Hybridization of roles: examining the influence of

International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research

85 www.ijmsssr.org Copyright © 2021 IJMSSSR All rights reserved

Hybridization of roles: examining the influence of managerial leadership on in strategy implementation in Commercialised State Enterprises in Zimbabwe’s Postal and

Telecommunication Sector.

Denver Mapetere*, Manhiwa E.R Thelma, Mangoma Shingai

Centre for Entrepreneurship Studies. Midlands State University Zimbabwe IJMSSSR 2021 VOLUME 3 ISSUE 4 JULY - AUGUST ISSN: 2582 - 0265

Abstract: The study aimed to explore the influence of managerial leadership on strategy implementation success implementation in Commercialised State Enterprises in Zimbabwe’s Postal and Telecommunication Sector. The enquiry was based on a 5 point level of agreement likert scale with a total of 478 respondents from a possible 835 targeted respondents. Survey data was presented in tables using percentiles, mean, mode and standard deviation scores. Data was analysed though linear regression’s ANOVA. The study findings indicate that there is a positive relationship between low level management ability to effectively deploy managerial leadership skills and strategy implementation effectiveness. Low level managerial leadership in Commercialised State Enterprises in Zimbabwe’s Postal and Telecommunication Sector was found to positively influence objectives achievement. The study recommended top management to facilitate skills development for middle level managers in line with specific strategy and its intended outcomes in order to increase their level of effectiveness during strategy implementation. Keywords: strategy implementation, managerial leadership, interpersonal roles, decisional roles, informational roles, technical skills, conceptual skills interpersonal skills.

Introduction Managerial leadership / implementation plan – hybridization of roles The study of strategy execution should be viewed within the lenses of middle level managerial leadership. The term middle management refers to managers who typically head a function, team, or office, and supervise day to-day and other operations; they are located below top managers and, in large organizations, typically distinct from first-tier supervisors (Chen, Berman and Wang 2014). The history view of management categorises managers as adaptors or conformists rather than innovators, they tended to be perceived as control-oriented, lacking in vision and unwilling to take risks whilst at the same time presenting leaders as charismatic heroes of radical corporate transformation that sort to destroy rigid and inflexible structures (Cadwell 2003). Cadwell (2003) leadership was viewed as essential to trigger change and managers were viewed as a person(s) with legitimate authority or power to direct the work related activities of one or more subordinates; the manager is essentially a supervisor. The role of line managers or middle managers has also changed from controlling workers to leading employees, provide revenue, and improve productivity (Hassan, Mansor, Zawawi, Rahman, Widarman and Kelana 2014). The current study hypothesizes that strategy execution is the domain of middle managerial leadership as it is an organisational act that requires the right blend of appropriate skills, knowledge and the right leadership agility in order to attain desired results. Skilled managers are able to use their knowledge of their organizational context and their colleagues/subordinates/seniors to influence those around them to adopt their point of view (Rouleau and Balogun 2011). Due to their closeness to operational employees, first line managers’ commitment to strategy execution is key in driving employees’ desire and attitude to implement the strategy. They contribute substantially to the process of organizational change even though they have little formal power to act strategically (Sudirman, Siswanto, Monang and Aisha 2019). Rouleau and Balogun 2011) yet we still know little about how this strategic influencing is done, particularly by middle managers, who are a special case since they lack the formal role authority held by their seniors to act strategically, they need to influence upwards as well as laterally and downwards. Further to that first line managers act as the link between employees and top managers and thus their



roles are multifaceted ranging from attending meeting with top management and with employees, setting and defining employee tasks and responsibilities, monitoring employee performance, training employees, monitoring strategy implementation progress, allocation and reallocation of resources amongst many other duties and responsibilities. Literature review Managerial leadership roles in strategy implementation a. The role of low level managers in strategy implementation. Findings suggest that communication, organizing, information seeking, analytical thinking and planning competencies are common competencies, but essential for effective public middle managers, conversely, achievement orientation, leadership, directiveness, persuasiveness and innovation are competencies that characterize effective public middle managers and distinguish them from average performers (Sudirman, Siswanto, Monang and Aisha 2019).Though often misunderstood as political obstacles to change, their mid-way position between senior and front-line management actually affords them the critical role of interpreting and framing strategic objectives for front-line staff (McGurk 2009). Middle managers play a key role in the success or failure of any strategic change because they are the central gatekeepers and boundary spanners between the internal and external environments, they move information up and down the organization and are key to getting the commitment of others in the organization, they play the roles of listener, coach, entrepreneur, sense maker, and sense giver (Thomas, Neff, Baho, and Stephens 2017). In addition Brubakk and Wilkinson (1996) mentions that employees generally responded indifferently to the formal reward systems, the large majority do not think it makes any difference to their effort, and they did not see it as a major motivator, rather, it was recognition via the daily reinforcement from branch- and lower-level managers that mattered the most. Thus it is important that the role played by CSOEZ’s middle/branch managers in strategy implementation is interrogated. The current study in understanding the roles of low level managers in strategy implementation look at the 3 general classification of managerial roles espoused by Henry Mintzberg that is interpersonal, information role and decision making roles as well as managerial skills (interpersonal, conceptual and technical skills) required for effective managerial execution of strategy related roles and duties. i. Interpersonal roles According to Kumar (2015) the interpersonal role link all managerial work together and is primarily concerned with interpersonal relationships. Relationships are the essence of the organization life and the attitudes and behaviors of middle managers are a much stronger determinant of interpersonal relationships than the leadership skills of top managers (Lis, Glińska-Neweś, Kalińska 2014). The study assumes that effective strategy implementation is a born out of effective relationship management and thus requires a different managerial leadership perspective that compels strategy implementers to commit and exert positive productive energy toward strategy execution. In this notion Luu, Dinh and Qian (2018) classifies leaders as ambidextrous. Ambidextrous leaders according to Luu, Dinh and Qian (2018) use opening leadership behaviors to encourage employees to proactively search for new ideas and solutions, then switch to closing leadership behaviors to encourage employees to implement them. Chang and Bright (2011) juxtaposes that managers need to ensure staff that their ideas and their ability to get work done are valued and trusted, to do so, managers need to provide an environment for people to feel safe to express their perspectives. Luu, Dinh and Qian (2018) concedes that in a nutshell, ambidextrous leadership can be expected to foster proactiveness, innovativeness and risk taking among employees. Lis, Glińska-Neweś, Kalińska (2014) summarises the manifestations of middle managers interpersonal behaviors and attitudes that the current study considered as a key strategy implementation success as follows: • Managers perform leadership roles in their teams; • Managers coordinate their teams and foster relations; • Managers perform coaching roles in their teams; • Managers capture and disseminate information on business goals and objectives; • Managers initiate changes in a company; • Through their behaviors, managers set a good example of positive relations both within and outside the team.



The manifestations espoused by Lis et al (2014) thus compels middle managers to have a deep understanding of organisational and environmental contexts within which they are operating in order for them to know the required behaviour and attitude. Luu et al (2018) declares that organizations are seldom in one situation or the other. Hence managerial leadership during strategy execution should be underpinned by the contingency behavioral tendencies if they are to effectively stimulate the development of employee commitment to the organisation and its chosen strategic paths. Information roles Middle managers as the central gatekeepers and boundary spanners in the organization, they are ultimately the sensemakers in the organization, taking information from senior leaders and interpreting it for others, likewise, they receive an abundance of information from subordinates, peers, and outsiders and interpret that information for their superiors (Thomas, Neff, Baho, and Stephens 2017). To ensure their effectiveness in the changing process, the project manager is placed in a coordinating role, with the responsibility of identifying the involvement across departments and enhancing horizontal and vertical Communications (Chang and Bright 2011). These managers have an access to both strategic and operational knowledge since they communicate with employees and other stakeholders like suppliers and customers (Berraies 2019). Brubakk and Wilkinson (1996) envisaged that branch and lower level managers are perceived as the most influential change agent by employees, branch managers who act as the key link between head office and branches have a critical role, further branch managers’ proximity to employees, and opportunity to identify conflicts and problems in conjunction with the change as well as “decoding” corporate messages for employees play a key role in managing change. Chang and Bright (2011) though the middle manager’s role in communication within the reporting line remains in the vertical communication channel, the way they report and communicate has changed, managers are expected to not only ensure that information is distributed but to deliver information in a most timely manner. ii. Decision making roles Growing demands on senior managers and limitations of political decision-making further constrain senior managers’ capacity, and lead to calls for lower managers to prepare decisions and take leadership in assessment (information synthesis) and decision-making processes (Chen, Berman and Wang 2014). Thus it becomes imperative that such managers possess decision making abilities in order to know when and where to make key decisions during strategy implementation efforts. Chang and Bright (2011) managers need to have analytical minds that can turn statistics into useful information and have the ability to use the information for making changes and improvement. Rafique, Hameed and Agha (2018) argue that mid-level managers are continuously exposed to new knowledge from outside the boundaries of the organization and ongoing knowledge processing activities inside the boundaries of the organization therefore, they are typically the first employee type to know about the processes and its different aspects. Chang and Bright (2011) this means that managers need to know how to generate data into changing patterns of usage to understand the changing needs of patrons, and more importantly, to communicate the information to the top administrators. As first responders to situations and in order to facilitate strategy implementation, middle managers/branch managers through the decision making role should possess sensemaking skills; sensemaking is more generally conceptualized as a social process of meaning construction and reconstruction through which managers understand, interpret, and create sense for themselves and others of their changing organizational context and surroundings (Rouleau and Balogun 2011). Chang and Bright (2011) to be effective, managers must demonstrate their ability to be adaptive to change and be able to launch new endeavors and projects in the most timely manner. Government agencies are expected to give due weight to political considerations in their interactions with elected officials, strategies and policies initiated by the public sector strategic apex can be “correct” politically but short on professional information and judgment, middle managers in the public sector are thus expected to be the balance wheel, being participative and even proactive in a policy-making process to ensure professionalism in political decisions (Chen, Berman and Wang 2014). The manager’s role is to make collaborative efforts with other departments to lend support as need (Chang and Bright 2011). Middle managers/branch managers should possess the ability to process information into useful decisions whilst at the same time managing conflicting objectives and expectations during strategy implementation.



b. Managerial skills/competences of managers during strategy implementation The study on evaluating the role of managerial leadership in CSOEZ assumes that middle managers/ branch managers are given employment or ascend to the position based on their skills and knowledge in relation to operations activities within the organisation. This assumption is supported by Raišienė (2014) who notes that results of meta-analysis revealed that modern organizations should be managed with a new attitude to manager’s work; a modern manager must be a leader who is able to enable employees and collaborate in a team. Cater and Pucko (2010) by systematically studying the activities for and obstacles to strategy execution on a sample of 172 Slovenian companies showed that that greater obstacles to strategy execution is in the forms of inadequate leadership skills. Veliu and Manxhari (2017) managers are required to ensure that organizations achieve their objectives and one of the most important criteria for having effective managers is competency. When measuring organization’s performance, its better results more and more are referred not to material recourses of an organization, but to human resources and their competencies; development of competencies has become one of the key priorities of the organisation (Bakanauskienė and Martinkienė 2011). Managerial competencies are activities, knowledge, skills or attitudes and perhaps also personal characteristics necessary to improve management performance (Martina, Hana, and Jiří 2012). Veliu and Manxhari (2017) managerial competencies refer to knowledge, abilities, skills and behaviors required for effective job performance in managerial occupations. Martina, Hana, and Jiří (2012) competencies refers to the capacity, i.e. abilities to perform a certain activity, to have certain general and specific characteristics and skills, to be qualified in the given area. Generally it can be said that it is a set of specific knowledge, abilities, skills, traits, motives, attitudes and values essential for the personal development and successful participation of each person in an organization (Martina et al 2012). Moghrabi, Sharabati & Khader (2014) contemporary successful managers need to possess much more dimensional abilities, they are not only capable to plan effectively and efficiently manage resources to achieve organizational objectives, but also they possess the leader/manager behavior and skills of teambuilding, coaching and mentoring, facilitating, and capable of creating a relatively informal work environment. Every successful and effective manager possesses several competencies that enabled him to perform efficiently and effectively at different managerial levels, competencies can also be called maturing when they are no longer relevant to the firm’s strategic positioning (Veliu and Manxhari 2017). As such the study over and above interrogating managerial roles also sort to understand the prevalent managerial leadership skills possessed and being deployed by middle/branch managers during strategy implementation. i. Conceptual skills Conceptual skills have become more and more prominent is organisational management due to the ever changing business environment that is more obscured and less predictable due to high degree of fractures as well as complexity. For instance the traversing from pure public organisation to a commercialised and hybrid organisation requires middle managers who can operate in both public, commercial as well as hybrid (public-private) environments by being able to balance and meet the needs of all stakeholders. The high degree of competition characterised by globalisation and new technologies such as electronic mail, social media platforms has diminished the deterministic strategic environment that CSOEZ were operating in. Subsequently such structural changes to the environment puts decision making pressures on middle managers who need to develop and maintain their conceptual skills. Further the drive for service inclusion in the country by CSOEZ entails that middle/branch managers who are located far from strategic managers need to be able to operate at strategic, tactical and operations levels if strategy implementation is to be a successful reality. Regardless of the shift in assumptions about people, the tasks of modern managers remain the same (Moghrabi, Sharabati & Khader 2014). Henceforth the current asymmetric strategic management environment requires smart thinkers who can operate at multiple levels of strategy management at any given time in the organisation’s life cycle. Martina, Hana, and Jiří (2012) due to current dynamic development and changes, more and more attention is being paid to the personality of managers and their competencies, since they are viewed as important sources of achieving a competitive advantage. Moghrabi, Sharabati & Khader (2014) basically, the assumptions underlying management theory include the ideas that needs vary according to situation and stage of development; that different people have different needs; an individual may display different needs in different groups, and that organizational members respond to different managerial strategies in accordance to motives, abilities, and nature of the task.



ii. Technical skills Bakanauskienė and Martinkienė (2011) undoubtedly, contemporary business companies need management professionals with managerial competences that would enable an employee to successfully perform in ever changing business and economic environment. Technical skills may be regarded as the basic competencies to be posed by any manager and leader seeking to effectively implement corporate strategies and to help subordinates and colleagues to achieve targeted results. Basic competencies are defined as knowledge and skills essential for the performance of a manager’s job Martina et al (2012). Competence such as knowledge and skills attainment is evidenced by the ability of an individual to gather data, process it into useful information, access it and arrive at an appropriate and useful decision in order to initiate the actions necessary to accomplish the assignment in an acceptable manner (Veliu and Manxhari 2017). Ibay & Pa-alisbo (2020) the knowledge and ability of the individuals in a managerial position are to fulfill some specific management activities or tasks. Raišienė (2014) organization success is inseparable from the managerial practice just like any organized social activity is inseparable from the values, attitudes, abilities and behaviour of the group’s leader. The guarantors of success or failures of any organization are the managers (Ibay & Pa-alisbo 2020). Thus it becomes imperative that middle managers possess necessary technical skills to facilitate strategy implementation. iii. Interpersonal Moghrabi, Sharabati & Khader (2014) the leader/manager can motivate his subordinates to learn from one-another, to experiment, to exchange information and assistance from others, and at the same time, become valuable resource and support to their fellow workers and colleagues. Interpersonal skills for middle managers are generally regarded as internal skills. This internal management skill serves to resolve conflicts between local employees and expatriates and maintain a close relationship between them (Veliu and Manxhari 2017). Moghrabi, Sharabati & Khader (2014) traditional concept of administrating and directing greatly differ with the new concepts of guiding and mentoring. Successful managers recognize that today's employees aspire to be coached, guided, and to participate in all activities and decisions that affect their organizational life, not to be merely managed and directed (Moghrabi et al 2014). Smutny, Procha, Vaculik (2016) the effectiveness of managers also depends on whether their subordinates or colleagues consider them to be leaders, if the position of manager is only formal, then subordinates have to obey, but their manager is not a leader for them, only a person with formal authority. Thus it is crucial that managers develop adequate interpersonal skills. If subordinates perceive their manager as a leader with genuine authority, then they tend to follow him/her, in this way, the evaluation of managers is in fact the evaluation of their ability to fulfill the leadership role (Smutny, Procha, Vaculik 2016). Consequently a manager must also be a leader these days, what is more, he must be a leader that is able to enable employees, motivate them to work and rally for collaboration (Raišienė 2014). Raišienė (2014) therefore implores that a particular attention has to be given to the organization managers and the development of their leadership competences in order to reach good results, because leadership is the axis that kick-starts all other processes in the organization and affects numerous variables outside the organization. Methodology Managerial leadership constructs were adopted from various literature sources and modified to suit the requirement of the current study. The construct was subdivided into interpersonal roles (7 likert scale items) (adapted and modified from Lis , Glińska-Neweś, Kalińska (2014)), informational role (9 likert scale items) (adapted and modified from (Lis , Glińska-Neweś, Kalińska (2014)), decisional role (9 likert scale items) (adapted and modified from Lis , Glińska-Neweś, Kalińska (2014)), technical skills (10 likert scale items) (adapted and modified from Moghrabi, Sharabati & Khader (2014)), interpersonal/human skills (13 likert scale items) (adapted and modified from Moghrabi, Sharabati & Khader (2014)) and conceptual skills (10 likert scale items) (adapted and modified from Ibay & Pa-alisbo (2020)). Results Managerial leadership behaviour The study in a bid to fully understand how strategies are implemented and establish factors that influence strategy execution success evaluated the impact of managerial leadership behaviour on strategy execution. In the section



the study focus on managerial leadership role which are decisional roles, interpersonal roles and informational roles. Further the study also investigated the influence of managerial leadership pre requisite skills of interpersonal skills, conceptual skills and technical skills. Decisional role Table 1 Influence of Decisional role on Strategy Implementation

Decisional role 1 2 3 4 5 Total Mean Mode SD

When implementing strategies we have clearly defined tasks

29% 21% 3% 26% 21% 100% 2.891 1 1.572

We have weekly—monthly plans to implement strategies

27% 23% 5% 26% 19% 100% 2.870 1 1.523

We have precise procedures followed for achieving strategic objectives

22% 37% 9% 13% 19% 100% 2.701 2 1.434

When implementing strategies we regularly review progress against targets

31% 19% 12% 26% 12% 100% 2.696 1 1.442

We implement strategies by piloting them initially and then implement them in full

27% 43% 19% 9% 2% 100% 2.157 2 0.983

We implement our strategies gradually, not in an instant

16% 37% 14% 19% 14% 100% 2.782 2 1.309

During the implementation process, we amend our strategy implementation methods if necessary

21% 51% 10% 5% 13% 100% 2.381 2 1.239

New strategies are introduced in a very similar way to those that have already been implemented

9% 16% 16% 27% 32% 100% 3.565 5 1.322

Our strategy develops through a process of ongoing adjustment while implementing

46% 18% 16% 8% 12% 100% 2.221 1 1.409

Total 2.696 1.359

The findings of the study reviewed that low level management inadequately make use of decisional roles during strategy implementation as supported by the mean score of 2.696 and a standard deviation of 1.359 from all 9 likert scale items supporting the constract. None of the likert scale items supported the adequacy of decisional role performance by low level management during strategy execution as they were all poorly rated. None of the likert scale items were scored exceedingly by survey participants. The poorest were: strategies are introduced in a similar way to those that have already been implemented (mean score 3.565, mode 5); our strategy develops through a process of ongoing adjustment while implementing (mean score 2.221, mode 1 – strongly disagree and standard deviation 1.409) followed by we implement strategies by piloting them initially and then implement them in full mean score 2.157, mode 2 – disagree and standard deviation 0.983). The low ratings by study respondents indicates that there is a general lack of decisional role innovation during strategy implementation.



Informational role Strategy implementation supervisors act as the link between strategy implementers and strategy formulators hence it is imperative that they fully perform their informational role in order to facilitate strategy implementation. Given this view the study with the help of 9 likert scale items set to establish the adequacy of informational role played by low level managers during strategy implementation. The results are presented and discussed below. Table 2 Influence of Informational role on Strategy Implementation

Likert scale item 1 2 3 4 5 Total Mean Mode SD

My supervisor brings information about frontline service operations to upper managers

24% 18% 12% 27% 19% 100% 2.989 4 1.476

My supervisor deals with complex information and synthesize it into clear understandings

17% 26% 15% 19% 23% 100% 3.052 2 1.432

My supervisor analyzes both internal and external information when assessing strategy execution

13% 26% 21% 23% 17% 100% 3.054 2 1.302

My supervisor analyzes and evaluate how programs contribute to broader strategy execution

8% 33% 23% 27% 9% 100% 2.960 2 1.131

In our organisation we use focus groups or other meetings with employees to generate more knowledge

19% 13% 5% 36% 27% 100% 3.389 4 1.478

In our organisation manager provides us with the information, carefully and cautiously.

19% 6% 12% 42% 21% 100% 3.397 4 1.388

In our organisation manager provides us with the information in an encouraging constructive way.

0% 8% 5% 62% 25% 100% 4.042 4 0.787

In our organisation manager gives us the information honestly and conscientiously

8% 19% 16% 33% 24% 100% 3.464 4 1.263

In our organisation manager gives us the information about the strategy’s performance development

14% 31% 10% 29% 16% 100% 3.002 2 1.342

Total 3.261 1.289

Managerial leadership practice of Informational roles during strategy implementation was investigated using 9 likert scale items. Overly the likert scale items obtained a mean score of 3.261 and a standard deviation of 1.289 indicative that managerial leadership in the form of low level management are able to play their informational role during strategy implementation. Furthermore, of the 9 likert scale items only 2 items had negative scores which were supervisor ability to analyse and evaluate how programs contribute to broader strategy execution (mean score 2.960, mode 2 –disagree and standard deviation 1.131) preceded by supervisor ability to bring information about frontline service operations to upper managers (mean score 2.989, mode 4 –agree and standard deviation 1.476). The best informational roles possessed by low level; management as per the survey participant’s views



were in our organisation manager provides us with the information in an encouraging constructive way and in our organisation manager gives us the information honestly and conscientiously which both scored (mean sore 4.042, mode 4 – agree and 0.787), (mean score 3.464, mode 4 – agree and 1.263) respectively. Interpersonal roles Interpersonal role is the last managerial role constract that the study investigated to ascertain the ability of low level management to guide operational processes as well as to gain human commitment to strategy execution. Under the interpersonal role a total of 7 likert scale items were considered to give an overall view of managerial leadership capabilities. Table 3 Influence of Interpersonal roles on Strategy Implementation

Liker scale items 1 2 3 4 5 Total Mean Mode SD

In our organisation managers perform leadership roles in their teams

15% 18% 2% 38% 27% 100% 3.435 4 1.432

In our organisation managers coordinate their teams and foster relations effectively

0% 7% 1% 49% 43% 100% 4.282 4 0.799

In our organisation managers perform coaching roles in their teams

11% 21% 12% 35% 21% 100% 3.341 4 1.317

In our organisation managers capture and disseminate information on business goals and objectives that affect employee relationships.

13% 25% 9% 22% 31% 100% 3.326 5 1.456

In our organisation through their behaviors, managers set a good example of positive relations both within and outside the team

9% 18% 9% 37% 30% 100% 3.550 4 1.300

In our organisation our department encourages open and constructive dialogue

23% 27% 13% 22% 15% 100% 2.791 2 1.405

In our organisation top management has a high level of trust in their subordinates

26% 34% 7% 24% 9% 100% 2.561 2 1.338

Total 3.326 1.292

A total of 7 likert scale items were adopted in the inquiry on effective use of interpersonal roles by low level management during strategy implementation in CSOEZ. The likert scale items retained a mean score of 3.326 and a standard deviation of 1.292 indicating that there is some managerial capability to perform interpersonal roles during strategy implementation. A total of 5 out of the 7 likert scale items were rated positively in the study. Of note team coordination and relations fostering was the most highly regarded interpersonal role with a mean score of 4.282, mode 4 – agree and a standard deviation of 0.799, followed by management ability to set a good example of positive relations both within and outside the team (mean score 3.550, mode 4 – agree and standard deviation 1.300). The poorest skills on the likert scale were ability to instill high levels of trust in subordinates (mean score 2.561, mode 2 – disagree and standard deviation 1.338) followed by department encouragement of open and constructive dialogue (mean score 2.791; mode 2 – disagree and standard deviation 1.405).



Managerial leadership skills The current study presumes that strategy implementation is the domain of manager who are appointed mainly on the basic of their technical ability to get the job done. As such the study investigated on the ability of low level management to effective guide strategy implementation through the deployment and utilisation of their technical skills. The Technical Skills constract was studied using 10 likert scale items and the results are shown in table 4 below.

Technical Skills. Table 4 Influence of Technical Skills on Strategy Implementation

Likert scale items 1 2 3 4 5 Total Mean Mode SD

Manager clarifies the goals to all involved parties.

23% 46% 16% 9% 6% 100% 2.291 2 1.101

Manager informs us of the required goals and we only achieve them.

0% 2% 16% 39% 43% 100% 4.230 5 0.789

Manager provides us with needed information related to our tasks if asked.

15% 23% 5% 26% 31% 100% 3.347 5 1.488

Manager has respect for his subordinates due to large managerial experience.

0% 0% 0% 58% 42% 100% 4.421 4 0.494

Manager has the technological and managerial capabilities.

19% 20% 10% 36% 15% 100% 3.075 4 1.384

Manager shows more interest in accomplishments of tasks.

5% 12% 5% 41% 37% 100% 3.931 4 1.161

Goals are set based on the physical and mental ability of employees.

47% 23% 2% 13% 15% 100% 2.255 1 1.512

Usually the manager involves us in goals setting.

7% 30% 16% 21% 26% 100% 3.299 2 1.324

Manager usually avoids involving himself in complex issues.

25% 26% 19% 16% 14% 100% 2.678 2 1.3723

Direct Manager usually does not have a clear explanation for the objectives set

21% 21% 10% 31% 17% 100% 3.025 4 1.430

Total 3.255 1.205

A total of 10 likert scale items scoring an averaged mean score of 3.255 and a standard deviation of 1.205 were used to integrate the adequacy of technical skills during CSOEZ strategy implementation. A total of 7 out of possible 10 likert scale items retained positive scores. The overall results shows that there is relative adequacy of technical skills in CSOEZ during strategy execution although improvements can be made, for instance only 2 out of 7 positive skills had mean score above 4. Manager has respect for his subordinates due to large managerial experience and manager informs us of the required goals and we only achieve them score the following, mean, mode and standard deviations scores respectively (4.21; 4; 0.494) and (4.230; 5; 0.789). The poorest technical skills were; goals are set based on the physical and mental ability of employees (mean score = 2.255, mode 1 and standard deviation = 1.512), followed by manager clarifies the goals to all involved parties (mean score 2.291, mode 2 and standard deviation 1.101).



Interpersonal Skills. Interpersonal skills are important in helping low level managers implement strategies. Further to that these skills set enables managers to effectively perform their interpersonal roles and succeed in managing people related matters during strategy execution. The current study subsequently investigated the presence and ability of low level strategy implementers to deploy interpersonal skills and the results were as follows. Table 5 Influence of Interpersonal Skills on Strategy Implementation

Likert scale items 1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL

MEAN

MODE SD

We consider our manager as reliable team member.

23%

21%

15%

24%

17%

100% 2.910 4 1.430

Manager respects his subordinates and gives them confidence.

41%

17%

2%

28%

22%

100% 2.530 1 1.533

The communication process between the manager and his subordinates is done in a transparency and confidential way

29%

36%

2%

19%

14%

100% 2.525 2 1.430

Manager believes in efficacy of training to his subordinates and always recommend areas for training

12%

7%

1%

37%

43%

100% 3.925 5 1.337

Manager considers that it’s one of his responsibilities to enable his subordinates

8%

6%

3%

33%

50%

100% 4.111 5 1.216

Manager consults subordinates in matters that concern them

8%

6%

0%

22%

64%

100% 4.278 5 1.234

Manager encourages the participation of subordinates and discussions.

5%

1%

0%

79%

15%

100% 3.977 4 0.802

Manager is always there to support us in front of higher authorities

64%

21%

7%

8% 0%

100% 1.592 1 0.933

Manager is characterized by his ability to form effective and productive teams

17%

37%

15%

11%

20%

100% 2.799 2 1.385

Manager acts as a teacher because he provides us with the required details.

15%

19%

4%

38%

24%

100% 3.366 4 1.413

We rely on our manager in transfer of our suggestion and requests to top management.

38%

27%

13%

15%

7%

100% 2.257 1 1.293

Manager is not addicted in his opinion, he is open to criticism

34%

21%

18%

13%

14%

100% 2.519 1 1.427

Manager believes that the individual work leads to high productivity.

3%

14%

0%

67%

16%

100% 3.793 4 0.972

Total 3.122 1.262

The adequacy of low level management Human skills application in strategy implementation was examined in the study with the help of 13 Likert scale items. The likert scale items all retained a mean score of 3.122 and standard deviation of 1.262 indicating that there is evidence of interpersonal skills being successfully applied during strategy implementation although not at the highest levels. Of the 13 likert scale items only 6 were viewed as positive by participants whilst the remaining 7 were viewed negatively. The two most highly ranked interpersonal skills were, Low level management’s ability to consult subordinates on matters that concern them was viewed highly by study members (mean score = 4.278, mode 5 – strongly agree and standard deviation 1.234), manager considers that it’s one of his/her responsibilities to enable his/her subordinates (mean score = 4.111, mode 5 – strongly agree and standard deviation 1.2160). The poorly rated bottom 2 interpersonal skills were manager is always there to support us in front of higher authorities and we rely on our manager in transfer of our suggestion and requests to top management mean score mode and standard deviation of (1.592; 1; 0.933) and (2.257; 1; 1.293) respectively.



Conceptual skills Effective managers combine technical, interpersonal and conceptual skills during strategy implementation. The last managerial leadership skill interrogated in this study was conceptual skills and the survey results are presented in table 6 below. Table 6 Influence of Conceptual skills on Strategy Implementation

Likert scale items 1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL MEAN MODE SD

My supervisor is able to set Priorities that guide our day to day activities

7% 12% 4% 56% 21% 100% 3.751 4 1.125

My supervisor is able to instill Discipline in the workforce

19% 13% 10% 7% 51% 100% 3.579 5 1.635

My supervisor is able to set clear and specific Goals that are understood by all workers

21% 26% 19% 30% 4% 100% 2.705 4 1.216

My supervisor is able to create an internal environment that facilitate employee creativity

39% 27% 13% 16% 5% 100% 2.215 1 1.258

My supervisor is able to Identify of Organizational Structures needed to facilitate strategy execution at branch level

14% 36% 23% 15% 12% 100% 2.749 2 1.220

My supervisor is comfortable with carrying out Multi jobs and strategies

41% 29% 17% 11% 2% 100% 2.038 1 1.092

My supervisor if capable of Comprehensive Planning

37% 25% 15% 13% 10% 100% 2.335 1 1.348

My supervisor is capable of recognizing Strength and Weakness within our organisation

53% 39% 3% 5% 0% 100% 1.605 1 0.783

My supervisor is able to clearly Articulate of Strategy before and during its implementation

23% 46% 16% 9% 6% 100% 2.312 2 1.105

My supervisor has shown good Abilities to Predict situations before they occur

30% 39% 10% 12% 9% 100% 2.316 2 1.268

Total 2.560 1.205

The findings of the study review that there is inadequate conceptual skills application in CSOEZ during strategy implementation as supported by a mean score of 2.560 and a standard deviation of 1.205. Out of 10 likert scale items the best conceptual skills as viewed by respondents were supervisor’s ability to set Priorities that guide day to day activities (means score = 3.751, standard deviation 1.125 and mode = 4 - agree) and supervisor/low level management ability to instill discipline in the workforce (mean score = 3.759, standard deviation = 1.635 and mode = 5 strongly agree). The remaining 8 likert scale items were rated poorly by survey participants. However direct manager’s is ability to recognise Strength and Weakness within the organisation was rated poorest (mean score = 1.605, standard deviation = 0.783 and mode 1 - strongly disagree) followed by direct manager being comfortable with carrying out Multi jobs and strategies (means score = 2.038, standard deviation = 1.092 and mode 1 – strongly disagree).



Overall effectiveness of managerial leadership in influencing strategy implementation was examined through inferential statistics by using regression analysis. The study sort to test the following hypothetical positions: H0: Adequate managerial leadership does not reduce the number of unattained objectives H1: Adequate managerial leadership reduce the number of unattained objectives Table 7 Relationship between managerial leadership effectiveness and number of unattained strategy objectives

Extrapolation form table 7 above led to the rejection of null hypothesis in favour of the alternate hypothesis which stated that adequate managerial leadership reduce the number of unattained objectives. This rejection of null in favour of the alternate hypothesis was supported by a statistically significant p value = 0.000. Further to that the model in rejection of the null hypothesis obtained a high sum of square of 726.2894 out of 804.9540 explained observations providing a strong R-Squared (0.9023) and Adjusted R-Squared of 0.9021. Additionally the goodness of fit between independent (adequacy of managerial leadership) and dependent (number of attained objectives) variables was computed through Root MSE (0.40652), standard error (0.01285). Inferential statistics of the regression model in favour of the alternate hypothesis’ coefficient explained that a 1 point change (increase) in managerial leadership effectiveness will result in 0.85189 increases in attained objectives. Summary of findings Low level managerial leadership CSOEZ was found to positively influence objectives achievement as indicated by the following regression analysis results were computed and p value = 0.000. Additionally regression model coefficient demonstrated that a single point improvement in managerial leadership competency will lead to a 0.85189 point improvement in objective achievement. Resultantly the study rejected the null hypothesis (adequate managerial leadership do not reduce the number of unattained objectives) in favour of the alternate hypothesis (adequate managerial leadership reduce the number of unattained objectives). The results explains that low level strategy direct managers ability to effectively utilise their managerial leadership skills and roles would enable them to execute their duties and responsibilities well at branch level operations leading to high objective achievement. Specific descriptive results were as follows: Conclusion and recommendations The study premised that strategy implementation is the domain of managerial leadership. Basing on the study results the study concludes that low level management are highly capable of influencing strategy implementation. This conclusion is supported by a mean = 3.037, standard deviation = 1.269. Further regression results of p value = 0.0000, R squared (0.9023), Root MSE (0.40652), and regression coefficient 0.85189 explains the high managerial leadership capabilities of low level managers during strategy implementation processes. Given the significant influence of managerial leadership in strategt implementation it is imperative that strategy direct managers such as branch managers develop adequate skills to enable them to perform their strategy daya to day role. Strategy implementation managers have to effectively play their interface role by bridging information gaps between top management and employees during strategy execution. Further to that strategy implementation direct managers should be able to identify subordinate strengths and weaknesses for effective delegation of strategy execution tasks. The study further compels top management to facilitate skills development for middle level

_ c o n s . 7 5 3 0 2 9 . 0 4 3 3 8 2 8 1 7 . 3 6 0 . 0 0 0 . 6 6 7 7 8 3 4 . 8 3 8 2 7 4 5 M A N L E A D E R S ~ P . 8 5 1 8 8 7 6 . 0 1 2 8 5 0 3 6 6 . 2 9 0 . 0 0 0 . 8 2 6 6 3 7 3 . 8 7 7 1 3 8 T O O M A N Y U N A ~ S C o e f . S t d . E r r . t P > | t | [ 9 5 % C o n f . I n t e r v a l ]

T o t a l 8 0 4 . 9 5 3 9 7 5 4 7 7 1 . 6 8 7 5 3 4 5 4 R o o t M S E = . 4 0 6 5 2 A d j R - s q u a r e d = 0 . 9 0 2 1 R e s i d u a l 7 8 . 6 6 4 5 3 0 3 4 7 6 . 1 6 5 2 6 1 6 1 8 R - s q u a r e d = 0 . 9 0 2 3 M o d e l 7 2 6 . 2 8 9 4 4 5 1 7 2 6 . 2 8 9 4 4 5 P r o b > F = 0 . 0 0 0 0 F ( 1 , 4 7 6 ) = 4 3 9 4 . 7 9 S o u r c e S S d f M S N u m b e r o f o b s = 4 7 8



managers in line with specific strategy and its intended outcomes. Areas for further study Next study to focus on managerial leadership capabilities of top management. Top management is more popular for their strategic leadership roles. Even their qualifications and selection is predominantly based on leadership capability. To what extend do they possess ideal managerial leadership attributes that drive successful strategy execution through drafting effective strategic plans. References

1. Bakanauskienė I and Martinkienė J2011). Determining managerial competencies of management professionals: Business companies managers’ approach in Western Lithuania region. ORGANIZACIJŲ VADYBA: SISTEMINIAI TYRIMAI: 2011.60. ISSN 1392-1142.

2. Berraies S (2019). Effect of middle managers’ cultural intelligence on firms’ innovation performance Knowledge sharing as mediator and collaborative climate as moderator. Personnel Review Vol. 49 No. 4, 2020 pp. 1015-1038 © Emerald Publishing Limited 0048-3486.

3. Brubakk B and Wilkinson A (1996). Agents of change? Bank branch managers and the management of corporate culture change. International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, 1996, pp. 21-43. © MCB University Press, 0956-4233.

4. Caldwell, R. (2003), "Change leaders and change managers: different or complementary?", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 285-293.

5. Čater, T., & Pučko, D. (2010). Factors of effective strategy implementation: Empirical evidence from Slovenian business practice. Journal of East European Management Studies, 15(3), 207-236

6. Chang A and Bright K (2011). Changing roles of middle managers in academic libraries. Library Management Vol. 33 No. 4/5, 2012 pp. 213-220 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0143-5124.

7. Chen C, Berman M.E and Wang C (2014). Middle Managers’ Upward Roles in the Public Sector. Administration & Society 1–30 2014.

8. Hassan A.M, Mansor A, Naha. N, Zawawi M.W, Rahman A.W, Widarman B and Kelana Y (2014). Do line managers’ have ‘linking pin’ in HR roles?. Intangible Capital IC, 2015 – 11(1): 1-12 – Online ISSN: 1697-9818 – Print ISSN: 2014-3214

9. Ibay S. B and Pa-alisbo M A C (2020) An Assessment of the Managerial Skills and Professional Development Needs of Private Catholic Secondary School Administrators in Bangkok, Thailand. World Journal of Education Vol. 10, No. 1; 2020.

10. Kumar P (2015). An Analytical study on Mintzberg’s Framework: Managerial Roles. International Journal of Research in Management & Business Studies (IJRMBS 2015) Vol. 2 Issue 3 July - Sept. 2015

11. Lis, A., Glińska-Neweś, A., & Kalińska, M. (2014). The role of leadership in shaping interpersonal relationships in the context of positive organisational potential. Journal of Positive Management, 5(4), 28-49.

12. Luu T.T, Dinh K and Qian D (2018). Ambidextrous leadership, entrepreneurial orientation and job crafting. European Business Review Vol. 31 No. 2, 2019 pp. 260-282 © Emerald Publishing Limited 0955-534X.

13. Martina K, Hana U, and Jiří F (2012). Identification of Managerial Competencies in Knowledge-based Organizations. 0 Journal of Competitiveness. Vol. 4, Issue 1, pp. 129-142, March 2012 ISSN 1804-171X (Print), ISSN 1804-1728.

14. McGurk P (2009). Developing “middle leaders” in the public services? The realities of management and leadership development for public managers. International Journal of Public Sector Management Vol. 22 No. 6, 2009 pp. 464-477 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0951-3558.

15. Moghrabi M.L, Sharabati A.A & Khader M (2014). Impact of Managers Skills Profile on His Managerial Behavior A Case Study of Jordan Kuwait Bank. International Review of Management and Business Research Vol. 3 Issue.2. June 2014.

16. Rafique M, Hameed S and Agha M.H (2018). Commonality, conflict, and absorptive capacity Clarifying middle manager roles in the pharmaceutical industry. Management Decision Vol. 56 No. 9, 2018 pp. 1904-1916 © Emerald Publishing Limited 0025-1747.

17. Raišienė, A. G. (2014), Leadership and Managerial Competences in a Contemporary Organization from the Standpoint of Business Executives, Economics and Sociology, Vol. 7, No 3, pp. 179-193.

18. Rouleau L and Balogun J (2011). Middle Managers, Strategic Sensemaking, and Discursive

https://www-emerald-com.access.library.msu.ac.zw/insight/publication/issn/0143-7739

https://www-emerald-com.access.library.msu.ac.zw/insight/publication/issn/0143-7739



Competencejoms. Journal of Management Studies 48:5 July 2011. 19. Smunty, Petr, & Prochazka, Jakub, & Vaculik, Martin (2016). The Relationship between Managerial Skills

and Managerial Effectiveness in a Managerial Simulation Game. INNOVAR. Revista de Ciencias Administrativas y Sociales, 26(62),11-22.[fecha de Consulta 31 de Mayo de 2021]. ISSN: 0121-5051.

20. Sudirman I, Siswanto J, Monang J and Aisha N.A (2019). Competencies for effective public middle managers. Journal of Management Development Vol. 38 No. 5, 2019 pp. 421-439 © Emerald Publishing Limited 0262-1711.

21. Thomas F.G, Neff J, Baho S, and Stephens K (2017). Gaining middle managers’ support for strategic change: literature review. Graduate School of Business & Public Policy - 4 - Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California.

22. Veliu L and Manxhari M (2017). The impact of managerial competencies on business performance: SME’s in Kosovo. Vadyba Journal of Management 2017, № 1 (30) ISSN 1648-7974.

Documents

Hybridization of roles: examining the influence of