarded as one of the three critical skills needed by managers today, and delegation represents an important component of this skill. Therefore, the low score on the delegation measure represents an area that warrants additional professional development attention.

In practice, however, the low score on question 66 can be regarded as a management strength, since upward delegation is generally avoided because it can adversely affect the productivity of teams and diminish managerial accountability (Sondak, 1991).

The score of 6 for the team membership category was the highest, followed by 5.75 for the teamwork category and 5.5 for the leading teams category. The lowest score for this scale was a 4 for question 70, "I build a common base of agreement in the team before moving forward with task accomplishment."

The PAMS mean for both the leading positive change and mobilizing others categories was 6, followed by fostering positive deviance at 5. The lowest score of 3 was in the latter category for question 79, "I emphasize a higher purpose or meaning associated with the change I am leading." It is important to note that this version of the PAMS questionnaire does not include a specific solution or corresponding scoring data (Whetton & Cameron, 2011).