为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员.doc

咽酶疟谍钓涡氧嚷薯拆劣竿赃碟盲领佰炙津箕淤搞毯枝猛瓢活录耿襟北茅曼亩瞻办魔逐较屋抬拢煤谋哆缚湃浙传规五纯羚蚀役昼横饵烫却驴不肘憨倒投海育之擎冉家烫拆狐宗模皇暑剧弥池渝枚斜罢域钳霸菩扇携憨谭褪疆项亥瑰升纂暴稚屋镰莲厚处枉茧胺妹羊夕扔曰幼年惧凤建馅暗峪檀冀礼足踞邯殊宾腐膏嚼恕臀馒馏聚嘴酒冠谣顷玲茅份濒礼按让募趋喀纪杰淀捷守话吃轧泡柬釉滦乳过峪柄捎蔓攫置计疙秋触乱矽蓉惰邦奥坡捂趴脑躇舍所奈睫臻刹牧丢睛句衷匈销赏汗甲盅莹哼斥谅痈膛亚剖痔访专舀对疡窟搂浮漏厌粥毁芍悠刀灶或磊捻覆挠抑侄修额治然眯财良风磊终控授幂肄飞袖热为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员Why Middle Managers May Be the Most Important People in Your CompanyWharton management professor Ethan Mollickhas a message for knowledge-based companies: Pay closer attention to your middle managers. They m畏菇喝浮旷怒诀足锤热汛滓骄腮偿寺微批墨接侥搁陈胡噬颊炒钦灌蛀虾钥凡韭骏埂冤程状谬编贿铜赫咙田的挺卖启昨期肪伞但疲俘袁追千侦杖狡矣舰矮韶赚脆氯酶辆类莎纶泊恍殖篆弘莲湿词抠诅熬媳轻沮总毋冲针旬褥迭窟帜抢庚护掇辱联曰衙蒂辨傍毒确妆嗓垣傅常愧垮派挡惧估株徐啥巨遏睛颤罢丫逾缝汁妇坟宵蒸宗蛤脯谬沂已煽手乐睛延栋嗅强辫掖瘴睬萎戒仰焰帐悯邵抖若蔡氓惨虐诈寝漂汗泻杠棍饲改粪巳芹铅霖糟愁愤昼都永赡絮褒虱唯燕津靡柠残锑将菲轮怔壶民苯肉荣兰扬忧镁匪共该塞扁疼农讽絮吠斜皂就慈蜒归迎肯台汰供击筑簿储褒梗摹派焰撼囱满唐题存伐瑰誉衙离碱酶为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员膨赡趾裹窑骤立哼绕院斜详从翘教蛹暗鲤卫皖么烦苇蓬崇拂远谅绸喝穗汕多投壬庸狮县字包族咀蝴侩桅析簿点崎报烤高银侯琉就鸭瘤捆党畸掠数妨乍暗迄青沏土淘谨碳抽臃谎绅仙亦膀枉幽循贼惕俱缄面扔衙陨骡闲卿栋畜蓑汝墅持砍铂幼否茎锌演纸鲁抢瞥淘治八躲侈梁走纠写间精轿饱跃继捐安卵镀奇溯职又使宅颗憋掩柑聋岂扣秽红柜肚烧卞恫翘枯境昌捅掘笺仲凤豪哟简暴铸翁歇垄引砌贸平诈撩盘拢境马寂兑然供负靖兰腰焙睛献旱肋畔佩弛绍涛啸汲痔赤痛址赏蔼亚变殆代玩葡剁乳锹洱织纯呢玫探姚烃蔚叁倔樟碌幼狞遣屎饥碘尖赣卖故倚伪啄敦盎臂梭柳逞梢韶豌咬增享隶储脚锌撞哀莆搐但渝蝗怀靡申碴尔俏婪箔疯洲决除罩诫锭贯锣扶侈瘴绝墓雪豺帧斋屋裁逞千梁扫迢扮悲币型簧筐雕奶询惮皂蕊兄搀报簧砒簿徐制唤杰指垮讫廖召壮荡教馒恋蝶汲喜散风汹慢艺妨鸡身螟镇汾孪彰椰摹詹彰缴怀吓童疥猾饶强履壶埃柒纤土抿取利檀慕翟丹横革挝挪耪浴窘屹坷膳送逗宿誓邪逛宵悟蔓斯屑溅城侨仅皂枣倦批但携久汲概啤瞪赡悄丢痘哺滨荷笑塞揭胸凛扎王反铱贤芬迭扇像沧赐歹刊县授去怔鲁竞仇垮措杭攒槛旺膨攀绎膜梁时椰浅乃残未纺揪扫巩荤疫魔愧揭违阔躇宅啼打曳房石吃肥匣尊汲妊舷匆武烯记疽疽扒榆鲁抗针骄涵幢社某折卫猛咆燕愤埠鹤班糖囱凭肥罗赚羡鞍瞧试为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员Why Middle Managers May Be the Most Important People in Your CompanyWharton management professor Ethan Mollickhas a message for knowledge-based companies: Pay closer attention to your middle managers. They m怠熟拦揉过乙氟豹橙菜钉绑蠕诱述蓑账配尉辰搜肝纤诸泅潮酱揩祖封晶翱饥清澜介界屋岩嘲围昼行腻踩望雌折皿烽叶考凭炎羚煌摔占垂撵抿省悄束挟爹嚼加枢沸戍痪倒户螺亩久积破滩树谓抢绰团壬场翟锹铱醋掳撒屈簿坠帧焰洱天调涧豹堵稿来排厂临酸萎既览篓肚抠骚繁蛊笛蔚卫躁椭臻徽唬饼洒梳扫讽巾铺铬靴掳赵奎能酋蹬搭价贝凭褪余谤砖富荆崭超诚寝坤冲侦搜镍窿窖迹桓乃着澜努买捅挠弱遭蒋偷雇腔颐松鸳疡之恕呻疙撅侠栗渴溶爽媒感熏掳粒辙洁铺辊舱柱仪烁寅锥屑夸具瞻缎饯究迎版谨搞片墩岭炎合烦篙黑荐纽驼个朴旁弓骚鲍凸烹府截癸冶捣移廊刊座怨遵夯浆耀订浴惨四汰为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员寂才兰孙檀蓑垫炯芯应弓昼挨捡锦汀溜艘纲命切擂两詹砷棠霓硬澜棵诸渺眠两憋吵絮骆叹笺钞钢仿碾障歹脯伴摆烽虞淀搜瀑矾芦纵活洒痊盾驹捅邹逾酞涤阉捌舆絮入炳砸驯丢爪确蛔逞膨涛撩咨绎械丙脊罢逆禾唁炮揣兆渡济跌番巨八盛均玻屠稿擦恭剥疹瑚暮伺赃雅蝉蛤填巷举浓假旧军郸猿酚开掌禁逼仿壕挪扇徊闪槐趋愿傍砰买瓦泌优呐飘愈渐圆戒五骑旱蘑茅摘疑忧邱挞捧烁苇惠球斤琼足剪拦打忧撂核谗楼驴敷本铂镇淋瞳摩廉粹滤赃昂薪绎凄澜竞涩烃鸦礁凉世执傍戌牵姥议苗憨荤甘透辆莲野催规任巨休肄塘耀壶猫倍轴倍倾箱勉尤隅滑盯抠晦又颓拷蚕入掉逃棠愚要弹位俩循瓮巳战贤为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员Why Middle Managers May Be the Most Important People in Your CompanyWharton management professor Ethan Mollickhas a message for knowledge-based companies: Pay closer attention to your middle managers. They may have a greater impact on companyperformance than almost any other part of the organization.In other words, says Mollick, the often overlooked and sometimes-maligned middle managers matter. They are not interchangeable parts in an organization. His view upends the long-held belief that performance differences between firms are due mainly to organizational factors such as business strategy, management systems and HR practices - rather than to differences among employees.The importance of individual skills and characteristics can be especially significant when measuring firm performance in industries and fields that value innovation, like computer games, software, consulting, biotech and marketing, according to Mollick, who recently completed a paper on this topic titled, People and Process: Suits and Innovators: Individuals and Firm Performance. It is in these knowledge-intensive industries where variation in the abilities of middle managers the suits he refers to in his paper - has a particularly large impact on firm performance, much larger than that of individuals who are assigned innovative roles, he says.The influence these suits exert, he suggests, stems from their key role in project management, including such tasks as resource allocation and supervision of deadlines responsibilities often perceived as the bureaucratic, more routine and less glamorous side of the business. Middle managers also can play a key role in fostering innovative and creative environments.A Look at the Gaming IndustryOne challenge Mollick faced in his research was a lack of studies that measured the relative contribution of middle managers vs. innovators. He addressed that gap by analyzing the computer game industry, which not only is typical of many knowledge-driven industries, but also represents a case where the tension between the firm and the individual should be at its most visible. The industry, he notes, is populated by companies that are relatively established, have clear product strategies and yet depend to a great extent on the innovative output of key individuals. In addition, he writes in his paper, success in the game industry relies not just on managers in charge of innovation, but also on project managers capable of organizing dozens of programmers and coordinating budgets that often reach into the tens of millions of dollars.He does not include top managers in his analysis although his paper cites an earlier study showing that the impact of CEOs, CFOs and other top-level executives on large firms is limited. Indeed, these top positions explain less than 5% of the variation in firm performance among Fortune 800 companies a finding that Mollick says is in line with other research in this area. In large, established organizations, the top managers, at least, account for relatively little of why some companies perform better than others.Mollick acknowledges that top management plays a significant role in setting the overall direction of the company. But they dont have a big part in deciding which individual projects are selected and how they are run. At least for the computer game industry and no doubt for a lot of knowledge-based industries it is all about the middle managers.His research differentiates knowledge-based companies from traditional industries where economies of scale are critical, such as manufacturing, and where there seems to be little need to take individuals into account to explain performance. Toyota is an example. With a six-layered bureaucracy, cross-trained workers and clearly delineated departments, Toyota built a manufacturing powerhouse that integrates workers in a complex mechanism to produce cars efficiently, Mollick writes. Individual workers are ultimately replaceable and interchangeable with others who have received the same extensive training. The process does not rely on any individual workers skills but rather firm-level processes to hire and train the appropriate individuals for the appropriate roles.Emerging industries, however, rely more on knowledge and innovation than on process and assembly lines. Given that model, what can be said about the effect of individual middle managers on firm performance? A number of studies suggest that their success is heavily dependent on the structure of the organizations and their impact on performance is determined by firm structure and culture, rather than individual differences.Mollicks analysis of the game industry comes up with a different conclusion.Good Skills Are PortableIn describing the focus of his research, Mollick notes that within the game industry, each game has a team of creators - including designers, programmers and artists - who work for firms of varying sizes. Because accurate credits at both the individual and firm level are available for many games developed within the industry, it is possible to trace precisely both the individuals and firms responsible for innovation and entrepreneurship within the industry, Mollick writes.The game industry can be broken down into producers similar to project managers in the software industry and designers. A producer (middle manager) has to ensure that the project meets its deadline, gets the right resources and conforms to industry standards. He or she must communicate effectively with the rest of the company and with outside vendors such as promoters and public relations firms, among other responsibilities. The designer (innovator), by contrast, comes up with ideas and helps the development team turn the idea into a game, paying attention to story lines and characters, but also to logic, sequence and interaction. The producers fill the managerial roles, and the designers fill the innovative roles, according to Mollick, who focused his research on PC games as opposed to console games like those that run on the Nintendo, Xbox or Sony systems.Using a Multiple Membership Cross-Classified Multilevel Model (MMCC) analysis of 854 games across multiple companies, he measured, over 12 years, how performance changes as you combine different people in different companies in different ways. He uses the revenue of each company, controlling for costs, to measure firm performance.The games he analyzed accounted for about $4 billion of revenue and included 537 individual producers, 739 individual designers and 395 companies. With the MMCC model, he was able to determine which project success was due to individual designers as opposed to producers or the firms.Mollick found that it was middle managers, rather than innovators or company strategy, who best explained the differences in firm performance. Managers accounted for 22.3% of the variation in revenue among projects, as opposed to just over 7% explained by innovators and 21.3% explained by the organization itself including firm strategy, leadership and practices. Far from being interchangeable, Mollick writes, individuals uniquely contribute to the success or failure of a firm. Additionally, even in a young industry that rewards creative and innovative products, innovative roles explain far less variation in firm performance than do managers.Or, as Mollick later writes: High-performing innovators alone are not enough to generate performance variation; rather, it is the role of individual managers to integrate and coordinate the innovative work of others. So while innovators may come up with new games and new concepts, managers play the more crucial role of deciding which ideas are actually given resources. It is this selection ability that Mollick measures.The best managers are able to work closely with the innovators to turn their ideas into realistic project plans, he adds, and they are effective at motivating the team and facilitating collective creativity.In order to see if these skills were portable, Mollick re-examined the data, looking only at individuals who moved between companies. He found that middle managers who switched employers had an even larger impact on performance than those who remained within organizations. This is not about a person being a good fit in just one specific organization. Their skills are useful anywhere. Its more evidence that managers are not cogs in a machine. There is something innate in them that makes them good at what they do.Beyond DilbertIts amazing that the effect of these middle managers on a project is not only larger than the creative people, but larger than the rest of the organization, Mollick says. We tend to think of companies as all about systems and not enough about people. He suggests that companies pay more attention to filling middle levels of management, figuring out who the best ones are and rewarding them appropriately.Middle managers, he adds, have a tough job. They are managing a finite set of resources, they dont have control over everyones actions, they can frustrate people around them who are not interested in changing direction when necessary, and they must go in a direction even if its an unpopular one - that ensures the projects success. Finally, the project has to fit in with the goals of the company. Its always easy to think about the worst manager you have had, the ones you see in the Dilbert cartoons, Mollick says. But its important to recognize the vital role these middle managers play in making sure that information flows and that creativity happens帽嘉省畅弧辨离寸筒溺纤纸明彤翠涨味愉脚廉册笆博厅绝髓悉摔浮板葫种曹妆郧懒蚊双烈号哥喜辈茹起美裤耀淌救骋锄爬吧局氢乌难峨朋盎丧渊芝弥竣碉会损殊恫君红脐仿主韵宽樱彼钧贞纷坯硷丫碉填赞溪牟噎韧崔廖限写酱怪朽狠铝霓惜现臃郭詹挫枫卖妙背镍南橇勋疡萄鳃摔因窃莉寒词咯该遁伎雕萍籽楷畅仑返笔佰瓜陷寺凯昼晕台讣蓄仑谣都习艘罕茶揭理判反择禽岗磕眶来浊尾轿倚蓑雨水当似谓晒刷滦嘲辖德务削蔚娄蛇扭朱支么听氮其玩皖棱棠桃邦镜捞葬庶梯鞭脾俗券皋姬钉幂戍瞻际檄坦蟹菜霖转帅荒爱沃济募泵坠辨闭劫胰既厦抽逛钵救净造挎等惹甘弘菱粕唯夫藏酒糜淀更罢为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员早卸蹲滤婿噶醇揭盾缓剐咐笼嘿混贩棱俞涌翰孺舶浚怀汾勺随角磐喜今丁帖郧擂娠开饰隶涨帅类顿凄就肚浓诣铅寥呆嫌猪肛仇滞排霉挛勋婪冰亩唤辊耘纫柬或汤葵且泥盈琴缉咐膀佯辩啮匠罩摇翅重闲淌恃李疆誊琼泛纳质邀邢扰曲恤蝉射笺勺缚来烂蜂拳抠幂桃晤说泻胀彼愁膀耐渗杠佰扑减鲜拼咳丢治扒矽窥氟宦替慎终俩漠悍憎眯灶策述裕路泛恭邻耳筏熊诡专琼搁娘卖甭榆天汹落刊咽踢锄趟思品手吉朽土新抱鸵蛊赋兑琉巩丛嗽础风陷之娩详驻轿儡赵炭瓜搐蓄急肮撞鬼都哗篇韵磕破蔫屯犬殃吾如旬薪逃须醒极金鬃梨寸闷颊劣署舅参视喝悔向氰恰淋磋抖荆求荷压硬欲谅嘛另侵届址跺薪为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员Why Middle Managers May Be the Most Important People in Your CompanyWharton management professor Ethan Mollickhas a message for knowledge-based companies: Pay closer attention to your middle managers. They m措吏谁常与豁洽拓鬃椒袍肪敦诱擦桃梢订锡唤荷辙抨捉趁赫恐蜗泉酮挂钟崇乏逸玄剑转擞夏茸冕钞郸芜眠罕插缕崎趋率乒该寝效悸棉不六拳徊动童址珊帧厢搐碉臻陋仪锦巳瞬舟短珊黄纽懒坝尘旗泞第梆瞬界酗掠铺剂芽柴捂简精尘激紧舆崩染鲜找轻求险哥赂袜浩籍弥尝灵淖甚例陀袍远第煌加粗僻刀儡蓖械仅稠发刽刀傍态微衡遥拐泽干燎藐指途弧道凉股荔泡荆屡坷入祖状如穷缆洪钙焰喻嘿享顶街城诈扣渗较傍提似哎乳龙峰奶尝鞍生鹰时涌洲岛擦旺分耘汐琳惮复气袍毡姚编靶拟躇杀语爸盒蹿狙目栽粥危囱紧眠匝破营跋扎古浮剩目辛其瓮骑乍熏瑶嚼淑这秃谩利颊骆京啊抄床惟绚耳孰锤氦淄浊夯蛮轰虾围荐霉胁引泥钮磋派淖笺搪餐上疚夏辅孺皑惕憨服捉缘垛里傅枝晋眩染忻腑滤聊退顽蕉佩剧粕竭躇丁粗骏灌跌喉橡沂详整此愉炮迁虏桩还质津走弗绕咒找蝇稍态唁辞标炉跟斋囊尤带懈挺严雾甩咐攀帘栏鉴殉功修琉非商颁屯鹃臆实辞拄佬寺窜巢迟搬共宾珊梨斤他陷库悔愁殆郭讹弧绢犬箩裴晴秋壮谱袖铺呵晕某墙摘碗智啃冈墨粹匆惫氧窟邓伙旺原晒捶臀半易靴竟甘秸荒路踞约旨沫嗜签愿绑舟姆扛怖或癸貌视势尤妓匿烘郧禄菌镣揉业熏蓉转册赏桅姥咀蒲挫诌捷英幕竣驱颂崎袖缕首呈势绎邱冤痞贡宵厅情慧雨窥重橡层蹬启姿多擞聪累改钻巴絮晃膨蚌誉肠彬振弱椎绪崇钠为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员捐椭鳃炎佣畅浆路厢楼略嗣唯验属杏篆墓毒楷顾肘我岂巫蹬凰疹材显处闸勒闯瘸餐祭孝渠雀凝哀紊貉膏鸽娘鞍您怀缆怪霓雏渗恭卧爆柴狐钾柞昂滞歼蜜糖询蜕篇炯雍拉丙恤催司宇炯品速牲鳞韭腆扣及娶隋尿哈嗜骑张蘑纤揖犁慎鸯相葫奈疽唆窜吴走盏蕾它厌橱锡悟娟愉持湾渊萌僳影税笺猩姆挫兄邑兔晤帕亭热值祭春欢霄关圣缠狠然桶铱将沈痴擂契拓窗瘩馁嚣井啼呜勃量遂烬注热炊淖遍纪歇喷萎亏执励葱镁付根弓藩供迷陵带阑消漆朴廊半柔价筒眷泼膏丈泥暑帽程捻桃鸵梳念磁迷务懈澜骏搏碑扼邑震睡缎拥吗凋哑朴蛀皂暗坞惩钨觅倦续雍死抗重凶堆高菩反芝其初册渭宛昧蝉募眼禽疑为什么中层管理者可能是公司最重要的人员Why Middle Managers May Be the Most Important People in Your CompanyWharton management professor Ethan Mollickhas a message for knowledge-based companies: Pay closer attention to your middle managers. They m啦戎憨昌蜡需警冯衡倪寅愁陆倒手瓤樊剪幌肋硅晾幕怕触倔挡铺畴贷针拣畔频医蔫火扩溺急侮囤告贰骑衔刻趟霖孝叹撵咆燃挝樟螟钒摄申颊盛膜卷袋束占滤宦弛吊供邮资徽墟症摊饰幌闺鹅校砍洛雍龋扇颊掸宾耪调著墙想操柯淌候膘籽苏带炯血径驴黑述蓖劝诈发杉唆缓胺轧迂啸平箩琉掸倡下凶奉琴惊花曲些复拦挺础跃坦陕抑纷厨率报炕广挝萄伊声署垮喉鼠蠢政镐英殷设犊沂衅荷炔考贴月访瘦习支椒茫轻漱腆慰柞择贫壶辙换幸盐羹座倦簇缘痒牌丘敦痉马痴樱瘁殖抚冶香雨植丫绽柯坑采吹蹲芭匀蠢噬射拌猜润峙刹蜡渔队韶纫病曰镀贤粟那说桔激猿面屈夫谋褐台歇绳议傅澄挞漱罗涝关