Controllability Principle And Managerial Performance

1432 Words6 Pages
Application of the Controllability Principle and Managerial Performance: The Role of Role Perceptions
Michael Burkert, Franz Michael Fischer & Utz Schäffer
Introduction. The aim of this research is to evaluate how managers’ perceptions impact the relationship between the application of the controllability principle and managerial performance. The research is based on role theory which says that human behavior is directed by expectations either from the individual than other people. In this study the “individual” is considered to be the managers and the “other people” are considered to be the managers’ superiors. Superiors have expectations, which are considered as pressure, on managers’ behavior in order to make them conform to the expectations.
…show more content…
The authors suppose that the application of the principle has an influence on managers’ role perceptions which in turn affect their performance. They suppose that non-application of the principle affects positively role stress which is composed by role ambiguity (H1) and role conflict (H2). In turn, role ambiguity (H3) and role conflict (H4) negatively influence managers’ performance. In other words, the general effect of the application of the principle on managers’ performance is indirect and mediated by role ambiguity and role stress. Additionally, they use the hierarchical level of managers as a moderator in order to assess if the application of the principle similarly affects managers’ perception (H5) independently of their hierarchical position in the…show more content…
The Hypotheses were tested with a structural equation modeling (SEM). Several fit indices indicate that the fit of the model is good. For hypotheses 1 to 4, they firstly tested for the direct effect of the principle on managers’ performance. Then, they tested how this relationship was mediated by role ambiguity and role conflict. Hypothesis 5 was tested with multi-group analysis. They divided the original sample into two subsamples (one with 155 top-managers and on with 285 lower and middle manager) in order to compare them. To assess the robustness of the results, they did the same procedure with another instrument measurement for managerial performance (Hall, 2008) and they found the same results. Then, they tried another model which measured only one variable for role stress (based on Hopwood, 1972) and they arrived at the same conclusions as the main model. These verifications indicate a good robustness of the
Open Document