Author:
Cheng Mei‐I,Dainty Andrew R. J.,Moore David R.
Abstract
Research on managerial competence has been narrowly focused and confusing in its terminology. In particular, a disparity has emerged between the definitions and assessments of competence developed in the USA and the approaches adopted in the UK. In this paper it is argued that each perspective is incomplete and therefore lacking as a comprehensive frame for understanding both managerial competence and the management of performance. Furthermore, they have failed to deal with issues of the dynamic environment and the widely different contexts for managerial performance, particularly with regard to identifiable cultural differences. This paper aims to paint a more complete picture of “competence” by subjecting it to conceptual analysis. An examination of its contemporary use identifies both conceptual and practical flaws. Accordingly, an alternative approach is posited which places emphasis on those issues critical to achieving desired enhancements in management performance.
Subject
Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous),Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous),Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
Reference36 articles.
1. Armstrong, M. (1998), A Handbook of Personnel Management Practice, 5th ed., Kogan Page, London.
2. Barnett, R. (1994), The Limits of Competence, Open University Press, Buckingham.
3. Boyatzis, R. (1982), The Competent Manager – A Model for Effective Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
4. Briscoe, J.P. and Hall, D.T. (1999), “Grooming and picking leaders using competency frameworks: do they work? An alternative approach and new guidelines for practice”, Organisational Dynamics, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 37‐52.
5. Burgoyne, J. (1989), “Creating the managerial portfolio: building on competency approaches to management development”, MEAD, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 56‐61.
Cited by
46 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献