1. Managerial Competencies, Corporate Values and
Integrity: A Meta-Analysis of Literature
Alexander R. Gray BSc., MSc.
Maastricht University Postgraduate
MSc (Hons) International Business, Strategy and Innovation 2014
Abstract. It would seem that defining the word ‘management’ is as difficult in practice as it is in theory, with many differing
descriptions including ‘what managers do’ (Grey, 1999), to Mintzberg’s more technical description of ‘being responsible for
the whole organisation or some part of it’ (2011). Managers make decisions on how best to tackle a task based building on
their experience, their knowledge of their employees, their cultural beliefs and any education they may have on management,
and typically either select to manage through information, people or action (Mintzberg, 2011). Whether a future exists for the
capitalist manager of the 20th century is debatable, with many signs indicating that new concepts such as ‘leadership’, ‘em-
ployee empowerment’ and ‘new capitalism’ will contribute towards the demise of the classical manager, paving the way for
the 21st century ‘leader’. Being a leader differs from being a manager in the ability to empower and properly motivate individ-
uals (Mintzberg, 2011), develop a wider appreciation and understanding of the consequences of business decisions, and the
consequences of unethical actions both on the company, the individual, and the employees within a company (Nonaka &
Takeuchi, 2011) (Jordan, Brown, Trevino, & Finkelstein, 2011) (Smith, Besharov, Wesseks, & Chertok, 2012). The new age of
capitalism also brings with it the ‘shared value’ approach, companies must develop a moral societal standing and make longer-
term decisions that will benefit both sides of a business decision. The very visible impacts of globalisation and growing unrest
in developing countries have served to make companies begin to realise that the smallest of actions can have a profound effect
on markets, society and the wider environment, and provides pressure to innovate and find new ways to ease the infamous
believed trade off between economic gain, social cohesion and environmental protection.
Keywords: Management, Historical Management, Social Management, Information Theory, Enterprise, Reflection, Meta-
Analysis, Managerial Attributes, Philosophy of Interaction
1. Introduction
This paper discusses and analyses management
literature on managerial skills and competencies,
which details the contrasting definitions of the term
‘manager’ and indeed ‘management’ itself, along
with an analysis of the commonplace practices of
management. Secondly, the paper discusses manage-
rial ethics, and assesses the reasons why firms or in-
dividuals may act in unethical/illegal ways, and the
wider implications of ethics on a workforce. Finally,
the paper investigates the possible changes to modern
capitalism that social entrepreneurship and the
‘shared value’ approach may bring, along with its
likely effects on the mentality of 21st century man-
agement. In terms of scientific material, the report
refers to numerous peer-reviewed academic papers
throughout, which have been cited and referenced
fully in the ‘bibliography’ section. Also, reference is
made throughout to Henry Mintzberg’s book ‘Man-
aging’, which was published in 2011. The three
themes that were selected from the course literature
are ‘skills and competencies’, ‘managerial integrity’
and ‘corporate citizenship and shared values’; the
author selected these topics because of their overlap-
ping content, their suitability to the practical example
and his own personal interest.
Practical examples from Mr John Darbyshire of JDC
Ecology accompany the theoretical concepts
throughout the paper. Mr Darbyshire (here forth re-
ferred to as ‘John’) is a 50% shareholder in the busi-
ness, based in Southern Scotland and has been oper-
ating it since 1994. The company deals with as-
sessing the ecological impact of construction and
development, a challenging and varied profession,
which requires knowledge of up-to-date environmen-
tal regulations and the ability to effectively deal and
negotiate with many different clients from multina-
tional corporations to elderly homeowners. John has

2. one full time employee, Mr Christopher Bell CEnv
(here forth referred to as ‘Chris’), who has worked
for the company for ten years and is qualified in plant
based Ecology. Chris assists John in every aspect of
the business and is an important asset. John was vid-
eo interviewed on 20/5/2013 and asked various ques-
tions on his business, his take on management, and
his views on future developments. Whilst his views
are interspersed throughout the report, a full synopsis
of the interview can be found in appendix one.
2. The Concept and Changing Definition of
‘Management
There are many differing accounts of ‘what manage-
ment is’ and ‘what a manager does’ and the task of
quantifying management into a single definition is
one that may prove to be impossible due to manage-
ments varied nature, changing perception and the
rapidly changing image of capitalism.
Christopher Grey (1999) investigates the derivation
of the term ‘manager’, as well as a manager’s role
and its theoretical implications in an attempt to quan-
tify the ‘special’ difference between ‘managers’ and
‘non-managers’ in the hope of a definition. This ‘spe-
cial’ status could be attributed to three separate ap-
proaches to management; the ‘Technical approach’
explains management as an economic necessity.
Managers were able to regulate firms more efficiently
than the open market could through internalising
costs; and thus hierarchies were created. The ‘Politi-
cal approach’ claims that managerial hierarchies be-
gan through the employment of specialised workers
that would supervise and discipline workers; Harry
Braverman (1974) (an former Fordist industrial
worker in 1970s USA), broadens this definition by
adding that the political approach (referred to as the
‘Labor process theory’), constitutes a massive loss in
control from workers to managers, and that managers
can be seen to ‘steal worker skills, along with reduc-
ing employee autonomy and satisfaction’; painting an
extremely negitive political image of management.
Finally, the ‘Elite approach’ describes management
as essentially a self-serving practice that seeks to am-
plify the gap between managers and non-managers;
resulting in a ‘sub-elite’. This view is characterised
by the seperation of those who own a firm - owners,
and those who control it – managers. This managerial
elite then expands through formal and informal net-
works, to the beneficial end of a manager. In sum-
mary of these viewpoints, Grey (1999) then broadly
defines management simply as ‘what managers do’1.
Henry Mintzberg (2011) provides both a macro and
micro view of management by offering the loose de-
scription of management to be a balance between art,
science and craft that is achieved over time through
experience. The ‘manager’ is then defined as the in-
dividual who is responsible for the whole organisa-
tion or some part of it. On a more detailed level,
Mintzberg explains that the description and various
roles of a manager are too large to be encapsulated in
one sentence, and are not adequately justified by ex-
amining the derivation the term ‘manager’ (Grey,
1999); rather, management should be defined by the
roles of a manager, which change based on the task at
hand. To this end, management is to be separately
viewed in three different planes. The ‘Information
Plane’: which involves a manager communicating,
controlling, framing and scheduling, the ‘People
Plane’: which involves leading and linking, and final-
ly the ‘Action Plane’: which involves dealing and
doing. References to this model will be made
throughout the report, and the visual representation
can be found in appendix two.
On this issue, Nonaka & Takeuchi (2011) largely
agree with the more abstract view Mintzberg’s man-
agement; labelling effective management [leadership]
as the achievement of ‘Phronesis’ (Greek: ‘practical
wisdom’ [Aristotle]); the theory that tacit and explicit
knowledge, which when combined with experience,
and guided by morals, will an effective manager
make. Mintzberg (2011) goes someway towards an
agreement with this statement; claiming that human
beings ‘know’ in two different ways – explicitly and
viscerally (tacitly) and reinforces the point of Nonaka
and Takeuchi by claiming that ‘we[managers/people]
function best when these two types of learning rein-
force each other’.
3. The Leader and The Manager
Mintzberg (2011) does initially refer to leaders and
managers as different entities, claiming ‘leaders do
the right thing and cope with change’ (innovate),
while ‘managers do things right, and cope with com-
plexity’ though he quickly concludes that any differ-
ence is conceptual only. Later in the book he claims
the term ‘leader is vastly overused and romanticised,
and that leading should be treated as an essential el-
1
Hinting perhaps, that ‘Management’ is a self-
fulfilling prophecy

3. ement of managing. He discourages its usage and
instead explains that leadership and management
should be seen together as ‘communityship’, further
stating that many companies could use less leadership.
In contrast, Nonaka & Takeuchi (2011) entitle their
article ‘The wise leader’; perhaps implying a differ-
ence between the two; but the article does use the
term ‘manager’ sporadically and does not seemingly
differentiate it from the term ‘leader’; bringing the
reader to the conclusion that what little difference
there is, is indeed, conceptual only.
4. The Irrational Management Image
In Grey’s (1999) assessment of the term ‘manager’,
he questions the difference between managers and
managed from a critical humanist view. He argues
that largely, any task can be seen as managing; man-
aging your own life, or that of your family, or even
managing your own work load. This assessment
seeks to separate the ‘act of managing’ from ‘manag-
ers’, and is extremely effective. Nonaka and
Takeuchi (2011) offer a critical view of managerial
image that is rooted in business ethics, explaining
that the view of ‘leaders’ as ‘knowledgeable’, ‘ethi-
cally responsible’ and ‘trustworthy’ is principally
flawed, and attributed the global recession (2008:
present day) along with the collapse of Lehman
Brothers to poor decisions from leaders. Throughout
his book, Mintzberg (2011) debunks various fallacies
about people’s perception of management, including
the [fallacious] reasons why ‘leaders are romanti-
cised’, and why managers are [falsely] seen to be
‘perched on their hierarchical pedestal’.
5. Skills and Abilities of the 21st
Century Manager
In a broad sense, Mintzberg’s model (that can be
found in appendix 1) nicely sums up the different
roles in management, which can then be broken down
into the different skills a manager must possess
(Mintzberg, 2011). In agreement with John, the man-
ager must use judgement to decide on the best course
of action to take to achieve each certain task; this is
done by deciding on a method (plane) of manage-
ment; possible options might be the information
plane (remain removed from the action), the people
plane (become closer to the action) or the action
plane (take action directly themselves).
5.1 Managing through Information
Managers can choose to use information to encourage
others to take the necessary actions by effectively
communicating and controlling. The manager acts as
the nerve centre of the organisation, collecting and
communicating information (either documented or
un-documented) to various internal heads of depart-
ments or externally to stakeholders, customers (etc.),
thereby acting as the spokesperson for the organisa-
tion. In terms of controlling, which shares great simi-
larity to Grey’s explanation of the Political approach,
the manager must control the performance of his sub-
ordinates through decision-making. Managers dele-
gate, designate decisions, distribute resources, and
impose targets.
5.2 Managing through People
Managers could also choose to directly encourage
their staff to perform, by energising workers through
motivation, support, team building, empowerment
and developing a cultural overlap between the indi-
vidual and the organisation; in other words: managers
mediate their employee’s development. Similar man-
agerial competencies are detailed by Nonaka &
Takeuchi (2011) in the ability of a phronetic manager
to ‘Excersise political power’: wise leaders must ap-
preciate the importance of timing, empathy, and
shrewdness. Leaders must accurately interpret tacit
and non-verbal communication and build rapport
with each individual member of a team, mentally
taking note of their interests, motivations and moral
development. The idea of developing individuals is
built on in the ability to ‘create shared concepts’. Jap-
anese companies try hard to foster a culture where
management staff can learn from eachother and em-
ployee growth is facilitated by scheduling a ‘ba’: a
place where employees with a shared sense of pur-
pose can interact. They can be held in formal places
such as project meetings or study groups or family
sports events or cafes. Employees can feedback to
management and share views, broadening their
knowledge and develop their understanding of their
product; resulting in motivated and informed staff
that are better equipt to operate. Managers must also
effectively link to people and organisations located
outside of the organisation. This is achieved through
networking: or to use another phrase; maintaining
managerial ‘trade routes’, representing the company
at both formal and informal events, transmitting out-
side pressures throughout the unit, exercising politi-
cal influence and strategically controlling the flow of

4. information across firm boundaries (Mintzberg,
2011).
5.3 Managing through Action
Managers may decide that the best way to manage a
scenario is for them to immerse themselves in the
action. This is typical for jobs of large importance,
and can include internally managing projects proac-
tively, handling disturbances reactively, building coa-
litions and mobilising support externally (Mintzberg,
2011). Managers may choose to spearhead a project
themselves either to learn, demonstrate or because
they are worried about results. A manager may
choose to respond to a disturbance themselves to en-
sure that the other party feels valued, as an act of
symbolism, or because the actual culprit is unknown.
Dealing with disturbances quickly and efficiently is
almost as good as preventing them from happening in
the first place. Externally, a manager can manage
through the action plane by building coalitions and
mobilizing support
6.0 The Only Way is Ethics
Firms that are caught participating in unethical be-
haviour can experience damaged firm performance,
loss of access to important resources and can severely
tarnish their reputations (Minshina et al, 2010). Ethi-
cal behaviour is of paramount importance in today’s
business. This is especially applicable to John; who
operates in a somewhat traditional business environ-
ment that has been known to offer vast financial in-
centives for unethical behaviour. The following sec-
tion explores why a firm would choose to act unethi-
cally and explores the possible advantages and disad-
vantages for doing so, as well as exploring the re-
sponsibility of exhibiting moral behaviour that a
manager has to his employees.
6.2 Ethical Impact on Business
Mishina et al (2010) explores the impact that expecta-
tion and pressure has on a manager’s propensity to
act in an unethical manner; the assumption that firms
will only behave unethically to survive is dispelled. A
firm’s relative performance is necessary to consider,
not just absolute performance. Large firms are espe-
cially susceptible to this as they are subject to intense
pressure from stock market analysts, shareholders
and the public and are therefore placed under signifi-
cant pressure to sustain high levels of growth. They
may choose to act unethically to maintain their per-
formance; this is called Loss aversion. A period of
high growth can signal future expectations; sustained
levels of high growth are targeted, although highly
unrealistic. Management teams may therefore view a
prospective period of diminished growth negatively
(despite the fact that it is still growth) due to their
heightened reference points; thus perceived risk of
acting unethically is measured against the conse-
quences of unmet targets. This modification in the
framing of decisions can lead to illegal or unethical
activities to be seen as necessary to maintain growth,
expectations, stock prices and shareholder satisfac-
tion. It is relevant to mention, however, that small
businesses are less susceptible to this. Other theories
that explain unethical behaviour are the House money
effect and Managerial hubris. In a nutshell, Manage-
rial hubris is how managerial perceptions of risk are
altered based on past performance, as they believe
they are simply too intelligent to fail or get caught,
and therefore managers may seek higher pay-out, or
unethical situations. Additionally, the House money
effect explains how managers may perceive recent
profits as ‘house money’ on which they can seek fur-
ther investment, ignoring the classical economic ap-
proach of viewing profits and losses as sunk costs.
6.3 Ethical Leadership
The ethical culture of an organisation is greatly influ-
enced by leaders who set the strategic and ethical
agenda, and positive effects of exhibiting an ethical
culture are seen to cascade to lower level employees
(Jordan el al, 2011). This being said, it is important
for the employees of the business that John displays
ethical qualities, which will be transmitted to them.
Employee perception of ethical leadership is greatly
influenced by the follower’s experiences with the
leader, as well as their own sense of ethics and beliefs.
The theory being that a well developed leader (a
leader that exhibits high levels of genitive moral de-
velopment) will be seen as a more desirable role
model by those employees whose level of moral de-
velopment bears the greatest difference. In other
words, the difference in the moral capabilities of
thinking between the ‘role model’ and the employee
mediates the effectiveness of managerial ethical lead-
ership. The assessment of ethical development can be
measured by an individual’s Cognitive moral devel-
opment, which is open to interpretation from follow-
ers. An individual may exhibit pre-conventional rea-
soning (characterised by a egocentricity, and viewing
rules as threatening), conventional reasoning (who
base decisions around upholding norms of significant

5. others and will seek also seek advice from these
trusted individuals) or post-conventional reasoning
(who go beyond the considerations of significant oth-
ers, and will consider the ‘greater good’ when mak-
ing decisions). It is hinted at in the article that higher
levels of managerial cognitive moral development
can be seen in increased happiness of employees, in
terms of higher autonomy and increased perception
of safety when offering criticism. Additionally, man-
agers can help facilitate the growth of cognitive mor-
al development in some of their subordinates by the
exhibition of more complex moral development. Im-
portantly, there is little chance of the more developed
thinker not being able to express their morals, due to
the fact that individuals who are at a higher level are
capable of comprehending reasoning below their own,
and can tailor their communications to suit, as well as
offering a novel approach when ‘speaking’ their own
moral ‘language’.
7.0 Communitarian Capitalism & Shared Value
The events of September 11th 2001, as well as the
rising oil prices, a world food shortage, a global re-
cession and increasing violence in the Middle East
and Africa. A strong belief follows that it is the job of
global capitalism to deescalate the world’s problems,
and bring society back together (Porter and Kramer,
2011) through the creation of ‘shared value’ through-
out the world (Hart, 2010; Porter and Kramer, 2011).
While the aforementioned can be seen as overly ide-
alistic, incremental changes towards a new era of
capitalism is a theme that is not only extremely topi-
cal, but also heavily mentioned in the literature. Por-
ter and Kramer (2011) go as far as linking the atti-
tudes of capitalist business’ with the major social,
economic and environmental problems in the world;
this twinned with bureaucratic governments that feel
pressurised to balance sustainability and economic
progress through regulations gives a situation that
pits business against society. The infamous ‘Occupy
Wall-Street’ movement that began in November 2011
(and is still alive today in some forms) (Occupy Wall
Street, 2013) bears testament to this and show us one
thing; capitalism is as unpopular as ever.
The answer, it would seem, is both a change in com-
pany mentality and a more considered and thoughtful
approach to management. Shared value, therefore,
can be said to be achieved through the process of
‘Phronesis’.
7.1 A Change in Mentality
A shift towards shared value will require companies
to search for opportunities in places they hadn’t con-
sidered before. Porter and Kramer (2011) say that
equal or greater opportunities loom at the bottom of
the economic pyramid, whether this be domestic or
abroad. To treat the bottom of the economic pyramid
as a place for charity and ‘non-profit’ organisations is
to deal it a significant insult; companies that seek to
better the standard of life in these places whilst mak-
ing profit are the most effective of them all (Porter
and Kramer, 2011).
Porter and Kramer (2011) offer the proverb ‘Compa-
nies can create economic value by creating societal
value’. Nonaka and Takeuchi (2011) hint at the nega-
tive stereotype of capitalism to typically be of west-
ern origin and existence. The ability to intelligently
judge value-adding projects and encourage value-
added management is described as ‘Phronesis’; which
is most often observed in Japan. They attribute this
cultural difference to the ability of Japanese firms to
rely on tacit and explicit knowledge as well as a wid-
er appreciation for the environment in which they
operate.
The move away from the marginalisation of suppliers
is another characteristic of the move towards shared
value economics. Traditionally companies would
exert maximum pressure on suppliers to drive down
costs and increase margins. Now, it is realised that
the substantial transaction costs involved in such a
practice are simply not worth it; instead, it may be
more efficient to invest in the suppliers, to create
added [shared] value across the board.
7.2 A Considered, Refined Management Approach
To turn theory into practice, management staff must
be able to recognise opportunities to create shared
value, and be able to manage the potential conflicts of
interest that may arise from the blurring of the eco-
nomic and societal elements of the business (Smith et
al, 2011) and that have the potential to polarise and
split up the project. Different authors describe this
practice in different ways; Porter and Kramer (2011)
stress the importance of maintaining a capitalist atti-
tude towards societal problems, stating that managers
must look to develop new skills and knowledge such
as a far deeper appreciation of social needs, produc-
tivity and the ability to collaborate across the prof-
it/non-profit boundary. Smith et al (2011) elaborate
on this point by assessing the possible conflict be-
tween society and business. They encourage manag-
ers to seize the paradox that exists as a chance to de-
velop themselves as managers and breed innovation.

6. Accepting the conflict, differentiating and recognis-
ing the differences, and finally integrating the syner-
gies between the two sides together do this. This atti-
tude is also largely present in Nonaka and Takeuchi
(2011) in their explanation of a wise manager exhibit-
ing the ability to ‘Grasp the essence’; being able to
see beyond a difficult situation, contrasting opinions
and controversial decisions and taking action that
best suits business as well as the environment and
also a manager’s ability to exercise political power;
the ability to combine and synthesise everyone’s
knowledge and viewpoints towards a common goal.

7. References
Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and Monopoly
Capital. The degredation of work in the 21st Century.
Monthly review press .
Grey, C. (1999). 'We are all managers now': 'We
always were': On the development and demise of
management. Journal of management studies .
Hart, S. (2010). Capitalism at the crossroads.
Pearson Prentice Hall.
Jordan, J., Brown, M., Trevino, L., & Finkelstein,
S. (2011). Someone to look up to: Executive-follower
ethical reasoning and perceptions of ethical
leadership. Journal of management .
Mintzberg, H. (2011). Managing. San Francisco,
California, USA: Brett-Koehler Publishing.
Mishina, Y., Dykes, B., Block, E., & Pollock, T.
(2010). Why "good" firms do bad things: The effects
of high aspirations, high expectations, and
prominence on the incidence of corporate illegality.
Acadamy of management journal .
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (2011). The wise
leader. Harvard business review .
Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2011). Creating shared
value. Harvard business review .
Smith, W., Besharov, M., Wesseks, A., & Chertok,
M. (2012). A paradoxical leadership model for social
entrepreneurs: Challenges, leadership skills, and
pedagogical toold for managing social and
commercial demands. Acadamy of management
learning & education , 11.