Management Education and Development, Vol. 14, Pt.

2, 1983, 144-

Book Reviews
THE COMPETENT MANAGER - A MODEL FOR EFFECTIVE
PERFORMANCE
RICHARD E. BOYATZIS
Wiley, 1982, ISBN 0 471 09031 X
In this book Boyatzis presents the results of a study into those characteristics which
seem to be associated with effective performance by managers. The book is ordered
very logically and is unusually clear for written work originating in the United States.
It is also extremely dense, which means that it cannot be read casually. Boyatzis makes
it quite clear at the end of the Introduction that the book is not intended to be a ’how
to do it’ manual for managers, but rather an account of some research and the theory
behind it for people interested in management development. I would add the qualifica-
tion that the reader should be fairly comfortable with cluster analysis particularly and
factor analysis in general. That said, the conclusions are presented sufficiently carefully
that it is unlikely that one will be misled by over-generalisation.
The purpose of the study was &dquo;To determine which characteristics of managers are
related to effective performance in a variety of management jobs in a variety of
organisations&dquo;. ’Effective performance’ is defined as &dquo;The attainment of specific results
(i.e. outcomes) required by the job through specific actions while maintaining or being
consistent with policies, procedures, and conditions of the organisational environ-
ment&dquo;. It was not an objective of the study to predict managerial performance. The
specific objective of the study was &dquo;To explain some of the differences in general
qualitative distinctions of performance (e.g. poor versus average versus superior man-
agers) which may occur across specific jobs and organisations as a result of certain
competencies which managers share&dquo;.
The word ’competency’ is central to Boyatzis’ thesis, and is carefully defined at two
levels. A competency is &dquo;an underlying characteristic of a person which results in
effective and/or superior performance in a job&dquo;. To define a competency, therefore,
it is necessary to determine what the actions were and their place in a system or
sequence of behaviour, together with the results or effects and the intent or meaning
of the actions and results. Competencies are held to be causally related to effective/
superior performance in a job. They represent capabilities, what an individual can do,
not necessarily what they are doing. One important variant of a job competency is the
threshold competency, defined as &dquo;A person’s generic knowledge, motive, trait, self-
image, social role, or skill which is essential to performing a job, but is not causally
related to superior job performance.&dquo; Speaking the same language as one’s subordi-
nates, for example, is essential to perform as a manager at all, but is no guarantee of
superior performance as a manager. Effective specific actions or behaviour are held to
occur when the three fields of individual competence, job demand, and organisational
environment overlap to some degree.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Victoria on February 26, 2015

 145

Boyatzis lists, and claims to have found evidence for, twenty-one different competen-
cies, each of which can be further analysed in terms of three levels: motive and trait
level; self-image and social role level; and skill level.
In Chapter Three Boyatzis presents the research design and methods. There are five
steps in the process. First, criterion measures of job performance are identified, and
data collected on managers. Second, job element analysis is conducted leading to
clusters of weighted characteristics managers to relate to superior per-
perceived by
formance. Third, behavioural event interviews
carried out, leading to lists of
are
competencies which are held to distinguish superior from poor performance. Fourth,
tests and measures are applied to assess the competencies identified. Fifth, a validated
competency model is created by integrating the results from steps two, three and four.
The advantages of this approach are held to be that it examines the person in the
job, not merely the job; it results in a model of competence, not a laundry list of
characteristics; and it can be validated in terms of performance data. The method is
presented as overcoming a number of difficulties inherent in other methods. First, it
avoids listing what a panel of experts thinks is relevant, thus removing the danger of
producing an &dquo;espoused theory of action&dquo; rather than a &dquo;theory in use&dquo;. Second, it
avoids characteristics such as ’courage’ or ’dedication’ which are not behaviourally
specific and which are difficult to assess. Third, a high reliability between coders of
behaviour is assured as all results are cross-checked.
Boyatzis recognises the limitations of his own work by making it clear that the
sample upon which the study is based is not random, and did not include poor
performers. It is therefore unwise to attempt to generalise the results without further
work. This is particularly true for British readers. The sample was selected on the
basis of available information about both individuals and organisations.
In Chapters Four to Nine inclusive Boyatzis presents his detailed findings about the
job competencies. Each Chapter follows a roughly similar pattern of general comments
about the particular group of competencies to be discussed, followed by an examination
of the results obtained for each competency within the group, and concluding with an
overall summary of the group. In most cases, each competency is examined by offering
a detailed definition and examples of related behaviour. The results are then presented
at each of the three levels (motive, self-image, skill), and an interpretation is offered.
Where appropriate, contrasts are drawn between the results obtained in the private
and the public sectors.
The research resulted in the presentation of six clusters of competencies:
1.Goal and Action Management. This included Efficiency Orientation, Perceptual
Objectivity, Diagnostic Use of Concepts, and Concern with Impact.
2. Leadership. This included Self-Confidence, Use of Oral Presentations, Logical
Thought, and Conceptualisation.
3. Human Resource Management. This included Use of Socialised Power, Positive
Regard, Managing Group Process, and Accurate Self-Assessment.
4. Directing Subordinates. This included Developing Others, Use of Unilateral Power,
and Spontaneity.
5. Focus on Others. This included Self-Control, Perceptual Objectivity, Stamina and
Adaptability, and Concern with Close Relationships.
6. Specialised Knowledge. This included Specialised Knowledge and Memory.
something that is both a special skill and a competency -
The last cluster includes
Specialised Knowledge. Boyatzis’ explanation of this is not clear, nor is his treatment
of Memory. This represents one of the few lapses in the book from an otherwise very
high standard of rigour.

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Victoria on February 26, 2015

146

In Chapter Ten Boyatzis presents an integrated competency model, showing how

the contents of the four major clusters, 1-4, relate to each other and contribute to
overall management competency. He uses a helpful analogy to piece together the
various parts of the study presented in the book. He asks the reader to consider a
jigsaw puzzle. The picture on the cover of the box represents the basic model, showing
the relationship between an individual’s competencies and effective job performance.
The conceptual framework describing the various levels of competencies and their
relationship to each other is like completing the border of the puzzle. The detailed
description of each of the competency clusters is similar to putting together recognis-
able sections of the puzzle. The integrated model represents the placing of those
sections into a coherent whole. Chapters Eleven and Twelve continue the presentation
of the model, plot some of the implications for action arising, and summarise the
whole. Such is the wealth of detailed information available to him that Boyatzis very
nearly fails to integrate it all.
The essence of his conclusions seems to be as follows. The Goal and Action Manage-
ment cluster competencies are all characteristic of effective managers. Of the Lead-
ership cluster, self-confidence and use of oral presentations are characteristic of effec-
tive managers, but conceptualisation only at middle and executive levels. Logical
thought is a threshold competency. Of the Human Resource management cluster, the
use of socialised power is characteristic of effective managers, but managing group

process at middle and executive levels only. Accurate self-assessment and positive
regard are threshold competencies. The Directing Subordinates cluster competencies
are all threshold, but the picture is a rather complicated one, depending on level of
manager and type of organisation environment. Of the Focus on Others cluster,
perceptual objectivity, and stamina and adaptability were characteristic of effective
managers, but self-control only at entry level management jobs. The Specialised
Knowledge cluster contained only threshold competencies. This picture is complicated
by the fact that, while the foregoing is broadly a correct summary of Boyatzis’ results,
it leaves out the important consideration of level. For example, two competencies
were found to have an inverse relationship with effective management - concern with
close relationships and memory. Two more were found to have similarly inverse
relationships, but at the skill level only - self-control and stamina and adaptability.
Each of the other competencies mentioned has some limitation on the generality of its
interpretation in terms of level.
Finally, Boyatzis claims that managers working in private companies and organisa-
tions generally show more of the competencies than those working in public organisa-
tions, but that it is possible to discriminate between superior and poor performers in
both types of organisation on the basis of the competencies. He is also careful to state
that the apparent superiority of private organisation managers over public organisation
managers may be a function of the relatively greater freedom to exercise the competen-
cies in private organisations, rather than the statement of overall effectiveness that it
might at first seem to be.
There are three Appendices. Two describe the statistical analysis and results, and
the samples from which the data were drawn. The third offers a training course based
on the results of the study. An outline only is offered, but it is rare and satisfying to
encounter an author who has thought through the applications of his research this far.
This book required a good deal of effort to read. It is unremitting in the demands
for concentration which it places upon the reader, but it is, at the end, rewarding.
Boyatzis states that &dquo;It is not lack of knowledge but the inability to use knowledge
that limits effective managerial behaviour&dquo;. It would be useful if it were possible for

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Victoria on February 26, 2015

 147

a workingmanual to be developed from the book, which would be of more practical

use to most trainers and management developers. From the theoretical point of view
the study seems to be more of a consolidation of what is already known rather than a
dramatic development - but it is of solid worth for all that.
Perhaps, at the end of a longish and complicated review process, I might be permitted
one small niggle - ’criteria’ is plural, Dr. Boyatzis.
...n ~ r’

ANDREW M. STEWART, Macmillan Stewart Ltd.

THE MANUAL OF LEARNING STYLES

PETER HONEY and ALAN MUMFORD
Published and distributed by Peter Honey, Ardingley House, 10 Linden Avenue,
Maidenhead, Berkshire, SL6 6BH, 1982, 83 pp.,
£25·20, ISBN 0 9508444 0 3.
That there should be individual differences in the ways people learn, just as there
are in almost every other human characteristic, makes immediate and obvious sense,
but it creates problems for educators. For some time now some of the minority of
management teachers who are prepared to consider that the ways in which they like
to teach may not match the ways in which their students are able to learn, have been
using the Kolb and Fry Learning Style Inventory (LSI) to get a handle on the problem
(Kolb and Fry, 1975).
Honey and Mumford have found neither the description of learning styles by Kolb
and Fry nor the LSI’s way of measuring them persuasive or meaningful to managers.
While acknowledging the usefulness of the underlying model, the Kolb learning cycle,
they have produced new labels for the learning styles based on the four stages and a
new instrument, the Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ), to measure them.
The basic premise is that people learn in the same way as experimental scientists
conduct research; that learning involves the four stages of concrete experience, obser-
vation and reflection, theory building (drawing conclusions), and application and
testing, the last leading into a new cycle. Derived from this is the idea that people’s
learning styles differ according to the stages of the process which they prefer and are
best at (but notice that these two are not necessarily the same - a point to which I shall
return). While I am just marginally doubtful about the logic of basing personal styles
on the stages of an integrated process, the four styles that Honey and Mumford come

up with (Activist, Reflector, Theorist and Pragmatist) and their detailed descriptions
of these are immediately recognisable, while their questionnaire, in which the manager
is asked simply to agree or disagree with 80 clear statements, feels sensible and
relevant.
Their book is an impressive and action-oriented package. It includes the LSQ itself
and all the paraphernalia required for using it, a set of norms and statistics based on
thirteen hundred individual managers and seven occupational groups, and excellent
discussions of the use of the LSQ for choosing and discriminating between learning
activities, for self-development, for helping managers to develop their subordinates
and for helping trainers and advisers in conducting development discussions and
training programmes.
For me the book has four particular strengths. The first is its clear thinking about
the ways in which different people learn, and how that knowledge can be used to
improve learning opportunities and effectiveness. The second are the many excellent
ideas and suggestions from which almost anyone concerned with management develop-
ment is likely to benefit. The third is its emphasis on not only using but expanding

Downloaded from mlq.sagepub.com at University of Victoria on February 26, 2015