research report€¦ · research report the management agenda 2016 dan lucy, meysam poorkavoos,...

RESEARCH REPORT

THE MANAGEMENT AGENDA 2016

Dan Lucy, Meysam Poorkavoos, Annette Sinclair and Carol Hatcher

About Roffey Park

Roffey Park is an internationally renowned leadership institute based in the UK and Singapore.

We develop people who develop organisations.

With 70 years’ experience of leadership, organisational development, human resources and coaching, we provide executive education and research to many of the world’s leading companies and organisations.

We offer tailored development programmes, qualifications accredited by the University of Sussex, management consultancy, coaching and training courses. Our research services provide a unique combination of research, consultancy and development expertise for organisations who are investigating ways of improving their effectiveness and intelligence.

Research at Roffey Park

Roffey Park funds its own research programme with the aim of meeting one of its charitable objectives: namely to conduct and publish research in support of the health and welfare of people at work. Our research improves the world of work and organisational performance by sharing knowledge of good practice in people management, leadership and organisational development.

For more information visit www.roffeypark.com or contact:

UK Office Singapore Office

Tel: +44 (0) 1293 851644 Tel: +65 6549 7840

Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]


Dan Lucy, Meysam Poorkavoos, Annette Sinclair and Carol Hatcher

February 2016

ISBN: 978-0-907416-15-9



Contents

Introduction ��5

Executive Summary �� 7

1� Business context and people challenges ��9

2� Organisational culture and change �� 23

3� Working life ��47

4� HR �� 69

5� Appendices ��79



AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to acknowledge Roffey Park consultants for their contributions to questionnaire design and interpretation of findings. In particular, Michael Jenkins, Ken Ingram, Alex Swarbrick, Ana Karakusevic and Benedict Eccles have added much value. The authors would also like to acknowledge Andy Smith for helping to distil key messages from the research; Janice McBrown for proofreading and coordinating media coverage of the research; and Alison Hoare and Debbie Beaney for the design and typesetting of this report.

INTRODUCTION


Introduction

This report presents the findings of Roffey Park’s 2016 Management Agenda Survey. The survey has been running for 19 years and aims to highlight the views of managers on aspects of organisational life. It is a key barometer of working life and is regularly featured by both the national media and trade press, as well as professional management journals.

Nearly 1,000 UK managers from both inside and outside HR and of varying levels of seniority responded to this year’s survey. In addition, this year’s survey includes the views of over 100 employees without line management responsibilities. The survey canvasses the views of managers drawn from a broad range of industrial sectors and from organisations both large and small. Details on the profile of respondents, and the organisations they work for, can be found in Appendix 1. Information on how the research was conducted can be found in Appendix 2.

The report covers a broad range of aspects of organisational life, from organisational culture and change through to motivation and well-being. Where relevant, we have compared this year’s Agenda findings to those last year. The report is structured as follows:

Executive Summary

Chapter 1 – Business context and people challenges

Chapter 2 – Organisational culture and change

Chapter 3 – Working life

Chapter 4 – HR

Rather than present an exhaustive account of the data collected in this year’s survey, we have chosen to focus on aspects of the data that appear most interesting and which, we hope, in their combination provide an engaging and informative view of the challenges and perspectives of today’s managers.


INTRODUCTION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


Executive Summary

When asked to use one word to describe their organisations’ climate, leaders use words such as changing, uncertain, and challenging. They see navigating change in this environment as their most salient challenge. Evidence from this years’ Agenda suggests that there may be some important leadership capability gaps in terms of meeting this challenge. The ability of leaders to effectively set direction, involve others in change, and to foster a culture which is both innovative and supports learning are all called into question. What emerges is a view of change that is top-down and driven, rather than a result of a shared and open inquiry into how best to respond and adapt to changing conditions.

Developing appropriate leadership capability is the most commonly identified people challenge by HR managers. What this means is likely to vary across contexts, but the ability to lead rather than just manage, to manage relationships well in complex organisational structures (such as matrix structures), and to effectively engage employees all feature strongly. We explored the capability of leaders in the eyes of those they manage through the lens of the SCARF model of motivation. Clear gaps are evident in a significant minority of leaders’ capability to set clear expectations, connect with those they lead on a personal and emotional level, and give adequate praise and recognition for work done. Leaders may need to enhance their ability to be clearer about their expectations in an uncertain world and ‘up’ their efforts to appreciate the work of others.

What is not so explicitly captured by the SCARF model is the focus of leaders on the development of those they manage and implications for the leadership pipeline within organisations. HR’s view that leaders are not

instilling a learning culture is supported by the operational managers themselves with one in five reporting that their line manager ‘never’ discusses their training and development needs, and a further one-third reporting that this discussion happens only once per year. More than one in two say they never or rarely receive any coaching from their line manager. HR hold mixed views about their success in developing and appointing successors, and they clearly need the support of leaders to help improve the situation. The lack of development focus also has implications for retention, with more than one-third of managers reporting an intention to leave their organisation as a result of a lack of opportunity to broaden their skills.

Trust has been a key theme for Roffey Park’s research this past year. Employee perceptions of the trustworthiness of their organisation are central to performance and become more pertinent at times of organisational change. On the whole, it seems that leaders trust their organisation across three key dimensions: ability (the ability of their organisation to reliably and effectively meet its goals); benevolence (how effectively their organisation demonstrates care and concern for the wellbeing of staff); and integrity (how effective their organisation is at consistently adhering to moral principles and a code of conduct acceptable to its employees). Trust is less apparent for junior managers and those working in the public sector. Less than half of public sector managers feel that their organisation is effective at demonstrating care and concern for the wellbeing of its staff.

Clear risks to trust emerge from this year’s Agenda. One-third of managers see a disconnect between espoused values and those demonstrated in practice. The gap is

more commonly reported by those in the public sector and in junior management positions. Common perceived barriers to the gap being closed are lack of buy-in from senior managers, lack of ownership amongst employees and language that does not reflect that of staff. The danger of the gap is that top-down imposed values generate cynicism and distrust. Just over one-third of managers report feeling pressured to compromise their organisation’s ethical standards. This again is likely to erode trust, particularly at middle and lower levels of management where breaches are most likely to be seen as a result of overly aggressive targets or the need to follow orders.

The trend of organisations slimming down and wanting more for less seems supported by the finding that the majority of managers at all levels say that they never have enough time to get work done (whilst this is true for all managers, it is increasingly so the more you move down the organisational hierarchy). Managers at all levels report not having a high level of control over aspects of work, in particular the pace of work, and one in two say they worry a lot about work outside of hours. This is likely to have negative implications for leaders’ sense of well-being and, perhaps, ability to perform at their best.

Despite the volume of work, and the worrying about (and doing) work outside core hours, the vast majority of managers say they are happy with the balance between work and home. Most also agree that that boundary has become more blurred with the widespread availability of mobile technology and social media. This is particularly the case for senior leaders where it seems that being ‘always on’ may now come with the territory of senior leadership. Whilst there is much in the media about the


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

detrimental aspects of mobile technology and social media, on balance managers view its impact as more positive than negative. That said, one-fifth do report the constant connectedness of a smart phone in their pocket as a source of stress.

The ever-growing importance of technology at work is writ large in this year’s Agenda. More than half of managers say that their organisation is implementing new technology to meet current business pressures. New technology may of course mean anything from a new telephone system to an entirely new approach to selling and buying services. What is apparent from previous experience is that introducing new technology is not always a quick win, and its success in achieving productivity gains depends crucially on how work and social processes are reconfigured to take advantage of new technologies. One estimate is that can take between 5 to 7 years before the benefits of introducing new technology are fully realised, if indeed they are. According to this year’s data, two-fifths of leaders do not think that their organisation has been successful in taking advantage of the opportunities offered by social media and mobile technologies.

The adoption and successful implementation of technology also features strongly in HR’s plans for future service delivery innovation. Commonly anticipated innovations include enabling managers and employees to be more self-sufficient, enhancing communication, and taking advantage of the opportunity offered by Big Data. The question, of course, is how well equipped is HR to exploit the available technology. In last year’s Agenda, we reported that just one quarter of HR managers felt confident exploiting technology to enhance HR and business performance.

Overall, the picture presented in this year’s Agenda is one of hard-pressed leaders doing their best to manage constant change. On the whole, the majority of employees are positive about the performance of their leaders. For a significant minority, there is clearly a need to develop a better ability to manage complex change and engage with employees in a way that helps them achieve their full potential.

1 | BUSINESS CONTEXT AND PEOPLE CHALLENGES


1. Business context and people challenges

BUSINESS CONTEXT and

PEOPLE CHALLENGES



More than half of all organisations (57 per cent) are putting in place cost restrictions as a means of responding to the political and economic challenges they face. This is particularly the case in the public sector where 75 per cent of managers report their organisation attempting to constrain or reduce costs, partly through redundancies (more than half, 52 per cent, of mangers in the sector report their organisation making redundancies). Seeking greater efficiencies through redesigned processes and systems is apparent with nearly two-thirds (64 per cent) of managers reporting their organisation adopting this approach. The dangers of this approach may be that in streamlining processes, what makes for good work may get lost and jobs become unfulfilling.

The ever-growing importance of technology at work is evident with the majority of managers (59 per cent) indicating that their organisation is looking to implement new technology. New technology may of course mean anything from a new telephone system to an entirely new approach to selling and buying services such as crowdsourcing. What is apparent from previous experience is that introducing new technology is not always a quick win, and its success in achieving productivity gains depends crucially on how work and social processes are reconfigured to take advantage of new technologies. One estimate is that it can take between 5 to 7 years before the benefits of introducing new technology are fully realised, if indeed they are1.

It appears that the majority of managers do not believe that their organisation is making the most of the opportunities offered by social media and mobile

1 E Brynjolfsson and LM Hitt ‘Computing productivity: Firm-level Evidence’. Review of Economics and Statistics 8, no.4 (2003): 793-808

technologies. More than one-third of managers (39 per cent) believe that their organisation has not been successful in taking advantage of the opportunities offered by social media and mobile technology thus far. This view is most keenly held by managers in larger organisations (more than 250 employees). There may be a number of reasons for this apparent lack of exploitation of digital, and one seems to be the question mark, for some managers, over whether their senior team recognise the importance of both the investment in, and sponsorship of, new technologies. If leaders are to understand how to navigate the changes that are coming their way in the ‘digital revolution’ and how these may affect the dynamics and indeed the metabolism of their business, there may be a requirement for additional leadership skills specifically in this area. Some managers we spoke with also report huge differences in the general technical competence at their workplace which begs the question of whether enough is being done to boost digital skills levels in the UK workplace.

Whilst our data does show a continued downsizing of the public sector, the pace of this over time appears to have slowed a little. Each year, we calculate the Employment Growth Index (EGI). This is the balance of HR managers’ expectations regarding workforce growth. With an EGI of -39, more HR managers in the public sector are expecting the size of their workforce to decline than are expecting it to increase. That said, the equivalent figure last year was -41, and the year before that, -46. Whilst cost cutting and downsizing continues, four-fifths (82 per cent) of HR managers in the sector identify succession planning as a key people challenge. It is clear that in the pressure to cut costs, starting in 2008, valuable talent may have been lost through voluntary schemes and the desire to trim the salary bill. A key concern in the sector now is

identifying those people who are up and coming and taking steps to retain them. Our data would suggest that HR feels it can improve its game in this regard. Less than half (45 per cent) of HR managers in the sector consider their organisations to be successful at developing and appointing successors. HR managers in other sectors have a slightly rosier view. 46 per cent and 59 per cent of HR managers in the not-for-profit and private sector feel their organisation is successful at developing and appointing successors.

Growth continues in the private sector, with our data suggesting year-on-year growth in employment expectations in the production and manufacturing sector. This year’s EGI of +32 compares favourably with +29 last year, and +25 the year before. The most common response to business challenges in the sector is the development of new products and services. This, at least in part, may explain the focus on developing appropriate leadership as the key people challenge in the sector. Innovating and ensuring new products and services are brought to market effectively may require a different, more creative skill set to one based predominantly on managing operations efficiently.

The not-for-profit sector has seen the greatest fall in its EGI, falling from +28 last year to +5 this time around. This is likely the knock-on effect of Government budget cuts. Funding pressures are translating into an increased focus on changing the culture to be more performance-oriented, and perhaps less paternalistic.

Summary



Implementing new technology features strongly as a means to meet business

challenges

How is your organisation responding to challenges in the political and economic environment?

Public Sector

(%)

Production and Manufacturing

(%)

Redesigning processes or systems 75 Looking to develop new products and services 72

Cost spending restrictions 67 Implementing new technology 63

Implementing new technology 64 Looking for new markets 63

Downsizing/Redundancies 52 Redesigning processes or systems 59

Focusing on core businesses 51 Cost spending restrictions 59

Base size (n) 251 Base size (n) 92

Private

Services (%)

Not-for-profit (%)

Redesigning processes or systems 57 Redesigning processes or systems 66

Looking to develop new products and services 55 Implementing new technology 55

Implementing new technology 55 Looking to develop new products and services 54

Looking for new markets 52 Cost spending restrictions 54

Cost spending restrictions 46 Focusing on core businesses 49

Base size (n) 382 Base size (n) 127

Note: Percentages may add up to more than 100 as respondents could give more than one answer.

More than half of all managers across industrial sectors report their organisation adapting to environmental pressures through the implementation of new technology� This may not be a quick win� Some estimates suggest that it takes 5 to 7 years for organisations to truly reap the rewards of new technology� Achieving this depends crucially on adopting new ways of working to make the most of what the technology can offer�

Cost cutting measures such as spending restrictions and the redesign of processes also feature across the sectors as a response to external pressures� Spending restrictions clearly place an emphasis on the capability to do more with less, and to innovate in the way things are done� Later in this report, there are some interesting insights into the cultural readiness of organisations for greater innovation�



More than one-third of managers do not feel their organisation is taking

advantage of social media and mobile technologies

To what extent do you agree that ‘my organisation has been successful at taking advantage of the opportunities offered by social media and mobile technologies’?

With implementing new technology a key response to business pressures, it seems that more than one-third of managers do not feel that their organisation is taking full advantage of the technology available to it� Managers in larger organisations are more likely to believe that their organisation could do more to reap the benefits of social media and mobile technology� It may be that larger organisations are more inclined to want, and to be able to, exercise control over the use of new technology and so limit the potential benefits of social media� It may also be that organisations are failing to make the best use of digital technology in spite of the greater connectedness that it can support because it can amplify issues such as trust and the need to collaborate more effectively across organisational silos�

42%

32%

Small and medium-sized

enterprises (SME, <250 employees)

Base size (n) = 172

38%

40%

Large organisations (>250 employees)

Base size (n) = 766

39%

39%

Overall

Base size (n) = 938

Agree

Disagree

Disagree

Disagree

Agree

Agree



HR managers in the public sector anticipate further redundancies whilst

growth continues in the private sector

How do you expect the size of your organisation’s workforce to change over the next two to three years?

Production and Manufacturing

(%)

Private Services (%)

Public Sector (%)

Not for Profit (%)

Increase in size 50 61 19 35

Decrease in size 18 18 58 30

No change 26 19 20 31

EGI +32 +43 -39 +5

Base size (n) 84 314 170 83

On balance, HR managers in the public sector expect the size of their workforce to decline over the next two to three years� More than half (58 per cent) of the HR managers in this sector expect further contraction in their workforce compared with 19 per cent anticipating growth, giving an overall Employment Growth Index, or EGI, of -39�

Expectations in all other broad industrial sectors are positive, although only just so in the not-for-profit sector� The overall EGI for this sector is +5, with 35 per cent of HR managers in the sector expecting their workforce to grow against 30 per cent expecting it to decline� The knock-on effect of public sector budget cuts is being felt in the sector, with an increasing focus on the ability to generate revenue and demonstrate impact to funders�

In the private sector, expectations around workforce growth are very positive, no matter whether the main focus of activity is production or the provision of services�



Employment expectations in the production and manufacturing sector shows

year-on-year growth, whilst expectations take a dip in the not-for-profit

sector

Sector (n = average base size) Management Agenda 2014

Management Agenda 2015

Management Agenda 2016

Production and Manufacturing (n=119) +25 +29 +32

Private Services (n=400) +43 +40 +43

Public Sector (n=226) -46 -41 -39

Not for Profit Sector (n=86) +30 +28 +5

Overall +13 +16 +15

Comparing this year’s data with previous years’ Management Agenda shows that there is year-on-year growth in employment expectations in the production and manufacturing sector�

Whilst the size of the public sector continues to decline, the pace seems to have slowed, albeit slightly, this year� The EGI this year of -39 compares favourably with the EGI last year of -41, and the year before that of -46�

This year has seen a big drop in overall workforce growth expectations in the not-for-profit sector� Whilst still positive, the EGI has fallen from around +30 to +5 in the last two years�

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

2014 2015 2016

Production and Manufacturing Private Services

Public Sector Not for Profit Sector



Developing appropriate leadership remains the key people challenge across

industrial sectors

Note: Percentages add up to more than 100 as respondents could give more than one answer.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Retention of key employees

Performance management

Managing the people aspects of change

Changing the culture

Succession planning

Employee engagement and morale

Developing appropriate leadership and managementstyles

What are the main people challenges your organisation is facing now?

Base size (n) = 615

Nearly 4 out of 5 HR managers reported developing appropriate leadership style as their organisations’ key people challenge� Overall, one quarter of HR managers (rising to one-third in the public sector) do not think that their organisation has the leadership and management capability to deliver its strategic objectives (see next page)� HR managers we spoke with highlighted the importance of leaders being able to navigate uncertainty and manage change, adapt effectively to new organisational structures (i�e� matrix working), and lead rather than manage�



A quarter of HR managers think their organisation doesn’t have the

leadership and management capability to deliver its strategic objectives

Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 as respondents could choose a ‘neither agree nor disagree’ option

15%

35%

26%

20%

27%

32%

26%

26%

69%

43%

48%

51%

54%

50%

40%

49%

Less than 100 (n = 54)

Between 100 and 250 (n = 37)

More than 250 (n = 508)

Production and Manufacturing (n = 74)

Private Services (n = 286)

Not-for-Profit (n = 82)

Public Sector (n = 157)

Overall (n = 599)

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the statement 'my organisation has the leadership and management capability to deliver against its strategic objectives'?

Disagree Agree

Overall, one quarter of HR managers doubt their organisation has the required leadership and management capability to deliver their strategic objectives�

HR managers in the public sector have least confidence in their organisation’s leadership and management capability�

HR managers from very small organisations have more confidence in the leadership and management capability in their organisation compared with their counterparts from larger organisations�



Succession planning is a key challenge in both the public and private sectors

What are the main people challenges your organisation is facing now?


There is a deal of overlap in the main people challenges reported by HR managers across industrial sectors� Employee engagement and developing appropriate leadership both feature strongly across sectors, as in previous years�

Compared with last year succession planning is amongst the top three people challenges this year for the public sector� This is perhaps a consequence of the recent focus having been on making redundancies and trimming the salary bill at the expense of ensuring the leadership pipeline is strong� One of our interviewees said “We've had a lot of people leave. We've done voluntary exit. What we haven't done is look across the piece and identify those people who are really valuable and really up and coming and who will be our leaders of the future and do something to keep them.”

Succession planning is also in the top three people challenges in both the production and manufacturing and services sectors (this was also the case in last year’s Agenda)� 70 per cent of HR managers in the services sector and 73 per cent in the production and manufacturing sector identified succession planning as a key people challenge� In the production and manufacturing sector, the focus on succession planning is linked to a concern that individuals with mission-critical technical skills may be reaching retirement age or looking for new challenges whilst there is an absence of job-ready replacements�

12 3

12 3

PRIVATE SECTOR*(base size (n) = 368)

* combined private services and production and manufacturing sectors

PUBLIC SECTOR(base size (n) = 164)

NOT-FOR-PROFIT SECTOR(base size (n) = 83)

Succession planning

Changing the culture

12 3

Developing appropriate

ledership and management styles Employee

engagement and morale

78%

66%70%


ledership and management styles

Employee engagement and morale

91%

82%89%


ledership and management styles Employee

engagement and morale

83%

69%71%

Succession planning



Despite the focus on succession planning, HR managers are split in their

views on how successful they are at developing and appointing successors

How successful is your organisation at developing and appointing successors to key roles?

Percentage of HR managers who report their organisation is successful or very successful at developing and appointing successors to key roles, by organisation size and sector

Not successful at all

Not very successful

Successful

Very successful

2%

45%

50%

3%

SIZE OF ORGANISATIONSECTOR

61%Less than 100

43%Between 100 and 250

Not-for-profit Sector 46%

Base size (n) = 83 Base size (n) = 525

Base size (n) = 40

Base size (n) = 51

59%Private Sector

45%Public Sector

Base size (n) = 164

Base size (n) = 369

More than 250 53%



Managing the different needs and expectations of a multi-generational

workforce continues to be seen as a future challenge by HR managers

What are the main people challenges your organisation is likely to face in five years’ time?


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Increasing diversity in senior leadership positions

Succession planning

Changing working practices, for example,technology

Developing appropriate leadership andmanagement styles

Finding the right employees in the right marketswhere we do business around the world

Managing the different needs and expectations of amulti-generational workforce


Base size (n) = 575

Each year in the Agenda we have asked about what HR managers see as their key people challenges for the future� Managing the needs and expectations of different generations appears high on the list each year� It seems that HR managers are aware of how the demographics of those in work is shifting, with older employees staying in work for longer� There is also much written about the different values of newer generations� What is certain is that with working lifespans extending, organisations will have to find ways to adapt to the changing nature of the workforce�



For HR managers in the not-for-profit sector changing working practices and

encouraging innovation have risen to the top of the agenda

What are the main people challenges your organisation is likely to face in five years’ time?


Compared to last year’s Management Agenda, future people challenges predicted by HR managers in the private and public sector have not changed� However this year HR managers in the not-for-profit sector are predicting different future people challenges to last year� Last year HR managers in the not-for-profit sector predicted succession planning, retention of key employees and meeting the different needs of a multi-generational workforce as their top future people challenges� This year they expect changing work practices, encouraging innovation and developing appropriate leadership and management styles to be their top three people challenges in five years’ time� This is perhaps a reflection of funding pressures and the need to be both more efficient and find new revenue streams�

12 3

12 3

PRIVATE SECTOR*(base size (n) = 364)

PUBLIC SECTOR(base size (n) = 151)

NOT-FOR-PROFIT SECTOR(base size (n) = 78)



Encouraging innovation

12 3

Finding the right employees in the

right markets where we do business

around the worldDeveloping appropriate

leadership and management styles

Developing appropriate leadership and

management styles

Developing appropriate leadership and

management styles

54%

43%47%

Managing the di�erent needs and expectations of a multi-generational

workforce / Succession planning

54%

50%52%

Changing working practices, for

example, technology

46%

44%45%

* combined private services and production and manufacturing sectors


2 | ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE AND CHANGE2. Organisational culture and change

ORGANISATIONALCULTURE

and CHANGE


2 | ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE AND CHANGE

Words such as ‘changing’, ‘challenging’, and ‘uncertain’ dominate managers’ perceptions of their organisations’ culture or climate. Whilst managers recognise managing change as their biggest leadership challenge, their ability to successfully navigate change is called into question by HR’s view that the ability to set direction and foster a learning culture are critical gaps in the capability of leaders in their organisation.

Nearly half of HR managers perceive a capability gap in the ability of their organisations’ leaders to set direction. Evidence from elsewhere in our survey suggests that this is an area in which line managers are perceived by those they manage to be least effective (see chapter 3 on working life). The question, then, appears to be, how can I as a manager set direction when all around me is changing? And how, given that, can I give myself and those I work with a sense of purpose (central to both engagement and resilience)?

The ability of leaders to foster a learning culture is critical to the ability to navigate complexity. To be able to create conditions in which questions are asked and sense-making draws on the views of the many rather than the few. More than half (55 per cent) of HR managers believe that this is a gap in the capability of their leaders. It also has implications for the ability of leaders to motivate and engage, something which HR also thinks is lacking in terms of managing change.

There is, perhaps, an interesting difference between HR and those in operational roles in their perceptions of barriers to change. Whilst both consider a lack of inspirational leadership and change fatigue as barriers, those in HR are more likely to cite leadership issues

whilst those in operational roles more commonly refer to change fatigue. What this means is open to interpretation. It may be that HR’s view is that any change fatigue can be overcome with the right leadership, whilst leaders see the need for some stability. The crucial question, perhaps, is what these views mean for the likelihood of any one change programme achieving its aims.

A failure to identify and involve key stakeholders is felt by roughly two-fifths of HR managers to be a barrier to change. Less managers in non-HR roles believe this to be the case, but one-third still do. Interestingly, this lack of involvement is felt especially keenly by more junior managers. Whilst one-fifth of Board directors believe it is a barrier, nearly half (46 per cent) of junior managers believe this to be the case. What emerges, then, may be a view of change that is top-down and driven, rather than a result of a shared and open inquiry in how best to understand and respond to changing conditions.

Given the rapidly changing nature of many businesses, we were interested in exploring how fertile the ground is in organisations for innovation. On the whole, managers in operational roles report feeling supported to some extent to take business risks, but few report feeling supported to a large extent. HR views their leadership population as being somewhat open to innovation, but few regard their leaders as being very open. To what extent the real issue is leaders not being open or an absence of a culture supportive of innovation is not clear. That said, our findings do raise the question of whether, given the current challenging business environment, organisations are doing enough to promote and support innovation.

In times of change and uncertainty, employees’ awareness of their sense of trust in their organisation is heightened. Perceived breaches of trust are damaging to employee morale and commitment. One potential breach is not so much what is done, but how it is done. And, in this, organisations’ espoused values become prominent. Many organisations’ values can appear like wish lists or corporate branding, inspiring but distant from our experience of them as stakeholders of one form or another. Alternatively they may be the connective glue that binds the organisation together and captures what makes the organisation different.

As in last year’s Agenda, roughly one-third of employees feel that organisational values as practised by management do not reflect those espoused by the organisation. Gaps in espoused and experienced values are greater in the public sector (43 per cent of managers in the sector see a gap compared with 31 per cent and 24 per cent in the private and not-for-profit sectors respectively) and for junior compared to more senior managers (46 per cent of junior managers see a gap compared with 31 per cent of senior managers and 12 per cent of board directors). The most common barrier to ‘living the values’ is lack of senior management buy-in. More than three-quarters (77 per cent) of managers saw this as a barrier. This is interesting given that the perceived congruence between actual and espoused values rises through the management grades. Are those at the very top of organisations deluded? Or, perhaps, it only takes one senior manager behaving out of line with the values to make a significant impact in perceived congruence. Nearly half (46 per cent) of managers cited lack of ownership amongst employees, and language that failed to be meaningful to employees (43 per cent),

Summary




as key barriers to values being lived. The danger for organisations is that values imposed top-down generate cynicism and distrust at a time when trust is fragile and ever more important.

Feeling pressured to compromise one’s own or organisation’s ethical standards is another potential source of broken trust. Both last and this year’s Agenda highlight that the majority of managers do not experience such pressures. Those that do report the need to follow orders (45 per cent), meet overly aggressive business targets (39 per cent) and scheduled pressures (34 per cent), as well as helping their organisation survive (30 per cent). This year, we see a sharp increase in the percentage of managers from the not-for-profit sector feeling the need to compromise their organisation’s ethical standards to help the organisation survive. The pressure to meet overly aggressive business targets has also increased in the sector. Funding pressures may force decisions that meet short-term financial needs but which may be contrary to long-term sustainability. It seems that more senior managers are likely to ground decisions that compromise ethical standards in terms of helping the organisation survive whereas those in more junior positions

see themselves as following orders. Those in the middle see compromises as a result of needing to hit targets. Each interprets the situation through their own lens and it seems that more dialogue may help each understand the others’ perspective and challenges.

If breaches of values and organisational ethics may both undermine trust, how trusting are managers of the organisations they work for? We used Gillespie and Dietz’s (2009)1 model of trust to measure managers’ level of trust toward their organisation. The model has three components:

• Ability – the ability of the organisation to reliably and effectively meet its goals and objectives

• Benevolence – how effectively the organisation demonstrates care and concern for the wellbeing of its staff

• Integrity – how effective the organisation is at consistently adhering to moral principles and a code of conduct acceptable to its employees

1 Gillespie N and Dietz G (2009) ‘Trust repair after an organisation-level failure’. Academy of Management Review, 34 (1): 127-145

Overall, roughly two-thirds of managers rate their organisation positively across all three dimensions. A positive result. On the other hand, the data is patterned by seniority. For each dimension, there is a decreasing level of trust by level of management. For example, whilst 84 per cent of Board directors feel their organisation effectively shows care and concern for employees, only 44 per cent of junior managers feel the same. The data is also partly patterned by sector, with managers in the public sector less positive about their organisations’ ability to act according to moral principles and show due care and concern for staff. This may be reflective of current pressures in the sector, where the risk may be that the pressure to do well overrides the purpose of doing good.



The dominant words used by managers to describe the climate in their

organisations are focussed on change and uncertainty

What one word would you use to describe the climate or culture in your organisation?

Base size (n) = 885




Managing change is recognised by leaders as their most important leadership

challenge

What are the top three challenges you face as a leader/manager in your organisation?

Leadership challenges %

Managing change 39

Maintaining staff morale and engagement 32

Balancing operational and strategic pressures 30

Managing workload 29

Base size (n) 844


Leaders recognise managing change as their top leadership challenge� This is true across industrial sectors with between one-third and one half of managers in each sector regarding it as a challenge (47 per cent of managers in the public sector regard managing change as a key leadership challenge compared with 45 per cent, 37 per cent, and 34 per cent in the production and manufacturing, not-for-profit, and private services sectors respectively)� The other major challenges identified by managers are also influenced heavily by change as can be seen in the quotes from managers we interviewed�

Maintaining staff morale and engagement

We are going through a difficult period financially and we had a voluntary redundancy programme� Another problem is that as a business we don’t measure engagement in a sophisticated way and as a business we don’t really know what engages people and what doesn’t�

(Production and manufacturing sector)

Managing workload

We are under resourced and overstretched� There is a very, very high level of expectation coming from the very top which is divorced from the actual reality on the ground� So people expect things to happen, which they should obviously, the Chief Executive or whatever should expect things to happen� But they seem to be unaware of the fact that people lower down in the chain are not as well-resourced as they were in the past� There's cuts going on all the time, there's restructures going on all the time, people are losing their positions� And there are fewer people to do the work, so there's that challenge�

(Public sector)

Balancing operational and strategic pressures

Vague strategic objectives with no timeframe and what the expected outcomes are� Because they’re not clear enough and we don’t know what we’re supposed to achieve as a result of them, it’s that balance of, well, okay, how do I know when I’ve got there, because I can’t measure it?

(Not for profit sector)



Views on the main barriers to change differ between HR and those in

operational roles, but lack of ‘inspirational leadership’ and change fatigue

feature strongly

What do you see as the main barriers to managing change effectively?

Note: Percentages shown reflect those agreeing that the stated barrier is present

There are some interesting differences in the views of HR managers and those in operational roles on barriers to change� There are also many similarities� Both see lack of appropriate leadership and change fatigue as key barriers, although those in HR and operational roles differ on which is most commonly a barrier� For HR managers, it is a lack of leadership that is front of mind� For those in operational roles, change fatigue is cited more commonly� Both report to a similar degree a lack of understanding about the need for and direction of change� HR more commonly sees a failure to review and learn as change progresses and a lack of involvement of key stakeholders� Turning these barriers on their head, it is clear that the ability to set direction, learn and engage others in change is central to people’s perceptions of effective change�

44%

52%

36%

31%

40%

27%

39%

42%

54%

44%

38%

32%

30%

29%

29%

26%

Change fatigue

Lack of leadership to inspire and motivate

Lack of understanding about need for and direction ofchange

Absence of supporting people management practices tohelp embed new ways of working

Failure to identify and involve key stakeholders, includingemployees, and address their needs, preferences

Failure to identify quick wins and celebrate successes

Failure to review and learn as change progresses

Lack of clear accountabilities

HR (n=571) Non-HR (n=252)




According to HR, leaders may lack the ability to foster a learning culture and

set direction in service of change

What, if any, do you see as the current skills gaps in leadership capability?

Central to navigating the complexity of change is the ability to learn, to ask questions and sense-make� More than half of HR managers view their leadership population as lacking the ability to foster a learning culture, to create an environment in which there is an openness to different views and a spirit of enquiry� A similar proportion of HR managers believe their leaders lack the capability to effectively set direction, establishing a clear purpose to engage and motivate those they work with�

7%

31%

32%

35%

38%

48%

51%

55%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

None of the above

Effectively assess risks and seize opportunities

Ability to see the big picture and identifyopportunities to add value

Ability to foster the development of collaborativeand partnership working with other organisations

Ability to plan and manage resources

Setting direction and creating the right conditionsto head in that direction

Ability to foster innovation and creativity

Ability to create a learning culture and support thedevelopment of employees

Base size (n) = 596



Lack of involvement in change is felt most keenly by junior managers

What do you see as the main barriers to managing change effectively?

Board Director Other Director/Senior Manager Middle Manager Junior Manager

Lack of leadership to inspire and motivate 34% 49% 52% 54%

Lack of clear accountabilities 27% 39% 36% 41%

Failure to identify and involve key stakeholders, including employees, and address their needs, preferences

20% 36% 41% 46%

Change fatigue 35% 47% 50% 41%

Base size (n) 74 373 335 41


Lack of involvement in change is felt especially keenly by junior managers, with nearly one half agreeing lack of involvement of key stakeholders is a significant barrier to change� Indeed, there is a clear trend with a perception of lack of involvement increasing with decreasing seniority� What is emerging may be an approach to change that is top-down rather than collaborative, with the danger that attempted changes are not widely owned by those required to implement them� There is also a trend apparent in the data around leadership� The perceived presence of leadership that motivates and engages declines with decreasing seniority� This may relate back to the previous point about leaders’ ability to communicate purpose and help set a meaningful direction for others�




The majority of managers believe that their organisation is not effectively

using technology to support bottom-up change

To what extent would you agree or disagree that ‘my organisation has been successful at utilising social media and mobile technologies to assist in the implementation of change programmes’?

DISAGREE

48%

AGREE

22%

DISAGREE

57%

AGREE

20%

Small and medium sized enterprises (SME, <250 employees)

Base size (n) = 171

Large organisations(>250 employees)

Base size (n) = 764

The majority of managers do not believe their organisation is effectively using social media and mobile technologies to support change� This is true irrespective of the sector in which they work or their level of seniority� Social media and mobile technology have the capability to support more bottom-up change through increasing the connectedness of the organisation and by sourcing ideas and responses quickly and efficiently from a wide group of employees� It doesn’t seem this opportunity is being taken advantage of, particularly in large organisations� This may reflect a preference for managing change top-down�



The majority of managers feel safe to take business risks to some extent, but

more than one-third feel supported only a little or not at all

To a large extent To some extent To a little extent Not at all

To what extent do you feel safe and supported enough to take business risks in order to innovate?

14% 51% 22% 12%

Base size (n) = 817 managers

Most managers feel somewhat safe and supported to take business risks in order to innovate although only one in seven feel supported to a large extent and one in ten do not feel supported at all� The question is, in the current environment of rapid change, do more managers need to feel more supported to take business risks and innovate?

There is a strong relationship between how supported a manager feels and their seniority� Only five per cent of junior managers feel safe and supported to a large extent compared with fifteen per cent of senior managers and forty-five per cent of board directors�




HR managers believe that the majority of managers in their organisation are

somewhat open to innovation

To what extent are managers in your organisation open to innovation?

Base size (n) = 597

On the whole, HR managers believe that leaders in their organisation are somewhat open to innovation� Less than one in five think that they are very open� Whilst HR managers may view operational leaders as only somewhat open to innovation, leaders themselves, on the whole, feel only somewhat supported� If HR sees the ability to foster innovation as a leadership gap (more than half do), one question is what can HR managers do to help create a culture which leaders view as supportive of innovation and risk-taking?

1%

67%

16% 16%

Not open at all

Somewhat open

Very open

Not very open



Trust is key to organisational effectiveness, particularly in times of change –

two-thirds of managers rate their organisation as trustworthy

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements…?

Dimensions of organisational trustworthinessAgree or strongly

agree (%)

Neither agree nor

disagree (%)

Disagree or strongly

disagree (%)

Ability My organisation reliably and effectively meets its goals and objectives

63 36 1

Benevolence My organisation effectively demonstrates care and concern for the wellbeing of staff

64 34 2

IntegrityMy organisation is effective at consistently adhering to moral principles and a code of conduct acceptable to its employees

69 29 2

Base size (n) = 818

We used Gillespie and Dietz’s (2009) model of trust to measure managers’ level of trust towards their organisation� We asked managers about their organisations’ Ability (how effectively and reliably it meets its targets), Benevolence (how effectively it demonstrates care and concern for the wellbeing of staff) and Integrity (how consistent it is at adhering to moral principles and an ethical code of conduct)� Overall, two-thirds of managers report trusting their organisation� Very few managers disagree but roughly one-third seem unsure� The relevance of this is that trust, or the lack of it, becomes more salient during periods of change�




There is a clear trend in perceptions of trust in an organisation by level of

seniority – the more junior the manager, the lower the trust

Base size (n) = Board Director 73, Other Director/Senior Manager 372, Middle Manager 332, Junior Manager 41

More senior managers are more likely to rate their organisation positively across the three dimensions of organisational trustworthiness� Less than half of junior managers regard their organisation as trustworthy in terms of its ability, benevolence or adherence to an ethical code of conduct�

My organisation reliably and e�ectively meets its goals and objectives

My organisation e�ectively demonstrates care and concern for the wellbeing of sta�

My organisation is e�ective at consistently adhering to moral principles and a code of conduct acceptable to its employees

Board Director

Middle Manager

Junior Manager

Other Director/ Senior

Manager

64%63%49% 68%

65%61%44% 84%

Board Director

Middle Manager

Junior Manager


Manager

72%65%41% 89%

Board Director

Middle Manager

Junior Manager


Manager



Trust perceptions vary by sector – managers in the public sector are

particularly doubtful of their organisations’ ability to show care and concern

for the wellbeing of staff

Percentages of managers who strongly agree or agree with the following statements:

Production and Manufacturing (%)

Private Services (%)

Public Sector (%)

Not for Profit (%)

My organisation reliably and effectively meets its goals and objectives 59 65 61 66

My organisation effectively demonstrates care and concern for the wellbeing of staff 62 72 49 71

My organisation is effective at consistently adhering to moral principles and a code of conduct acceptable to its employees

72 76 56 72

Base size (n) 102 423 286 140

Our data on trust suggests that managers in the public sector are more doubtful of their organisations’ ability to show care and concern for staff and to adhere to a code of conduct or set of ethical standards� This is of particular concern given the nature of the work that many in the public sector perform� Failing to look after the well-being of staff in the sector may ultimately impact their ability to care for those they serve�




One third of managers see a gap between espoused and lived values,

potentially undermining trust

Do you think your organisation’s stated values generally reflect the actual values practised by management?

24%

31%

43%

33%

68%

62%

47%

58%

Not for Profit (n=121)

Private sector (n=448)

Public Sector (n=243)

Overall (n=812)

No Yes

In very similar findings to last year’s Agenda, just under three-fifths of managers feel that the values practised by management reflect their organisation’s stated values� Public sector managers are most likely to report a lack of congruence, perhaps reflecting a tension between espoused public service values and the demands of continued efficiency drives�



Junior managers see less congruence between espoused and lived values

Do you think your organisation’s stated values generally reflect the actual values practised by management?

46%

39%

31%

12%

37%

53%

61%

85%

Junior Manager (n=41)

Middle Manager (n=328)

Other Director/Senior Manager (n=370)

Board Director (n=73)

No

Yes

14%

34%

36%

81%

58%

55%

Less than 100 employees (n=94)

Between 100 and 250 employees (n=59)

More than 250 employees (n=659)

No

Yes

As in previous years, managers further up the hierarchy are more positive regarding the congruence of espoused and practised values� This may reflect actual differences in the practice of organisational values in more senior roles, for example, where congruence on values is taken into account in promotions� It may however, be a reflection that more senior managers are out of touch with practices and behaviours in other parts of the organisation�

Managers in very small organisations are less likely to see a gap between the organisation’s stated values and those practised by management�




The most common barrier to living the values is a lack of senior

management buy-in

What do you see as the main barriers to living the values?

Base size (n) = 260 Note: Only managers who saw a gap between espoused and lived values responded to this question.

Note: Caution is required in interpreting this graph due to small sample sizes

77% 53% 46% 43% Lack of senior

management buy-in (i.e. senior managers not role

modelling the values)

Conflict with existing culture (culture-in-use)

Lack of ownership amongst employees as values imposed

top-down

Language of values does not relect that of sta

(failure to make values meaningful to employees)

Three-quarters of managers who see a gap between espoused and practised values report that lack of senior manage-ment buy-in is a barrier. Junior managers are particularly likely to view this as a barrier.

Overall, just over half report conflict with the existing culture is a barrier, although those in more senior management roles are more likely to believe this. One half of managers see a lack of ownership of the values as a result of their being imposed top-down or through the use of language that does not resonate with employees. The danger of this is that employees become cynical and efforts to change are not supported by a sense of trust in shared values.

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Junior Manager(n=19)

Middle Manager(n=122)

OtherDirector/SeniorManager (n=111)

Board Director(n=8)

Lack of senior management buy-in(i�e senior managers not rolemodelling the values)

Conflict with existing culture(culture-in-use)



Just under two-thirds of managers NEVER feel pressured to compromise

their organisation’s ethical standards

Do you ever feel pressured by other employees or managers to compromise your organisation’s standards of ethical business conduct in order to achieve business objectives?

Roughly one-third of employees doubt their organisations’ ability to adhere to a code of ethical conduct� This is mirrored in the one-third of managers that report feeling pressured to compromise their organisations’ ethical standards, at one time or another� One quarter of managers feeling pressure do so only rarely, but this may nonetheless breach trust�

63%

No - never

24%

Yes - but very rarely

10%

Yes - periodically(e.g. to meet financial objectives)

Yes - all the time

2%

Base size (n) = 817




Junior managers are most likely to have felt pressured to compromise their

organisation’s ethical standards

Do you ever feel pressured by other employees or managers to compromise your organisation’s standards of ethical business conduct in order to achieve business objectives?

Public sector Private sector Not-for-profit

Yes-all the time 2% 3% 2%

Yes-periodically (e.g. to meet periodic financial objectives

11% 10% 7%

Yes-but very rarely 31% 20% 26%

No-never 55% 67% 64%

Base size (n) 246 450 121

5%

3%

2%

3%

8%

27%

10%

8%

14%

23%

27%

23%

25%

26%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Non-managerial staff(base size (n) = 134)

Junior Manager(base size (n) = 41)

Middle Manager(base size (n) = 330)

Other Director/Senior Manager(base size (n) = 372)

Board Director(base size (n) = 74)

Yes-all the time Yes-periodically (e�g� to meet periodic financial objectives) Yes-but very rarely

Junior managers are most likely to report having felt pressured compared with managers at other levels and non-managerial staff�

Managers in the public sector are more likely to report having felt pressured, although most report such pressure is very rare�



Pressure to compromise on ethics most commonly stems from a need

to follow the boss’s directives, efforts to meet overly aggressive

financial/business objectives or scheduled pressures

What are the principal causes of these pressures to compromise your organisation’s standards of ethical business conduct?

Note: Percentages may add up to more than 100 as respondents could give more than one answer. Only those saying that they had felt pressure to compromise their organisation’s ethical standards responded to this question.

Advancing boss’s c

areer interests

11%Meeting scheduled pressures

34%

Saving jobs

10%

Feel

ing

peer

pre

ssur

e

12%

Wan

ting to

be

a tea

m play

er

12%

Advancing your own career3%

Resisting competitive threats

13%

Rationalising that others do it 5%

Helping the organisation survive

30%

Need to follow boss’s directives45%

Meeting overly aggressive financial / business objectives

39%

Base size (n) = 303




Helping the organisation survive is now the most common pressure to

compromise on ethics for not-for-profit managers. Increased proportions of

public and private sector managers blame scheduled pressures


Public sector Private sector Not for Profit

2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015

Need to follow boss's directives 47% 48% 47% 36% 34% 30%

Meeting overly aggressive financial/business objectives

40% 28% 39% 40% 34% 22%

Meeting scheduled pressures 41% 32% 33% 24% 22% 24%

Helping the organisation survive 34% 23% 23% 19% 46% 26%

Base count (n) 107 164 146 243 41 46

Managers from all sectors report the same four principal causes of pressure to compromise organisation’s standards of ethics, namely the need to follow the boss’s directives, meeting overly aggressive financial/business objectives, meeting scheduled pressures and helping the organisation survive� However, the extent to which these pressures are felt varies across sectors�

Public sector: As we found last year, the principal pressure public sector managers’ report is a need to follow the boss’s directives� However, this year an increasing proportion of public sector managers include overly aggressive financial/business objectives, scheduled pressures and helping the organisation survive, among the principal causes of pressure� Clearly the ongoing budget cuts in this sector are having a significant impact�

Private sector: This year an increasing proportion of private sector managers include the need to follow their boss’s directives and meeting scheduled pressures among their principal causes of pressure�

Not-for-Profit sector: Helping the organisation survive is now the most common cause of pressure to compromise on ethics, following a substantial increase in the proportion reporting this compared with last year� The proportion of not-for-profit managers who attribute pressure to overly aggressive financial/business objectives has also increased this year�



The principal causes of pressures to compromise organisational ethics varies

by role level


Less senior managers more frequently include the need to follow their boss’s directives among the principal causes of pressure to compromise their organisation’s ethical standards� Managers with more responsibility, further up the organisational hierarchy, are more likely to attribute pressure to helping the organisation survive�

Pressure to meet overly aggressive financial/business objectives is most common among middle and other/senior managers, who have most responsibility for operations�

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Junior Manager(n=22)

Middle Manager(n=117)

Other Director/SeniorManager (n=125)

Board Director(n=30)

Need to follow boss's directives

Meeting overly aggressivefinancial/business objectives

Helping the organisation survive

Meeting scheduled pressures

3 | WORKING LIFE


3. Working life

WORKINGLIFE

3 | WORKING LIFE


Nearly one in two managers (45 per cent) would describe themselves as having a ‘medium’ level of motivation, and this may simply reflect the wax and wane of organisational life. There is, however, a clear trend with respect to seniority. The more senior the manager the more likely they are to feel highly motivated. At the other end of the organisational hierarchy, nearly one-third of junior managers consider their motivation to be low which is of concern.

So what is it that actually motivates UK managers? The vast majority of managers (86 per cent) state that above all else, it’s the opportunity to make a difference. This is the top motivator (as it was two years ago) for board directors, senior managers and middle managers who all consider it to be at least twice as important as financial reward (overall 41 per cent). A sense of autonomy and the freedom to decide how work is done (76 per cent) ranks second. Junior managers are the exception in that they regard respectful and friendly colleagues a more important motivator (78 per cent of junior managers rated this a motivator), followed by recognition (71 per cent) and good leadership (71 per cent).

We asked managers responding to our survey about the effectiveness of their line manager in aspects of leadership, based on SCARF. Founded on the concept that social concerns are a primary human motivator,

the SCARF model has become widely discussed in management circles and in the field of learning and development since its introduction. The model is concerned with five domains of experience which activate strong ‘threats’ and ‘rewards’ in the brain, namely: Status (sense of importance relative to others), Certainty (one’s need for clarity), Autonomy (sense of control over events), Relatedness (sense of connectedness and security with another person) and Fairness ( just and non-biased exchange between people). For example, an employee who is not recognised for their contribution at work may consider this a ‘threat’ to Status, whereas appropriate recognition would trigger the ‘reward’ response, so boosting motivation.

Overall, one quarter of those we surveyed do not feel that their manager is effective at giving praise and recognition for work done. There is a trend in views with seniority. The more junior the manager, the more likely they are to feel that their line manager is not effective at giving praise and recognition. With one-third of junior managers feeling that their motivation is low and regarding recognition as a key motivator, saying ‘thank you’ for work well done would seem to be a ‘quick win’ for boosting employee morale. Previous research1 has, however, highlighted differences in perceptions regarding the frequency of feedback between managers and those they manage.

1 Pardey D, May T (2014) ILM Research Paper 4: Motivation and Rewards: A full analysis of research underpinning ‘Beyond the bonus: driving employee performance’ Institute of Leadership and Management (ILM)

The research identified that 69 per cent of managers felt they were ‘always giving feedback to individuals on their performance’ compared to 23 per cent of employees. There appears a yawning chasm between what leaders think they are doing and how this is experienced by employees.

More than one-third (37 per cent) of junior managers regard their line manager as ineffective at empowering them to make decisions. This is also true for around one-fifth of middle (21 per cent) and senior (17 per cent) managers. With autonomy and the opportunity to make a difference key motivators, it seems that in a significant minority of cases leadership may be failing to provide the conditions of work which employees say would motivate them. Of the five SCARF dimensions, the lowest rated is that of ‘Certainty’. Overall, 35 per cent of managers say that their line manager is ineffective at setting clear expectations. It is the lowest scoring dimension across the grades, with 33 per cent of senior managers reporting a lack of clear expectations, 36 per cent of middle managers and 40 per cent of junior managers doing the same. This would seem to be a basic requirement of effective leadership. As we discuss elsewhere in this report, managers may need to get better at being clear about what they can and cannot be certain about, and setting clear expectations even in environments characterised by change and uncertainty.

Summary

3 | WORKING LIFE


Nearly one in two (44 per cent) managers say that their level of stress has increased over the last six months. The proportion reporting increased stress increases as we descend through the management layers. 59 per cent of junior managers report feeling more stressed now than they did six months ago. Junior managers are less likely to feel that: their job is secure (42 per cent of junior managers compared with 47 per cent and 52 per cent of middle and senior managers respectively feel that their job is secure); or that they are fairly rewarded financially for the work they do (49 per cent of junior managers compared with 57 per cent and 65 per cent of middle and senior managers respectively feel that they are fairly rewarded financially). Both these factors may, at least in part, be responsible for the increased level of stress experienced.

The majority of managers at all levels report that they never have enough time to get work done (this is also patterned by seniority, with a greater percentage of junior managers saying this is the case). Roughly one in two managers, irrespective of level, also report worrying a lot about work outside of hours. It seems then that the sheer volume of work and worries about it may be spilling over into what is meant to be time away from work. Roffey Park’s research on personal resilience2 has suggested that maintaining a sense of perspective about work is a key capability for developing personal resilience, including not allowing work to encroach and overshadow other parts of one’s life. It seems, then, that managers at all levels could do with focussing on building their capacity for resilience.

2 Lucy D, Poorkavoos M, Thompson A (2014) Building Resilience: Five key capabilities. Roffey Park Institute.

One aspect of work conditions that has featured strongly in research into workplace stress is that of control. Karasek’s (1979) job demands-control model argues that the combination of having little scope for decision-making and a heavily demanding job gives rise to stress and job dissatisfaction. Whilst the majority of managers report not having enough time to get work done, managers at all levels report lacking control of key features of work, in particular the pace at which work is done. Less than half of board directors, senior and middle managers report a high level of control over the pace at which work is done. It appears that the increased levels of stress may be, in part, related to this condition of having too much work and too little control. This may especially be the case for junior managers who report considerably less control over a number of features of work than their more senior colleagues.

Despite not having enough time to get work done and worrying about work outside of hours, the vast majority (66 per cent) of managers report having a satisfactory balance between their work and home lives. We were interested in finding out more about whether, and to what extent, managers experienced a blurring of the traditional ‘boundaries’ between their work and home life, specifically related to the presence of mobile technology. The majority (59 per cent) of managers agree or strongly agree that for them, the boundaries are blurring, twice as many (24 per cent) as those who disagree or strongly disagree. Those in senior roles are most likely to feel a blurring between the two (77 per cent reported a blurring). Does this simply ‘come with the territory’ in a senior role in 2016, particularly where the organisation is operating globally? And if so, do we really understand the

long term implications for health and well-being if work is increasingly bleeding into our home life?

We asked to what extent managers believed the impact of technology on the balance between their work and home life had been positive or negative. Opinion is divided. What we may not have expected to find was that 31 per cent of managers feel that the abundance of social media and mobile technology is actually having a positive impact on the balance between their work and home life. And in spite of much discourse on the evils of the abundant technology at our fingertips, only one-fifth (21 per cent) report feeling a negative impact. We were able to explore this finding in more depth in our qualitative interviews. The main positives cited included the ability to work from home; to work whilst travelling and in other locations and to be able to work flexible hours. Some people spoke at length about the need to ‘feel connected’ and the benefits of this not only for the business, but for them as an individual. But for some, the constant connectedness offered by the smart phone in their pocket is much more a source of stress, as they feel under pressure (whether perceived or real) to respond, for example, to late night emails. And in some cases this pressure is experienced as ‘pervasive’ or ‘relentless’. One interviewee described the expectation in her organisation to respond to out of hours emails as a ‘hierarchy of who is most committed, in the same way that the hours you put in at the office used to be’. Overall, it would appear that UK managers recognise and experience the pitfalls of the ‘always on’ culture as enabled by mobile technology and social media, but regard these potential risks as secondary to the benefits offered in terms of speed, agility and connectedness.

3 | WORKING LIFE


Overall, more than one-third (39 per cent) of managers are considering leaving their organisation in the near future. This increases to 47 per cent of managers in the public sector. Least likely to be considering a move are those working for not-for-profit organisations (35 per cent). When we look at the results by seniority, exactly half (50 per cent) of all junior managers say they intend to leave their organisation in the near future, followed by middle managers (45 per cent).The most frequently cited reasons behind this intention to leave are lack of promotion prospects (47 per cent) and poor management (46 per cent) which mirror those identified in last year’s Management Agenda. What managers are really asking themselves when thinking about whether to stay or go is ‘What are my chances of getting promoted?’ and ‘How good do I think my manager is?’ It is interesting to note also that the lack of opportunity to make a difference and lack of appreciation are the next two most common reasons for leaving (38 and 37 per cent of managers cite these respectively). Both have featured elsewhere in this report as key sources of motivation for managers.

One aspect of poor management, named by 46 per cent of managers as a reason for holding an intention to leave is a lack of focus on development. More than one-third (36 per cent) of managers report a lack of opportunity to broaden their skills as a reason for thinking about leaving their current organisation. Elsewhere in this report, we have noted HR’s views on the apparent lack of capability of managers to create a learning culture that supports the development of employees (more than one half of HR managers cited this as a gap in leadership capability in their organisation). This view is supported by operational managers themselves with one in five reporting that

their line manager ‘never’ discusses their training and development needs. Roughly one-third (30 per cent) do so only once per year. And around one in two (55 per cent) ‘never’ or ‘rarely’ receive any coaching from their line manager. It seems, then, that line managers could be doing a great deal more to support the development of those they work with and, perhaps, ultimately retain talent.

It is interesting to note, given the current debate around productivity in the UK, that nearly two-thirds (61 per cent) of managers report that the skills they have are higher than required to do their present job. In the jargon, they might be considered to be under-employed. The data we have is clearly self-report data and so whatever our managers’ views on their own skills levels, there is always the possibility that their line managers do not feel the same way. That caveat aside, it would appear on our evidence that organisations may have more capability at their disposal than they are managing to make effective use of.

3 | WORKING LIFE


One-third of junior managers rate their motivation at work as ‘low’

How would you assess your current level of motivation at work?

Level of Motivation Board director (%) Other director/senior manager (%) Middle manager (%) Junior manager (%) Employee in a non-managerial

role (%)

High 64 41 26 20 25

Medium 29 47 54 49 55

Low 7 12 20 32 20

Base size (n) 73 363 326 41 130

As might be expected, the majority of managers rate their motivation at work as neither high nor low, but somewhere in between� Feelings of motivation are no doubt in flux daily� It is nonetheless concerning that one-third of senior managers rate their motivation at work as low�

3 | WORKING LIFE


What motivates most is the opportunity to make a difference

What motivates you at work?

The opportunity to make a difference 85%

Autonomy and the freedom to decide on how work is done 76%

Good leadership 71%

Recognition by others 68%

Respectful and friendly colleagues 65%

The opportunity to develop new skills 60%

Sense of belonging 54%

Financial rewards 41%

Base size (n) 805

Note: Percentages may add up to more than 100 per cent as respondents could select multiple responses.

3 | WORKING LIFE


Managers consistent in what motivates them most – apart from junior

managers

Junior Manager

Respectful and friendly colleagues

(78%)

Recognition from others

(71%)

1 3

Good leadership

(71%)

2

Base size (n) = 41

3Opportunity to make a

di�erence

(86%)

Good leadership

(69%)

1

Autonomy and freedom to decide how work is done

(76%)

2

Base size (n) = 325

Middle Manager

Opportunity to make a di�erence

(88%)

Good leadership

(74%)

1 3


(76%)

2

Base size (n) = 366

Other Director/Senior Manager

Opportunity to make a di�erence

(84%)

Recognition from others

(60%)

1 3


(81%)

2

Base size (n) = 73

Board Director

3 | WORKING LIFE


One quarter of managers say their line manager is not effective at praising

work done

How effective is your line manager at��?:

65%

Treating people fairly

Fairness

E ective

Giving praise and recognition for work done

Status75%

Ine ective

25%

E ective

Setting clear expectations

Certainty

Ine ective

35%

E ective

Empowering you to make decisions

Autonomy

Ine ective

Connecting with you on a personal and emotional level

Relatedness

Ine ective

30%

81% 19%

E ective

81%

Ine ective

19%

E ective

70%

Base size (n) = 957

The SCARF model of motivation proposes five domains of experience which activate strong ‘threats’ and ‘rewards’ in the brain, namely: Status (sense of importance relative to others), Certainty (one’s need for clarity), Autonomy (sense of control over events), Relatedness (sense of connectedness and security with another person), and Fairness ( just and non-biased exchange between people)� It seems that one quarter of managers are not effective, in the eyes of those they manage, at giving praise and recognition for work done, a key source of motivation especially for junior managers� The ability to set clear expectations, arguably a basic requirement of effective leadership, scores least well across the five dimensions�

3 | WORKING LIFE


Nearly two-fifths of junior managers say their line manager is ineffective at

empowering them to make decisions

How effective is your line manager at��?

Giving praise and recognition for work

done

Setting clear expectations

Empowering you to make decisions

Treating people fairly

Connecting with you on a personal level

Base size (n)

Effective (%)

Ineffective (%)

Effective (%)

Ineffective (%)

Effective (%)

Ineffective (%)

Effective (%)

Ineffective (%)

Effective (%)

Ineffective (%)

Board director 77 23 70 30 90 10 84 16 79 21 69

Other director/senior manager

74 26 67 33 83 17 85 15 69 31 372

Middle manager 75 25 64 36 79 21 78 22 69 31 336

Junior manager 73 27 59 41 63 37 73 27 73 27 41

Employee in a non-managerial role

85 15 76 24 82 18 88 12 81 19 130

Note: Percentages for each dimension may not add up to 100 as respondents could answer ‘neither effective nor ineffective’.

Autonomy and the opportunity to make a difference are the two most commonly cited sources of motivation at work� At the same time, nearly two-fifths of junior managers and one-fifth of middle and senior managers do not feel their line manager is effective at empowering them to make decisions�

3 | WORKING LIFE


Nearly one in two managers report increasing levels of stress, rising to nearly

two-thirds of junior managers

Has the level of workplace stress you experience increased, decreased or stayed the same over the last six months?

Increased (%) Stayed the same (%) Decreased (%) Base size (n)

Board director 36 53 11 72

Other director/senior manager 39 54 7 367

Middle manager 49 43 8 325

Junior manager 59 34 7 41

Overall (managers) 46 46 8 805

Employees in a non-managerial role 45 42 13 130

The majority of middle and senior managers report that stress at work has decreased or stayed the same� But for junior managers it’s a different story - 59 per cent say that their stress levels have increased�

3 | WORKING LIFE


Perceptions of workload may help explain increased stress levels; feelings

of job insecurity and lack of fair reward are also evident for the majority of

junior managers

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements��?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Board Director (n=69) Other Director/senior manager (n=372) Middle manager (n=336) Junior manager (n=41)

I am fairly rewarded for the work I do (% Agree) I never seem to have enough time to get work done (% Agree)

I worry a lot about work outside of work hours (% Agree) I feel my job is secure in this workplace (% Agree)

The majority of managers at all levels report never having enough time to get their work done. Nearly one in two at all levels also report that they worry about work a lot outside of work hours. It seems that workload may be contributing to perceived levels of stress. For junior managers, workload is only part of the picture, with feelings about job insecurity and not being rewarded fairly also seemingly playing a role.

3 | WORKING LIFE


Perceptions of lack of control, particularly over the pace of work, may also be

contributing to stress levels

Percentage of managers reporting that they have a high level of control over��

What work is done (%)

How work is done (%)

The quality standard to which work is done (%)

The pace at which work is

done (%)

Base size (n)

Board director 69 75 78 48 72


52 70 73 42 367

Middle manager 41 61 67 36 325

Junior manager 17 34 44 17 41


32 48 59 36 130

Karasek’s job demands and control model of occupational stress argues that high job demands allied with low levels of control can risk creating psychological strain and physical illness. Whilst the majority of managers at all levels report feeling that they never have enough time to get work done, less than one in two managers at all levels report a high level of control over the pace at which work is done. It appears that the increased levels of stress may be, in part, related to this condition of having too much work and too little control. This may especially be the case for junior managers who report considerably less control over a number of features of work than their more senior colleagues.

3 | WORKING LIFE


Despite worrying about work outside of hours, the majority of managers

report a satisfactory work-life balance

Percentage of managers agreeing that they worry a lot about work outside of hours

Percentage of managers reporting they have a satisfactory work-life balance

Board Director

Other Director/ Senior Manager

Middle Manager

Junior Manager

45%

44%

42%

51%

Base size (n) = 72

Base size (n) = 367

Base size (n) = 325

Base size (n) = 41

Board Director

Other Director/ Senior Manager

Middle Manager

Junior Manager

63%

66%

69%

53%

Base size (n) = 72

Base size (n) = 367

Base size (n) = 325

Base size (n) = 41

3 | WORKING LIFE


The majority of managers say that technology is blurring the

boundaries between work and home life

To what extent would you agree with the statement ‘social media and mobile technology has blurred the boundary between my work and home life’?

Agree (%) Neither agree nor disagree (%) Disagree (%) Base (n)

Board director 77 12 11 73

Other director/senior manager 62 17 22 368

Middle manager 51 20 29 324

Junior manager 65 15 20 41

Overall (managers) 64 16 21 806

Employees in a non-managerial role 49 14 37 131

On balance the impact of technology is seen as positive, most notably for directors and senior managers (36 per cent).

3 | WORKING LIFE


Managers in the public sector are more likely to report intending to leave

their organisation in the near future

NOYES NOYES NOYES NOYES NOYES

Production and manufacturingBase size (n) = 87

Private servicesBase size (n) = 359

Public sectorBase size (n) = 239

Not-for-profit sector

Base size (n) = 119Overall

Base size (n) = 804

39%

61%

36%

64%

46%

54%

35%

65%

39%

61%

Are you considering leaving your organisation in the near future?

3 | WORKING LIFE


Lack of promotion prospects, poor leadership and lack of opportunity to

make a difference are the main reasons for looking to leave

Why are you considering leaving your current organisation?

Base size (n) = 337


Lack of challenge

Long hours

Poor management

Incompatible ethical aims

Poor relationship(feeling that I do

not belong)

Insu�cient financial rewards

Lack of opportunity to broaden skills

Lack of opportunity to

make a di�erence

Lack of responsibilityLack of

control over work

Lack of appreciation

Lack of promotion prospects

36%46%

47%38% 37% 37% 34% 23% 21%

18%

12%17%

3 | WORKING LIFE


Reasons for intending to leave vary by industrial sector

Top three reasons for intending to leave by sector

Note: Some of the above differences should be interpreted with caution due to small sample sizes.

Lack of promotion prospects (53%)Poor management (44%)Lack of opportunity to make a di�erence (37%)

Lack of promotion prospects (55%)Lack of appreciation (49%) Lack of opportunity to broaden skills 49%

Poor management (52%)Lack of opportunity to make a di�erence (44%)Lack of promotion prospects (43%)

Poor management (42%)Insu�cient financial rewards (44%)Lack of promotion prospects (39%)

Production and Manufacturing Base size (n) = 33Services (Private sector) Base size (n) = 124Public sector Base size (n) = 108Not-for-profit sector Base size (n) = 36

Prod

uctio

n an

d manufacturing

Services (Private

sec

tor)

Public

sector

Not-for-profit sector

3 | WORKING LIFE


One-third of managers report that their line manager only discusses

development needs with them once a year or less often

How often does you line manager discuss your training and development needs?

Base (n) = 814

In chapter 2, we reported that more than half of HR managers said that they felt leaders in their organisation lacked the capability to develop a learning culture� This appears to be borne out by the finding that one-third of managers discuss the development needs of their staff only once a year or less frequently than that� This is irrespective of whether they work in HR or not�

18%

30%

25%

12%

16%

Never

Once every year

Once every six months

Once every three months

More frequently than once every threemonths

Base size (n) = 814

3 | WORKING LIFE


More than half managers ‘never’ or ‘rarely’ receive coaching from their line

manager

How often do you receive coaching from your line manager?

Would you have benefited from coaching earlier in your career?

More than one in two managers reported ‘rarely’ or ‘never’ receiving any coaching from their line manager� This was true irrespective of whether they worked in HR or not� Of those managers who had received coaching of one form or another during their career, the vast majority felt it would have been helpful earlier in their career� Whilst this claim is impossible to prove, it is clear that there is an appetite for development amongst managers that may not be currently met by their line managers and the organisations they work for�

OFT

EN

SOMETIMES RARELY N

EVER

16%

32% 30%

16%

22%

Base size n= 816

84% 7% 9%

Base size n= 645

3 | WORKING LIFE


Nearly two-thirds of managers report feeling under-employed

How well do the work skills you personally have match the skills you need to do your present job? My own skills are…

Much higher (%)

A bit higher (%)

About the same (%)

Lower (%)

Much lower (%) Base (n)

Board director 20 28 42 10 0 74


18 43 35 4 0 371

Middle manager 20 43 31 6 0 335

Junior manager 20 49 29 2 0 41

Overall (managers) 19 42 34 5 0 821


24 43 29 4 0 136

61 per cent of the managers reported that their skills are a bit higher or much higher than the skills they need to do their present job� In effect, they would be considered to be ‘under-employed’� Whilst it may be true that our data is based on self-assessment, the potential relevance of this is twofold� On the one hand, the UK has a productivity problem and part of that is not making the most effective use of the skills that are available� On the other hand, if managers believe they do not have the opportunity to use their skills and develop, they may either become demotivated or look to leave their organisation for pastures new�

Those in more junior roles are marginally more likely to feel their skills are under-used� That said, the proportion of employees, save for board directors, feeling their skills levels are above that required is roughly two-thirds across levels of seniority�

4 | HR


4. HR

HR

4 | HR


HR managers are divided regarding how innovative their function is. Just over half believe their function is innovative, although those in the not-for-profit sector are more positive (66 per cent report HR is innovative) and those in the public sector more negative (44 per cent report HR is innovative). HR also tends to be more innovative in SMEs, which have the potential to be more flexible.

Most HR managers anticipate that innovations in HR’s approach to service delivery over the next few years will involve greater use of technology; most commonly to enable managers and employees to be more self-sufficient (and consequently release HR resources for higher value activities), but also to enhance services and communications and manage dispersed workforces. Last year’s Management Agenda found that just one quarter of HR managers felt confident at exploiting

technology to enhance HR and business performance. Developing competence in this area is likely to become increasingly important.

More than two-thirds of HR managers report their organisation has implemented the HR Business Partner model, although it is more common in the public sector (80 per cent) and less common in SMEs (23 per cent). The majority (79 per cent) believe that the model has been successful. The Business Partner model is most commonly seen to be effective at increasing HR’s business focus and increasing the value of HR to the business (particularly in production and manufacturing and not-for-profit organisations). HR managers are more divided regarding how successful the HR Business Partner model has been at reducing HR operating costs.

According to HR managers, the most common challenge to successful implementation of the model has been transactional work overwhelming business partners, followed by boundary issues and a lack of requisite skills within HR to deliver the model. Our findings suggest that many HR functions are planning to release resources for more strategic and value added work through the use of technology. There is a danger that HR’s credibility as a strategic partner will be undermined if plans are made to adopt a Business Partner model without adequate resources in place.

Summary

4 | HR


Half of HR managers believe their function is innovative

How innovative is your HR function?

4%

48%

43%

4%

Very innovative

Innovative

Not innovative

Not innovative at all

Base size n = 603

Overall, just under half of HR managers believe their function is not innovative� Those in the not-for-profit sector are more positive while HR managers in the public sector are most likely to report their function is not innovative�

Size of organisation also has an impact on innovation� 70 per cent of HR managers in SMEs report their function is innovative compared with just 49 per cent of their counterparts in larger organisations� This is likely to reflect the greater flexibility of smaller organisations�

4 | HR


HR managers in the public sector are least positive about the HR function’s

ability to innovate

47%

NOTINNOVATIVE

53%

INNOVATIVE

Private Sector

Base size n = 359

56%

NOTINNOVATIVE

44%

INNOVATIVE

Public Sector

Base size n = 161

34%

NOTINNOVATIVE

66%

INNOVATIVE

Not-for-Profit Sector

Base size n = 83

4 | HR


Most plan to innovate through greater use of technology

How, if at all, will your HR function innovate in its service delivery approach in the next three years?

Move away from transactional services to free up time and develop capability for a more strategic role

Using technology to enhance services and communications (including to manage and meet the needs of dispersed workforces)

Upskilling managers to be more self-su�cient

Encourage employees to take responsibility for their own L&D

Greater use of technologies for improved analytics

Outsourcing

Building HR capability to become more strategic

Greater use of technologies to automate processes, simplify processes and enable self-service delivery

Using on-line and new technologies (such as gamification) for L&D

Using webinars for meetings and updates

On-line onboarding

Leveraging the benefits of social media to enhance communications

4 | HR


More than two-thirds of HR managers report their organisation has

implemented the HR Business Partner (HRBP) model and most say it has

been successful

80% of organisations have implemented the HR Business Partner modelBase size (n) = 164

73% of HR managers report it has been successfulBase size (n) = 130

Public sector



Private services



Production and manufacturing



Not-for-Profit sector

Overall, 69 per cent of HR managers report their organisation has implemented the HR Business Partner model, although it is more common in the Public sector (80 per cent) and less common in SMEs (23 per cent)�

Most HR managers in organisations where the model has been implemented feel it has been successful (79 per cent)� Success varies, however, across sectors� Over a quarter of HR managers in the public sector and over a fifth in private services feel the model has not been successful in their organisation compared with just 9 per cent of HR managers in production and manufacturing�

4 | HR


Four-fifths believe the Business Partner model has increased HR’s business

focus and three-quarters that it has increased the value of HR to the

business

How successful has this model been at…�?

Note: Only HR managers that had implemented the HRBP model answered this question.

Increasing HR’s business focus

Increasing the value of HR to the business

Reducing HR operating costs

All sectors 81%

Public sector 77%

Private Services 80%

Production and manufacturing 87%

Not-for-profit 87%

All sectors 76%

Public sector 71%



Not-for-profit 87%

All sectors 50%

Public sector 54%



Not-for-profit 46%

All sectors (n = 418)

Public sector (n = 127)

Private Services (n = 193)

Production and manufacturing (n = 46)

Not-for-profit (n = 52)

The Business Partner model is most commonly seen to be effective at increasing HR’s business focus and increasing the value of HR to the business� HR managers in production and manufacturing and not-for-profit organisations are most likely to report the business model has been successful in these areas�

HR managers are more divided regarding how successful the HR Business Partner model has been at reducing HR operating costs�

4 | HR


Too much transactional work, boundary issues and lack of requisite skills

within HR are common impediments to the success of the Business Partner

model

What have been the main challenges in implementing the (HRBP) model?

Just one-fifth of HR managers in organisations that have implemented the HR Business Partner model report it hasn’t been successful� The main challenges they report are business partners being overwhelmed by transactional work, boundary issues and lack of the requisite skills within HR to deliver the model�

Business partners overwhelmed by transactional work

70%

Boundary issues between business partners, centres of expertise

63%

Business partners overwhelmed by initiatives from the Centre

36%

Lack of buy-in beyond HR

45%

Lack of requisite skills within HR to deliver the model61%

Base size (n) = 89

4 | HR


5 | APPENDICES


5. Appendices

APPENDICES

5 | APPENDICES


Appendix 1 - Respondent profile

This year’s Management Agenda is based on the responses of 1109 managers and non-managers from organisations of a range of sectors and sizes. The characteristics of the individuals who completed the survey and the type of organisation they work for are presented here.

Respondent characteristics

Figure 1 shows the profile of survey respondents by level of seniority. Figure 2 shows the profile of survey respondents by age group.

Figure 1 Figure 2

8%

39%

36%

4%

13%

Respondent profile by role level

Board Director Other Director/Senior Manager

Middle Manager Junior Manager

Non-managerial staff

Base size (n) = 1068

3%8%

12%

39%

31%

6%

1%

Respondent profile by age group

20-29 30-34 35-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+


5 | APPENDICES


59 per cent of respondents were female, with 41 per cent male. Figure 3 below shows a breakdown of respondents by seniority within each gender.

Figure 3

71 per cent of the managers responded to the survey worked in a role dedicated to people management and development (e.g. HR generalist or specialist, OD, L&D, Talent and etc). The majority of these people were female (62 per cent were female, 38 per cent were male).

5 | APPENDICES


Respondent Organisation Characteristics

Respondents to the survey worked for a range of organisations of different sizes and sectors. Figures 4 and 5 show breakdowns of respondents’ organisations by employee size and broad industrial sector. Table 1 (overleaf) shows a more detailed breakdown by industrial sector.

Figure 4 Figure 5

8%

3%

7%

16%

30%

35%

Respondent profile by organisation size

Up to 50 51 – 100 101 - 250 251 – 1,000 1,001 – 5,000 5,001 +


12%

46%

29%

14%

Respondent profile by organisation sector

Production and Manufacturing (n=127) Private Services (n=504)

Public Sector (n=317) Not for Profit (n=156)


5 | APPENDICES


Sector Percentage Number

Production and Manufacturing 12 127

Chemical industry 5 6

Construction 10 12

Electronics 5 6

Energy 7 9

Engineering 21 26

Food and beverage 14 17

Metal casting 1 2

Plastics 2 2

Telecommunications 1 1

Textiles 1 1

Aerospace/Defence 6 7

Other 30 37

Private Services 46 504

Energy/Water 6 32

Private Health Services 3 16

Financial Services 21 106

Catering/Leisure 5 23

Retail/Wholesale 10 49

IT 5 27

Telecommunications 3 16

Legal Services 3 16

Private Education 1 6

Consultancy 13 66

Distribution/Transport 6 31

Media/Publishing 3 16

Sector Percentage Number

Private Services (continued)

Pharmaceuticals 1 7

Other 17 85

Public Sector 29 317

Central Government 17 25

Local Government 27 84

Non-departmental public body 10 30

Public Education 16 49

National Health Service 18 57

Housing 1 3

Other 12 36

Not-for-profit 14 156

Community support 2 3

Education 14 21

Environmental 3 4

Health and social care 19 29

Housing association 23 36

Human rights 1 2

International development/humanitarian assistance 10 15

Professional association 5 7

Religious charity 1 1

Social enterprise 2 3

Other 22 34

Table 1

5 | APPENDICES


Appendix 2 - How we designed and conducted the research

The Management Agenda survey is now in its 19th year and is updated annually through a consultation exercise conducted with Roffey Park consultants.

Each year we retain some of the questions from previous surveys for comparison purposes and replace the rest with new questions. This year’s survey consisted of 57 multiple choice, closed and open ended questions in three sections. First, there was a section about HR issues and challenges which only HR professionals could answer. Second, a section about leadership challenges and culture that could be answered by both HR and non-HR managers. Third, a section about working life, ethics and values that all the respondents could answer.

In addition to managers, non-managerial staff were also able to answer the questions about coaching and culture in section two and all the questions in section three of the survey. This provided some insight into non-managers’ views on some of the issues as well as managers and allowed us to compare the results between managers and non-managers.

In addition to the responses collected from the survey we undertook 17 in-depth qualitative interviews with managers to explore some of the answers given in more detail. Interviews covered a variety of topics covered in the survey including people challenges, leadership challenges, ethics, values, innovation, working life and

technology. Interviews were conducted with both HR and non-HR managers from different levels of seniority. The managers interviewed worked in a range of different organisations, of different sizes and sectors.

An online version of the survey was produced and the survey was live from 10 September 2015 until 26 October 2015. An email invitation with a link to the survey was sent to a list of previous Management Agenda respondents and an external data base of UK managers and non-managers. A link to the survey was also available on Roffey Park’s website and E-News. The incentive for completing the survey was a free copy of the final report and entry into a free prize draw of an Apple watch.

Related Reading

RESEARCH REPORT

BUILDING RESILIENCE: FIVE KEY CAPABILITIES

Dan Lucy, Meysam Poorkavoos and Arun Thompson

www.roffeypark.com

Building resilience: Five key capabilities £10

Living in a matrix £10

Forthcoming research

Building trusting relationships – the role of anticipation and risk – A collaboration with academics from the University of Chichester, this study explores individuals’ lived experiences of trust through a series of thought-provoking stories and personal reflections.

Psychological flexibility –This research paper will explore the research behind the concept of psychological flexibility, and look at how it can be developed using Acceptance Commitment Training (ACT).

HR Views on the Nine Box Grid – As a follow-up to this year’s research report into the experiences of employees of the Nine Box Grid, this research paper will explore the views of HR practitioners on the Nine Box and ask how successful it is at supporting talent management and succession planning.

Executive coaching – beyond the client’s agenda - How has coaching changed over the last decade? How do coaches manage their responsibility to the client, to their organisation and to the wider world? What is the art of coaching? What does the future look like for executive coaching?

Compassionate Leadership – This research paper will explore what compassionate leadership is and why organisations may need more of it.

Visit www.roffeypark.com/reports for further information

Is the Nine Box Grid all about being in the Top Right? £10

The Expert as Leader£35

An employee perspective on organisational trust during change £10

Innovation, Leadership and Culture £10

ISBN 978-0-907416-15-9 Published February 2016

Roffey Park Institute, Forest Road, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 4TB, United KingdomTel: +44 (0) 1293 851644 Fax: +44 (0) 1293 851565email: [email protected] www.roffeypark.com

Roffey Park Institute Limited is a charity registered with the Charity Commission No. 254591

Now in its 19th year, Roffey Park’s Management Agenda is the definitive barometer of managers’ views on working life. Regularly featured in newspapers and professional journals, the research is widely recognised as one of the most important and reliable indicators of emerging workplace issues in the UK.

Based on the views of 1,000 managers working in organisations from a wide range of sectors and of different sizes, this year’s research report covers everything from manager views on leadership, organisational culture and change, ethics and values and the overall quality of working life. The report presents the views of managers from all levels of seniority and those in both HR and non-HR roles.

This research should appeal to a wide audience, from board members through to HR, OD and managers in the wider business. It should also be of interest to anyone with responsibility for developing effective people management strategies, OD initiatives, and healthy organisations.

research report€¦ · research report the management agenda 2016 dan lucy, meysam poorkavoos,...

Documents