1

An exploratory study of impact of self efficacy on

managerial effectiveness with special reference to

aspiring managers at PG level

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

Dr. Jyoti Sharma Ms. Anjali Patel Ms. Soumi Banerjee Mr. Lokendra Ankaley

Associate Professor Student Student Student

Management MBA (MS) 5 Yrs. MBA (MS) 2 Yrs. MBA (MS) 5 Yrs

International Institute of Professional Studies Devi Ahiliya University

Indore- M.P.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of present research is to study the impact of Self-Efficacy on Managerial Effectiveness with special reference to aspiring managers at PG level.

Self-Efficacy

The concept of self-efficacy lies at the center of psychologist Albert Bandura's social cognitive theory. Bandura's theory emphasizes the role of observational learning, social experience, and reciprocal determinism in the development of personality. According to Bandura, a person's attitudes, abilities, and cognitive skills comprise what is known as the self-system. This system plays a major role in how one perceives situations and how one behaves in response to different situations. Self-efficacy plays an essential part of this self-system. Self-efficacy is person's belief in his own ability that he can be successful in a particular situation. Bandura said that this belief determines how people feel, think and behave (1994-95).

The Role of Self-Efficacy

All people can identify the goals, which they want to achieve, and things they would like to change. But most people think that implementation of these plans is not simple. Bandura found that self-efficacy plays a major role how goals, tasks and challenges can be approached.

People with a strong sense of self-efficacy:

View challenging problems as tasks to be mastered.

Develop deeper interest in the activities in which they participate.

Form a stronger sense of commitment to their interests and activities.

Recover quickly from setbacks and disappointments.

2

People with a weak sense of self-efficacy:

Avoid challenging tasks.

Believe that difficult tasks and situations are beyond their capabilities.

Focus on personal failings and negative outcomes.

Quickly lose confidence in personal abilities (Bandura, 1994).

Self-efficacy begins in early childhood, as children gain experiences and face different situations. Self-efficacy grows continuously throughout the life - as people develop skills and gains understanding (Bandura 1992).

According to Bandura, there are four major sources of self-efficacy:

1. Mastery Experiences: The most effective way of developing a strong sense of efficacy is through mastery experience, Bandura (1994). Performing a task successfully strengthens our sense of self-efficacy. However, failing to adequately deal with a task or challenge can undermine and weaken self-efficacy.

2. Social Modeling: Witnessing other people, successfully completing a task is another important source of self-efficacy. According to Bandura, Seeing people similar to one-self succeed by sustained effort raises observer’s beliefs, that they too possess the capabilities, to succeed in mastering the comparable activities (1994).

3. Social Persuasion: Bandura also asserted that people could be persuaded to belief that they have the skills and capabilities to succeed. Consider a time when someone said something positive and encouraging, that helped one achieve a goal. Getting verbal encouragement from others helps people overcome self-doubt and instead, focus on giving their best effort to the task at hand.

4. Psychological Responses: Our own emotional reactions in challenging situations play important role in self-efficacy, moods, emotional states, physical reactions, and stress levels. It can impact how a person feels about their personal abilities in a particular situation. A person who becomes extremely nervous before speaking in public may develop a weak sense of self-efficacy in these situations. However, Bandura also notes "it is not the sheer intensity of emotional and physical reactions that is important but rather how they are perceived and interpreted" (1994). People can improve their self-efficacy by learning to reduce stress and elevate his own mood.

Managerial Effectiveness

Managerial effectiveness is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. A manager whether he relates to organization, company, department or section, is a person who is responsible for getting things done through others. Getting things done by others in turn reflects efficiency and effectiveness.

Managerial effectiveness is related with managerial functions – planning, organizing, staffing, directing, coordinating and controlling, as every organization operates in a dynamic environment. Managers are expected to develop culture of organization in such a way that along with maximization of productivity and profitability employees get ample of opportunities to get tuned to new environment of the organization accompanied by self and organization development. Managerial Effectiveness also relates to positive approach of improving and increasing higher level of performance and productivity. This is also helpful

3

for group cohesiveness, establishing clear and common goal, observable progress towards goal attainment. Managers having a holistic approach in managerial strategies and interpersonal processes for effective team building enhance problem solving orientation and develop proactive attitude, thus encouraging managerial excellence in most effective manner.

In recent past, the managerial problems have enhanced both in terms of numbers and degree of complexity. The skills and tools available with the organization today have turned out to be ineffective in finding the solutions to the problem, which become chronic over a period of time. Among the number of dimensional aspects of managerial effectiveness the first dimension is concerned with proper interaction between the area of influence and area of concern. Managers must interact with the team and understand the problem, and then move for resolution, hence gaining the confidence of the team.

The competition is presenting ultimate challenge to the new generation managers. The victory will be decided on basis of optimal utilization of experience creativity and honest professionalism. For this purpose, human resource management experts will have to assume new innovative roles for arresting the deteriorating values, building organization’s cultural strength broadening the philosophy of tolerance, sacrifice and showing deep concern for the people.

Every organization, functions within the cultural system of the society in which it is located. Every person has his own cultural background, which shapes his or her behavior pattern, which in turn influences his or her work conduct. Employees in organization have different personalities, values, beliefs, aspirations, needs and attitudes. The challenge before the organization is, to accommodate the diversity of the culture and capacity, to bring modifications in the existing culture. A manager should take care in developing the culture of the organization, in which along with maximization of productivity and profitability, individuals are able to work in accordance to the culture. Diversity, if managed positively, may serve as an important tool which may result in too increase innovation, creativity and strengthen decision making by providing different perspectives of the problems. Every individual aims to grow and develop, irrespective of the culture he/she belongs to, and the effectiveness depends to a great extent upon the emphasis on the development of the function.

People are main asset of the organization and failing to retain the good manpower risks the hazards of stagnating or going out of business in spite of having high goals, ideas physical facilities and best of technology. So it is important for an organization to manage its people in terms of quality of work life, compensation, status and authority. The organization can grow only when employees within the organization are given the opportunity to grow and develop simultaneously.

AIM

To study the impact of Self-efficacy on Managerial-Effectiveness with special reference to aspiring managers at PG level.

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of our research are:

1. To study the level of Self efficacy in aspiring managers. 2. To study the level of Managerial effectiveness in aspiring managers. 3. To study the impact of Self Efficacy on Managerial Effectiveness in aspiring managers.

4

4. To study the impact of Self efficacy on Personal Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness in aspiring managers.

5. To study the impact of Self efficacy on Interpersonal Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness in aspiring managers.

6. To study the impact of Self efficacy on Functional Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness in aspiring managers.

HYPOTHESES:

The hypotheses proposed for this study are mentioned under. The reasoning for setting these hypotheses is the earlier findings in similar researches as mentioned in detail in the Literature Review.

H1: A significant relationship will exist between Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness in aspiring managers.

H2: A significant relationship will exist between Self Efficacy and Personal Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness.

H3: A significant relationship will exist between Self Efficacy and Interpersonal Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness.

H4: A significant relationship will exist between Self Efficacy and Functional Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness.

LITERATURE REVIEW

In the following section the theoretical framework that underlines the rational of the study is presented. The discussion incorporates relevant literature and current research related to Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness.

SELF EFFICACY

One’s beliefs about oneself can act as moderating variables in the stress-strain relationship having the moderating effects of self-esteem on the results of teamwork.

1. Bandura (1986) defined perceived self-efficacy as one’s capability to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances.

2. Bandura (1986, 1989); Simon (2001); Pajares (1996) said that a task will be avoided if people perceive it to be beyond their capabilities; whereas they embark on activities for which they feel competent.

3. Ozer and Bandura (1990) noted that perception of self-efficacy can be heightened through experiences that facilitate a sense of personal control and skill acquisition.

4. Bandura (1992) researched that one’s own beliefs of efficacy as an important determinant of motivation, affect, thought and action.

5. Bandura (1997) perceived self- efficacy refers to beliefs in one’s own capacity to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations.

6. Schwarzer (1999) stated that self-efficacy can make a difference to people’s ways of thinking, feeling and acting. Here he said that people’s high self- efficacy facilitates cognitive and executive processes in multiple contexts, influencing decision making and academic achievement.

5

7. Schwarzer (1999) conceptualized that self-efficacy in general is one’s coping skills that is manifested in a wide range of challenging situations and has a broad and stable nature.

8. Bandura (2006) provided a brief explanation of the role self-efficacy in human functioning: efficacy beliefs influence whether people think optimistically or pessimistically; what courses of action they may pursue; challenges and goals they set and gets committed to; level of effort they put in endeavors and the results they expect to come out due to their efforts; level of stress and depression they experience in coping with taxing environmental demands; and the accomplishments they realize.

MANAGERIAL EFFECTIVENESS

A manager whether he relates to organization, company, department or section, is a person who irresponsible for getting things done through others. Getting things done by others in turn reflects efficiency and effectiveness.

1. Taylor (1911) describes the major function of manager as: planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling.

2. Mayo (1933) also supported that managers have function of by the social context of work and human relations models.

3. Mintzberg (1973) has showed the variety of roles the manager performs at a time in any organization.

4. Herbert (1976) measured managerial effectiveness through the capability of the manager to meet the goals, crucial to organization and achieved through subordinates.

5. Luthans and Lockwood (1984) also defined various roles of management that make any organization successful.

7. Gupta (1996) identified in his research that there are 19 dimensions of managerial effectiveness. This was based on peoples interpersonal relations, beliefs, inspiration, innovation, personal and organizational goals fulfillment, subordinate motivation, management of discipline and conflict.

8. Robertson et al. (2000) affirmed the significance of relation between managerial performance and managerial conscientiousness.

9. Witt et al. (2002) supported that managers’ good at problem solving, focus and observation are the resultant of orderly well organized, reliable and procedural nature of those managers.

10. Rastodi and Dave (2004) research concluded the relation of managerial effectiveness with performance and results. According to them a manager is effective who aptly manages a situation and meets the targets in all organization areas. In short they provided the proof of the linkage between managerial effectiveness and personality type.

11. Hogan and Kaiser (2005) evidenced in literature that personality dimensions play a major role in making any leader effective.

12. Christopher and Minor, (2006) supported the overall performance of people in workplace is affected by interpersonal dimensions.

13. Pomsuwan (2006) explained through his studies that there are 7 critical competencies to increase the effectiveness for the employees, professionals and managers/leaders in future.

14. Govender P, Parmasur S (2010) evaluate the role and competencies that are critical considerations for development of management. S. A. J. Psychol., 36(1).

15. 18. Govender and Parumasur (2010) have proved that manager must possess a vision that must focuses on high performance, market share growth and competitive advantage maintenance.

6

METHODOLOGY

Research

This exploratory research is conducted to find the relationship between Self efficacy and Managerial effectiveness of aspiring managers by a controlled inquiry of non-experimental kind. For the study co-relational and multivariate research as a type of relational research was employed as it allowed to simultaneously determining the degree and direction of relationship between dependent and independent variables. For this research, the researchers have worked on the following multiple regression equation:

Y = a + b1X1 + b2X2

Where X1 and X2 are two independent variables and Y being the dependent variable, and the constants a, b1 and b2

Co-relational research is used to determine the extent to which the independent and dependent variables are related among a single group of people. There is no attempt to manipulate the variables. (Random variables)

Survey

To conduct this research standard questionnaire (of 64 questions) consisting of scales on Self efficacy (35 questions) and Managerial effectiveness (29 questions) was used for collecting the primary data. The respondents were asked to fill some necessary personal information and the questionnaire was further divided into following two parts for assessing:

1. Self-Efficacy scale- Self-efficacy was measured using the original scale developed by Dr. Dhar. This 35-item scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree has a Guttman Split-Half coefficient off 0.740.

Reliability High (0.740)

Validity High (0.86)

2. Managerial Effectiveness scale- Managerial effectiveness was measured using a scale that is a modified version of scale developed by UpinderDhar, SantoshDhar and Preeti Jain.

Reliability High (0.71)

Validity High (0.86)

It was originally a seven point scale converted into 5 point scale for this research. This is 29-item scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. The scale yields the scores for three dimensions based on semantic differential. The dimensions are:

I - Personal Effectiveness: Individual effectiveness of a person leads to personal effectiveness. It arises when the individual himself knows what he wants to do, and then works hard to achieve the same. Items 1, 6, 7, 8, 12 and 13 measure this dimension.

II -Interpersonal Effectiveness: When an individual has good interpersonal relations and can make people work to the best of their ability with the help of available resources to maximize the net output of the organization. Items that measure this dimension are number 2, 3, 4,5,9,10,11, 14,16 and 17.

7

III - Functional Effectiveness: When an individual is able to carry out the overall managerial function effectively like planning, organizing, coordinating and analyzing, it indicates functional effectiveness. Item numbers 15,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28 and 29 measure this dimension.

Operational Definitions

1. Self-efficacy Beliefs- Self-efficacy (SE) refers to an individual's belief to exercise control and manage courses of action required to attain desired results. SE arises from the gradual acquisition of complex cognitive, social, linguistic, and/or physical skills through experience. Efficacious beliefs contribute to effective performance and promote personal wellbeing by encouraging goal setting and commitment, persistent effort, perseverance, resilience, reduction in stress, and depression.

2. Managerial Effectiveness- A manager whether he relates to organization, company, department or section, is a person who irresponsible for getting things done through others. Getting things done by others in turn reflects efficiency and effectiveness; this is Managerial Effectiveness.

DATA COLLECTION METHOD

DATA COLLECTION- In this research study, the tool used for the collection of data was Questionnaires. The questionnaire had questions for both: controlled variables that are the demographic details and the uncontrolled variables that are in related with the variables of this study. For the purpose of this research 320 individuals were approached who were pursuing MBA and other higher programs like MCA, MTech and so on (aspiring managers).Data was collected using questionnaires on paper and online platform. Thus primary data was collected.

The questionnaire is based on a mixture of Nominal Scale and Likert Scale with five response categories ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” which requires the respondents to indicate the degree of agreement or disagreement with each of the statements.

SAMPLING- To make it sure that every item in the population has an equal chance of inclusion in the sample and each one of the possible samples, in case of finite universe, has the same probability of being selected Simple Random Sampling was used for this research project.

Nature of universe- The nature of Universe is homogeneous as it includes all the individuals who are aspiring managers. They might be students or just graduated students. Being homogenous it can easily serve our purpose of this research. The population is finite.

Geographical limits- To make these research widely applicable, geographical limits for this research were not limited to certain city or country as the aim was to collect the heterogeneous data from individual of different backgrounds. So surveys were collected from different countries as well using online network.

Size of Sample- Size of the sample was determined by a keeping in view the nature of universe, number of classes proposed, nature of study and type of sampling. The research was started with a target of 200 as a sample size, but during the research, it was realized that there was an opportunity to increase the sample size to 320 and collect even diverse views. So the sample size was 320.

8

This sample size was optimum, as it was possible to remove certain sampling errors (as there is always a high possibility of occurring of certain errors) by analyzing the survey and removing those entries of survey as certain individuals which was either incomplete, or either causing Skewness in the data to make it smooth and normally distributed. Thus at the end after performing all the required operations we were left with an ideal sample size of 262.

DATA ANALYSIS TOOLS- The results of correlation, regression and t-test were obtained using SPSS (Statistical Packets for Social Sciences) 16.O software. And to obtain tables and graphs both SPSS 16.0 and Micro soft Excel 2010 was used.

FINDINGS

This study was aimed to establish Self Efficacy as determinants of Managerial Effectiveness in Aspiring Managers. Hypotheses were proposed as per construct and relevant data analysis techniques were used to examine these hypotheses.

The findings with supporting tables and graphs are as follows:

Table 1 Mean Values and Standard Deviation

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Managerial Effectiveness Score 110.98 15.546 262

Self-Efficacy Score 133.38 13.632 262

The Mean values determine the average score of that variable of our population.

In our research, the total maximum score for Managerial Effectiveness Scale is 145, and the mean value of Managerial Effectiveness score is 110.98, which is approximately equal to 111. 111 score is approximately 76.55% of 145. Thus the average managerial effectiveness level of our research sample is preferably high.

Similarly the total maximum score for Self Efficacy is 175, and the mean value of Self Efficacy score is 133.38, which is approximately equal to 133. This score of 133 is approximately 76% of 175, and thus average self-efficacy level of our research sample is preferably high.

Chart 1 Graph showing the comparative scores of Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness in aspiring managers.

75.6

75.8

76

76.2

76.4

76.6

Managerial Effectiveness Score Self Efficacy Score

Comparative Score in percentage

9

The Graph above shows that the average score of Managerial Effectiveness and Self Efficacy for the research sample. It can be seen from this graph that the score for Self Efficacy is slightly less than the average score of Managerial Effectiveness or average score of Self Efficacy. But as such the two values of averages of given variables lie in the range of 76% to 76.5% of range as shown in Chart 1. It can be interpreted that there is a consistency in the mean values of both the variables.

Table 2 Correlation between Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness

Managerial Effectiveness Score

Self-Efficacy Score

Pearson Correlation Managerial Effectiveness Score 1.000 .309

Self-Efficacy Score .309 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed) Managerial Effectiveness Score . .000

Self-Efficacy Score .000 .

N Managerial Effectiveness Score 262 262

Self-Efficacy Score 262 262

The relationships between the independent variable Self Efficacy and the dependent variable Managerial Effectiveness are investigated through the calculation of Pearson product-moment coefficient. Results are presented in table 2.

The hypotheses that can be tested by using this result is H1: A significant relationship will exist between Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness in aspiring managers.

These results partly confirm the hypotheses and indicate that- A moderate and significant positive relationship exists between Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness (r=0.309, n=262, ρ =0.000). Results indicate that where respondents report higher levels of Self Efficacy, it is more likely that they will report higher levels of Managerial effectiveness. The interactive graphs to depict the relationship between Self efficacy and Managerial effectiveness are depicted in Chart 3.

Chart 3 Graph showing the relation between Self Efficacy score and Managerial Effectiveness score in aspiring managers

y = 0.3522x + 64.008 R² = 0.0954

0

50

100

150

200

0 50 100 150 200

Ma

na

ge

ria

l E

ffe

cti

ve

ne

ss S

co

re

Self Efficacy Score

Relationship between Self efficacy score and Managerial Effectiveness score

Managerial Effectivenessscore

Linear (ManagerialEffectiveness score)

10

Table 3 Model summary or multiple regressions between Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness.

Model Summaryb

Model R

R Square

Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

Change Statistics

R Square Change

F Change df1 df2

Sig. F Change

1 .407a .165 .159 14.258 .165 25.640 2 259 .000

a. Predictors: (Constant), Self-Efficacy Score

b. Dependent Variable: Managerial Effectiveness Score

Keeping in mind the positive scores of correlation, regression analysis is conducted in this research to gain information on Managerial Effectiveness explained by Self Efficacy.

A multiple linear regression was conducted with Managerial Effectiveness as dependent variable to determine amount of variance explained by Self Efficacy. It was found that combined model of Self Efficacy explained 16.5% of variance in Managerial effectiveness, as the value of R square is 0.165.

Table 4. Multiple regression of Self-efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 58.368 8.764 6.660 .000

Self-Efficacy Score .228 .070 .200 3.255 .001

a. Dependent Variable: Managerial Effectiveness Score

The results are significant for Self Efficacy (β=0.200, ρ=0.001). Thus:

H1: A significant relationship will exist between Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness in aspiring managers: This null hypothesis is accepted.

11

Table 5 Correlation between Self Efficacy, Personal Effectiveness, Interpersonal Effectiveness and Functional Effectiveness dimensions of Managerial Effectiveness.

Correlations

Self-Efficacy Score

Personal Effectiveness

Interpersonal Effectiveness

Functional Effectiveness

Self-Efficacy Score

Pearson Correlation

1 .309** .352** .192**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .002

N 262 262 262 262

Personal Effectiveness

Pearson Correlation

.309** 1 .759** .586**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 262 262 262 262

Interpersonal Effectiveness

Pearson Correlation

.352** .759** 1 .562**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000

N 262 262 262 262

Functional Effectiveness

Pearson Correlation

.192** .586** .562** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .000 .000

N 262 262 262 262

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The relationship between the independent variable Self Efficacy and the dimensions of dependent variable Managerial Effectiveness viz: Personal Effectiveness, Interpersonal Effectiveness and Interpersonal Effectiveness are investigated through the calculation of Pearson product-moment coefficient. Results are presented in table 4.

The hypotheses that can be tested by using these results are:

H2: A significant relationship will exist between Self Efficacy and Personal Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness.

H3: A significant relationship will exist between Self Efficacy and Interpersonal Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness.

12

H4: A significant relationship will exist between Self Efficacy and Functional Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness.

These results obtained from correlation partly confirm these hypotheses and indicate that:

A moderate but significant positive relationship exists between Self Efficacy and Personal Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness (r=0.309, n=262, ρ =0.000);

A moderate but significant positive relationship exists between Self Efficacy and Interpersonal Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness (r=0.352, n=262, ρ =0.000);

A weak but significant positive relationship exists between Self Efficacy and Functional Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness. (r=0.192, n=262, ρ =0.002);

Results indicate that where respondents report higher levels of Self-efficacy it is more likely that they will report higher levels of personal effectiveness, interpersonal effectiveness and moderate levels of functional effectiveness. As the relationship between Self Efficacy scores and Functional Effectiveness Scores (dimension of Managerial Effectiveness) indicates that there are other variables that might be causing impact on Functional Effectiveness. As Functional Effectiveness will be a factor of knowledge, skills, and attitude also experience. The relationship between Self Efficacy and dimensions of Managerial Effectiveness viz: Personal Effectiveness, Interpersonal Effectiveness and Functional Effectiveness are depicted with the help of this graphs: Chart 4, Chart 5 and Chart 6.

Chart 4 Graph showing the relation between Self efficacy Score and Personal Effectiveness Score (dimension of Managerial Effectiveness) in aspiring managers

Chart 5 Graph showing the relation between Self Efficacy Score and Interpersonal Effectiveness Score (dimension of Managerial Effectiveness) in aspiring managers

y = 0.6245x + 26.397 R² = 0.1207

0

200

0 50 100 150 200

Pe

rso

na

l

Eff

ecti

ve

ne

ss

Sco

re

Self Efficacy Score

Relationship between Self efficacy score and Personal Effectiveness

score

Personal EffectivenessScore

Linear (PersonalEffectiveness Score)

y = 0.3645x + 3.286 R² = 0.1083

0

50

100

0 50 100 150 200

Inte

rpe

rso

na

l

Eff

ecti

ve

ne

ss S

co

re

Self Efficacy Score

Relationship between Self efficacy score and Interpersonal Effectiveness

score

Interpersonal EffectivenessScore

Linear (InterpersonalEffectiveness Score)

13

Chart 6 Graph showing the relation between Self efficacy Score and Functional Effectiveness Score (dimension of Managerial Effectiveness) in aspiring managers

Collectively these results of correlation and graphs are significant to prove the relationship between the independent and dependent variables of this study.

Thus further this would help in processing the remaining of the hypothesis.

Chart 7 Graph showing the composite scoring of independent variable Self Efficacy and dependent variable that is Managerial Effectiveness in aspiring managers

The scores above the Mean value were separated from the scores below the mean value for all the three variables: Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness are used to make a pie chart. Then it was found that:

17% of the sample individuals have high levels of all the two variables: Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness.

20% of the sample individuals have low level of all the two variables: Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness.

And 63% individuals have score of two variables: Self Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness lying in the middle region.

y = 0.1852x + 23.622 R² = 0.0415

0

20

40

60

80

0 50 100 150 200Fun

ctio

nal

Eff

ect

ive

ne

ss

Sco

re

Self Efficacy Score

Relationship between Self-efficacy Scores and Functional Effectiveness Score

Functional Effectiveness Score

Linear (Functional EffectivenessScore)

HIGH 17%

LOW 20% NEUTRAL

63%

Total Composite Scores

14

DISCUSSION

This research study tries to find out the influence of Self-efficacy on Managerial-effectiveness in aspiring managers. The research also focuses in measuring the levels of these variables individually, in aspiring managers.

1. Self-Efficacy level in Aspiring Managers- Analyzing the result of self-efficacy reveals that the data is preferable high in its self-efficacy level which in turn implies that young aspiring managers have good level of believe on their capabilities to learn and to perform behavior at designated levels. (Bandura,1986,1997). Thus, it reveals that they have good confidence on themselves about what they can and can’t do across different tasks and situations. The moderate high level of self-efficacy is also evident because the sample was of post-graduate students studying in reputed educational institutes having good academic motivation, learning and achievement (Pajares, 1996, Schunk, 1995). Also another reason of good Self-efficacy level is, due to the influence of Emotional-Intelligence on Self-Efficacy, because more the individuals are emotionally balanced the higher the self-efficacy of the person lies.

2. Managerial Effectiveness level in Aspiring Managers- Examining the results of the Managerial effectiveness shows that the aspiring managers lie in preferable high managerial effectiveness. This shows that they are competent enough to get things done by others. This reflects both their efficiency and effectiveness of their work. It also reveals that they are efficient multi-tasker, since manager has to perform various tasks in various roles at a time. (Mintzlurg, 1973, Quinn, 1990, Luthans and Lockword, 1984)

3. Influence of Self-Efficacy on Managerial Effectiveness- The impact analysis between Self-efficacy and Managerial-effectiveness shows positive relationship. The relationship between these two is significantly moderate, which shows that the people have good level of self-confidence in themselves, that they will be able to learn and accomplish the goals assigned to them, which increases their managerial effectiveness. It has a great influence on how one feels, think, and act. Self-efficacy levels makes people more motivated to take action. People with high Self-efficacy, tend to choose to perform more challenging tasks, set themselves more ambitious goals and perseverance in pursuing these goals. It also tells about influencing career decisions, achievements, job satisfaction and performance. Hackett and Beth (1981); Locke Latham (1990) supports the findings of individual self-efficacy. a. On Personal Effectiveness: The result also shows that, there lies positive relation

between self-efficacy and personal effectiveness. This shows that there lies enough self-assessment among the individual about their ability and skills. It shows that managerial effectiveness increases significantly with increase self efficacy, as shown by research study of Bandura (1986, 1989); Seimon (2001) & Pajares(1996) which said that a task will be taken if people perceive it to be within their capabilities. The results adhere to Bandura’s (1997) words that, its one’s belief in one’s own capacity, to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage situation and motivation generation ( Bandura 1992), which efforts his action. Apart from this, personality factors are also important in increasing the managerial effectiveness (Rastogi and Dave, 2004).

b. On Interpersonal Effectiveness: The relation between interpersonal effectiveness and self efficacy is positive, which lies in moderate level. This indicates that individuals with moderate self-efficacy level have moderate level of self-esteem and think positively about their accomplishments and personal development. This also shows that they have good level of empathy to understand others problems, having moderate level of organizational awareness and service orientation. Thus, they maintain good relationship with others and influence them easily. There are some studies that,

15

reveals that self-efficacy effects conflict management too. This becomes an important implication for organization that if an employee is offered with good self-efficacy, he can manage conflict more functionally and thus increases their effectiveness as a manager too.

c. On Functional Effectiveness: The result shows that there lies though positive but weak correlation between self-efficacy and functional effectiveness. This shows that, though young people who aspires to become managers, are good in team work, collaboration, planning and have good general self-efficacy, which is related to one’s belief in one’s general capacity to perform tasks but, they lack in the specific self-efficacy area, referring to beliefs in one’s ability to perform special tasks. This also reveals that, managers who are of an orderly well organized, reliable and procedural nature are better at problem solving, focusing and observing results. (Witt et al., 2002) Also the behavior they practice also affects the overall performance of people in workplace (Christopher and Minor, 2006). The accurate understanding of the co-workers and making them work also increases the interpersonal interface, a pleasant activity leading to work performance (Law et al., 2004). Also, here the charismatic leadership role is also important to increase the functional effectiveness. When the professionals realize that, they cannot control the results or success in their jobs, there arises a phenomenon of self-efficacy crises (Montalban, Duran and Bravo, 2000) leading to burnout syndrome in organizational settings (Cherniss,1993; Harrison,1983).

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence that confirmed the relationships between: Self-Efficacy and Managerial Effectiveness; in aspiring managers. It was found that Self Efficacy play a vital role in increasing Managerial Effectiveness. It is essential that the individual should be both personally and socially aware, as well as, should know to manage himself well, so that he can create a good ripple effect and provides himself as a role model for his workplace mates to follow. It is essential that he should know to work calmly under pressure else, it can result in stress and burnout. It is also essential that, he is happy with the organization where he is working, since that is essential for better performance.

Therefore, it seems that a focus on development of effective interpersonal relationships and skills combined with training on various aspects of Emotional Intelligence and Self Efficacy would have significant impact on the various levels of perceived effectiveness of managers and their functioning. Further, more training on Emotional Intelligence and Self Efficacy will address aspects such as anger, stress, anxiety, which in turn will have positive impact on both interpersonal and intrapersonal relationships, which provides him the ability to deal with various situations; it will result in less conflict in workplace and home environment.

It is essential that Self Efficacy of aspiring managers, who are currently the students pursuing their post-graduation is given proper attention. This can help in removing psychological barriers, improving decision making capabilities, dealing with the lower level staff of the organization and above all dealing in proper manner with the customers, thus fulfilling the objectives of the organization. They need to develop patience in their profession, since they cannot lose their calm in the work place. They also have to deal with unwanted disturbances and adverse situations, thus they need to regulate their emotions as well as to have control over their behaviors.

Hence, it can be said that it is essential to develop effective Self Efficacy and Emotional Intelligence in future aspiring managers of today, so that they are able to cope with the challenges of their professional and personal life and become effective managers.

16

SCOPE

Whatever things we do devoting full of our efforts, there is always a scope for further improvement. Similarly there is an opportunity for future scope in this research. Some of the scope can be enlisted as:

The same research can be conducted increasing the sample size of the population and more accurate results about the relationship between Self-Efficacy, Emotional- Intelligence and Managerial Effectiveness can be obtained from that.

Due to convenience sampling the data was taken majorly from an educational institute from where the researchers belong, that might have biased the results; as for the future research, a diversified sample from varied educational background may reveal more precise significance of Self Efficacy and Emotional Intelligence on Managerial Effectiveness levels.

This relationship between Self-Efficacy, Emotional-Intelligence and Managerial-Effectiveness can also be studied comparatively on the basis of demographical variables (controlled variables) like- age, gender, education level, experience level, income level and so on.

Researches may be conducted on how the different dimensions of Self Efficacy viz: Self-Awareness, Self-Management, Social- Awareness, and Relationship-Management; and different dimensions of Emotional Intelligence viz: Emotional-Competence, Emotional Maturity and Emotional Sensitivity; impacts on the individual dimensions of the Managerial Effectiveness viz: Personal Effectiveness, Interpersonal Effectiveness and Functional Effectiveness.

As results found on correlation and regression analysis suggest that it would be prudent to include Self-Efficacy and Emotional- Intelligence training in the curriculum of aspiring managers; it is suggested for the future researches to include a pre and post-test for Self-Efficacy, Emotional- Intelligence and Managerial Effectiveness, with inclusion of Self-Efficacy and Emotional- Intelligence training to access their impacts on Managerial Effectiveness by means of an intervention study.

It is seen in the results of this research that Self Efficacy has lesser role to play in Functional Effectiveness dimension of Managerial Effectiveness and similarly Emotional Intelligence has lesser role to play in Personal Effectiveness. Therefore further researchers can be conducted to find out the factors that are causing these two.

LIMITATIONS

First of all, the data in this study was obtained using self-report measures, and the results may be contaminated by the variance of the common method. It would be appropriate to complement these measurements with others obtained with different methods.

A possible limitation of this study was the number of participants. There were only 320 surveys completed. Although the results were quite significant, a larger sample size could have yielded some different results.

The respondents were selected as per the convenience of the researcher, the major disadvantage of Convenience Random Sampling technique is that there is no idea how representative the information collected about the sample is to the population as a whole.

Another limitation of the study is that Co-relational research cannot infer causation of the relationship between the variables. While co-relational studies can suggest that there is a relationship between two variables, they cannot prove that one variable causes a change in another variable. In other words, correlation does not equal causation.

17

Also there is a possibility that individuals have filled the survey in hurry or some of the questions might have been misinterpreted by individuals and this would have resulted in any faults in results.

In this sample the researchers wanted to focus only on aspiring managers. This includes individuals who are into higher studies or those who are working. But there is a majority of surveys filled from students. Thus it’s a limitation of this study.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books:

Research Methodology- Methods and Techniques by C. R. Kothari, New Age

International Publications.

Research Papers:

Ashraf F, Khan M A (2012, February 1). African Journal of Business

Management Vol. 6(4), pp. 1263-1275.

Bandura, A. (1992). Exercise of personal agency though the self-efficacy

mechanism. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.) Self-efficacy: Thought Control of Action.

Berlin: Taylor and Francis.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY:

Freeman.

Bono JE, Foldes HJ, Vinson G, Muros JP (2007). Workplace emotions: The role

of supervision and leadership. J. Appl. Psychol. 92: 1357-1367.

Brittain, J., Leslie, Dalton, Maxine, Ernst, Chris and Deal, Jennifer. (2002),

Managerial Effectiveness in a Global Context. North Carolina . North

Carolina, state in the SE United States.

Campbell, S.J.P., Dunnette, M.D., Lawler, E.E. and Weick, K.E., Jr. (1970),

Managerial Behavior, Performance, and Effectiveness. New York: McGraw Hill.

Chauhan, V S., Dhar, U., and Pathak, R.D. (2005). 'Factorial constitution of

managerial effectiveness: Re-examining an instrument in Indian context'

Journal of Managerial Psychology

Dayal, I. (1984), 'Effective Management: Looking within' Indian Management,

vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 24-5.

Dessler, G. (1994), Human Resource Management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice Hall.

Dhar, U., Dhar, S., and Jain, P. (2000), Manual of Managerial Effectiveness.

Indore: Prestige Institute of Management and Research.

18

Govender P, Parumasur S (2010). Evaluating the roles and competencies that

are critical considerations for management development. South Africa. J. Ind.

Psychol., 36(1).

Gupta, S. (1996), Managerial Effectiveness: Conceptual framework for the

concept in aesthetics and art criticism.

Hunt JG, Hosking DM and Schriesheim CA. Leaders and managers:

International perspective on managerial behavior and leadership. NY:

Pergamon.

Jex , S. M. and Bliese, P.D. (1999). Efficacy beliefs as a moderator of the

impact of work-related stressors: A multilevel study. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 84, 349-361.

Likert, R. (1961), New Patterns of Management. New York: McGraw Hill.

Luthans, F.,and Lockwood, D.L. (1984). Toward an observation system for

measuring leader behavior.

Mintzberg, H (1973). The nature of managerial work. US: HarperCollins.

Pomsuwan S (2006). A study of individual and managerial effectiveness: A

case of employees of the Thai life assurance association. J. Public Private

Manage., 13(1): 35-50.

Quinn, R. (1990). Becoming a master manager: A competency framework.

NY: Wiley.

Rastogi, R.,and Dave, V. (2004). Managerial effectiveness: a function of

personality type and organizational components. Singapore Manage.

Robertson IT, Baron H, Gibbson P, MacIver R, Nyfield G (2000).

Conscientiousness and managerial performance. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol.,

73: 171-180.

Taylor, F. (1911). The principles of scientific management, NY: Harper and

Brothers.

Witt LA, Burke LA, Barrick MR, Mount MK (2002). The interactive effects of

conscientiousness and agreeableness on job performance. J. Appl. Psychol.,

87(1): 164-169.

Yukl, G.A. (1989). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-

Hall.