Garad AdamSashidar ChakravarthiGeorges Al MouakarAbdulrahman Almqairen Juan BritoEsteban AngelHabib Abou Saleh

Middle-Managers as Boundary

Subjects

Boundary Subjects

Middle-Managers–Boundary Subjects

Configurations of Roles

Identities & Subjectivities

Failure to distinguish leads to confusion

Conflating Structural positions

Behaviors impregnated–interiority & Phenomenal

The ResearchMethod of Research

Quantitative and Qualitative methods

Location of Fieldwork

BAMA – A Brazilian auditing and consulting firm in Brazil.Three office location - Rio Grande do Sul(RS), Rio de Janeiro(RJ) and Sao Paulo(SP)

Duration of Fieldwork

7 months in two distinct phases (Aug 2011 – Oct 2011 and Feb 2012 – June 2012)

Data Collection

Formal and Informal Setting.Multi-angled approach that is open and emergent 100 page observation and around 100 hours of recorded interviews.

Data Analyses

Iterative and Inductive approach.Focus movement, General interest -> Social roles -> Boundary subject concept

SWITCHING AND LIMINALITY

Switching: Experience of movement between different roles

Liminality: Sense of being nowhere or in-between because of switching

IDENTITY SWITCHING

IDENTITY LIMINALITY

DISCUSSION

This study analyses and shows:

• How managers’ experiences are marked by instable identities

• The experience of liminality

• How frequent switching can be both an empowerment and a source of suffering

CONCLUDING REMARKS

This study can be extended to other managers in boundary positions

Limitations:• Weak internal controls of emerging markets• BAMA being a middle management functioning

company• International exposure leading to a more globalized

vision of managerial identity

CONCLUSION

Distinction between switching and liminal identity:

Multiple identities deals with different role categories in which managers self-define

Liminal identities refer to the spaces created between identities created in the process of identity transition

Identity switching create a diversity of identities as well instability sense of resourcefulness and loneliness

CONCLUSION

The key element in maintaining workplace relations and

performance involves a boundary subject position

2nd ArticleThe False Promise of Organizational Change

Organizational Culture Change ?Studies always focused on low level

Changes were documented. (surveillance / control)

Working conditions?

Why managers continue to pursue it?

Managers respond better to values exposed.

Managers as agents and not targets.

Organizational Culture Change ?Contextualized positions

A variable

Impossible

It depends

Objective:

Explore the managers’ perception

Method:

Depth qualitative study – Single Case

Flagship Stores

Documents, Observation and Interviews

INTERVIEW FINDINGSINTERVIEW FINDINGS

Dictatorial role

Not space to think or give ideas.

Developing role.

People is treated as equal.and could give opinions and feedback.

OLD MANAGEMENTOLD MANAGEMENT NEW MANAGEMENTNEW MANAGEMENT

Cultural changes increases the pressure over managers.

Decisions are more centralized, limiting middle managers autonomy.

CONTROLCONTROL

INTERVIEW FINDINGSINTERVIEW FINDINGS

INTERVIEW FINDINGSINTERVIEW FINDINGS

The change from employees are more behavioral than a transformation of values.

Managers are key agents in any process of change.

Change of management style takes time and determination.

Communication of change should be very clear to fulfill the goal and avoid any missunderstanding.

Could the conditions of a job inspire you to adapt towards Could the conditions of a job inspire you to adapt towards organizational changesorganizational changes??

INTERVIEW FINDINGSINTERVIEW FINDINGS

CAREER CAREER

Shake of managers’ level of confidence.

Reduction in over all productivity.

Generation of job security concerns.

Generation of career prospects concerns.

CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION

Attempts to impose top management values on employees are

fraught with difficulties and unintended consequences.

Managers are at best ambiguous about culture change - Parallels of

that of Jackall (1988).

Insecurity provided managers with visible consequences of their

behavioral choices.

“Organizational Change is Difficult. It requires Time, Determination and

Commitment “

John Kotter (1996), “ Leading Change”: Only 30% of transformation program succeed.

McKinsey (2008) – In a Survey questioned 3199 executives: Only 1 out of 3 transformation program succeed.