Continued from drymgr-a:

Some Reflections

Against the scene of about 81% of the Unions making losses, over 90% of the village societies (VMPCs) are found to be viable and in profit, according to the progress report of NDDB. It may be worthwhile to examine the paucity of competent managers in the co-operative dairy unions. Why this paucity? There is no reason to believe that India as a nation lacks good managers. Could there be something in the sector, therefore, that repels competent people? How are managers recruited and selected in the sector? Who appoints them? How are the various forms of rewards and recognition effected? Who are the managers accountable to? The answers to these questions might explain the current paucity of competent managers in the industry.

At the VMPC, the stake-holders, namely the farmers themselves, appoint the secretary, who remains accountable to them directly. Who appoints the managers at the Union level? Politicians, who follow the dictates of nepotism and other selfish interests, often interfere with the selection, appointment and promotion of managers in the Unions. There are cases in the sector where managerial positions remained vacant long after selection interviews by experts had been done and appointment letters typed, but not posted! People who get to occupying managerial positions by such machinations often lack the required qualities of a professional manager. How effective would these favourites of politicians be on the job? Even if qualified and competent, who would they be anxious to serve? Who are these managers answerable to?

When personnel practices begin to give short shrift to relevant professional competence, the organisation will gradually--in more ways than one--be rid of professionals worth the salt: Freshers who consider themselves competent would be wary of joining such organisations and those who are already in there on merit would sooner or later quit, physically or psychologically. People who stay physically after their emotional resignation may have a desperate need to keep the job; keeping the job in the context may often involve compromises that engender a "peaceful" co-existence and professional suicide. The social skills of the variety that reportedly prevails in the sector today may very well be the freakish offspring of these "odd couples" operating together. In the process of all this, the manager's selfesteem is likely to sink low. Under the circumstances, the reported perception of, for example, low professional knowledge in the sector is more likely to be a version of obsolescence than a total lack of professional knowledge itself; most of the managers are degree holders, after all. The absence of professional freedom, referred to above, can easily rob the manager of opportunities to apply his knowledge; a prolonged lack of application of knowledge will in turn obliterate the perceived need for further learning and updating of professional knowledge, leading to obsolescence. The net result is penury of effective competence.

Assuming that the revised management training and development programmes are indeed effective, would the upgraded managers be permitted to apply their acquired skills when they return to their organisations? Would they be free from interferences any more than they had been before the programme?

A two-pronged strategy, therefore, appears necessary: One to upgrade the existing managers as already discussed and the other to reorient the elected members of the board. With irrationally low personal stakes (just one share of ten rupees!) and improper orientation, board members tend to play free and aggrandise themselves by hoodwinking their electorate and bulldozing the managers; organisational health and profitability do not seem to be their concerns. There are board members who, for example, propose a number of independent transport contracts and have them sanctioned by pressure tactics, even when one single contract would be more than enough to meet the real need adequately and at a fraction of the cost! Why not increase the stakes of the board members?

When those who are meant to run interferences for the manager turn out to be interferences themselves, what can the manager do? Would it not be in the interests of the co-operatives to alter the bylaws so as to have the professional CEO appointed as CMD? An elected board, with higher stakes and proper orientation, might deem it fit to have a professional manager as its chairman.

Table 1: Perceived Possession of Attributes (% of respondents) ;N= 262 -------------------------------------------------------------------

Attribute ............................... High.. Satis. Inadeq. Low -------------------------------------------------------------------

i. Command of basic facts ................. 8.... 33 .... 33 ... 26

ii. Relevant professional knowledge ....... 4.... 22 .... 28 ... 46

iii.Continuing sensitivity to events ..... 25.... 41 .... 24 ... 10

iv. Analytical, problem-solving,and ...... 18.... 38 .... 27 ... 17 judgement-making skills

v. Social skills and abilities ........... 23.... 45 .... 21 ... 11

vi. Emotional resilience .................. 5.... 29 .... 28 ... 38

vii.Proactivity ........................... 7.... 34 .... 30 ... 29

viii.Creativity........................... 13.... 41 .... 28 ... 18

ix. Mental agility......................... 5.... 26 .... 27 ... 42

x. Balanced learning habits................ 3.... 19 .... 23 ... 55

xi. Self-knowledge......................... 6.... 24 .... 31 ... 39

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2: Results of Cross Tabulations ----------------------------------------------------------------

1. Managers high on problem solving & proactivity : ..... 28.24%

2. Managers high on prob. solving & prof. knowledge: .... 18.32%

3. Managers high on prof. knowledge & proactivity : ..... 15.65%

4. Managers high on all the three attributes : .......... 11.07%

5. Managers high on continuing sensitivity to

events & balanced learning habits : ..................... 17.56%

----------------------------------------------------------------

Table 3: Self-knowledge and Perception of Other Attributes

High
Self-knowledge

%

<-------------------->

Low
Self-knowledge

%

High SK1

T

27

2

F

High SK2

r

7

0

a

High SK3

u

20

17

l

High SK4

e

33

11

s

High SK5

P

40

12

e

High SK6

o

13

1

Po

High SK7

si

20

2

si

High SK8

ti

20

9

ti

High SK9

ve

13

0

ve

High SK10

s

7

1

s

Low SK1

T

27

40

F

Low SK2

r

27

63

a

Low SK3

u

0

18

l

Low SK4

e

13

31

se

Low SK5

N

13

17

N

Low SK6

e

13

51

e

Low SK7

ga

7

50

ga

Low SK8

ti

7

29

ti

Low SK9

ve

7

58

ve

Low SK10

s

33

75

s

Table 4: Correlation Matrix: N = 262 --------------------------------------------------

.....SK1 SK2 SK3 SK4 SK5 SK6 SK7 SK8 SK9 SK10 SK11 --------------------------------------------------

SK1 . -- .47 .44 .42 .38 .34 .39 .48 .42 .41 .35

SK2 ......-- .33 .34 .38 .40 .38 .37 .39 .40 .33

SK3 ..........-- .45 .48 .37 .30 .46 .37 .31 .32

SK4 ..............-- .41 .36 .30 .52 .47 .38 .39

SK5 ..................-- .42 .43 .39 .43 .36 .33

SK6 ......................-- .36 .31 .34 .38 .35

SK7 ..........................-- .32 .49 .53 .42

SK8 ..............................-- .46 .37 .29

SK9 ..................................-- .52 .38

SK10 .....................................-- .42

SK11 .........................................-- _____________________________________________________________________

Note: All values p < 0.001 (two-tailed)

References

Arul, M.J., "Operation Flood and Management Development". Management in Government, Vol. 21, Nos. 1-3, 1989, p.95.

Bennis, W., "Transforming Our Work Ethic: Four Traits of Leadership". Education Network News, Vol. 3, 1984, pp. 1-3.

Chatterjee, A.K. and Acharya, R.M., "Dairy Industry in India: A Profile". Dairy India, 1987.

Katz, R.L., "Skills of an Effective Administrator". Harvard Business Review, Sept-Oct 1974, pp. 90-102.

Mintzberg, H., "The Manager's Job: Folklore and Fact". Harvard Business Review, July-August 1975, pp. 49-61.

Pedler, M., et al., A Manager's Guide to Self-development. U.K.: McGraw-Hill, 1986.

National Dairy Development Board, Report of the EEC-WB Team, October 1991.

National Dairy Development Board, Monthly Progress Report on Operation Flood, March 1992.

*****

Go to another study.