MAP – managerial assessment of proficiency

 

I have been on several extensive management courses in my life. This was one of them and was without doubt the worst experience of the lot. It involved two very intense days, one of which was my birthday, answering questions about videos of work situations and filling out multiple choice. It was undertaken, certainly in the team I was with then, with the fear that, if you didn’t score highly enough, your managerial competency would be seriously questioned and may have consequences. Luckily I scored higher than my then manager, who inadvertently let it slip that she scored lower than all three of us. It goes without saying that the programme was then trashed, but this lady continues in senior management in local government to this day.

I am trying to work out what it was based on that others can derive some learning from. There were 12 managerial competencies. I have put my scores beside each.

Time Management and Prioritising 61%, Setting Goals and Standards 90%, Planning and Scheduling Work 93%, Listening and Organising 58%, Giving Clear information 74%, Getting Unbiased Information 92%, Training, Coaching and Delegating 60%, Appraising People and Performance 88%, Disciplining and Counselling 27%, Identifying and Solving Problems 66%, Making Decisions and Weighing Risk 82% and Thinking Clearly and Analytically 69%.

These were then grouped in to four composites – administration 81%, communication 75%, supervisory 58% and cognitive 72%. Our team composite was 62,64,62,61.

In terms of my lowest score they wrote – ‘you find it difficult to discipline people in a constructive, non-punitive manner. Improvement is possible by mastering the half dozen steps in the discipline process and by applying them in a firm, but fair manner. The morale of all employees can be affected negatively by your failure to take disciplinary action when it is called for’.

My highest score was in planning and scheduling. ‘You have shown real strength in your ability to plan and schedule activities. You are able to reduce the chance of crises at work by managing proactively – setting timetables, arranging for needed resources, and helping others to follow a schedule. You’ve learnt that proper planning prevents problems.’

MAP used Jung’s four patterns of behaviour/ communication styles. We are all a combination of Intuitor (I scored 22), Thinker (25) , Feeler (23) and Sensor (30).

The intuitor is forming global concepts, integrating experience in different ways, looking for meaning in each and constantly searching to know the why behind the what.

The thinker is logical, organised and systematic and enjoys collecting and processing information and giving much attention to detail and precision.

The feeler enjoys dealing with the moods, feelings and emotions of self and others.

The sensor is here-and-now, action-orientated, learn-by-doing who must grab the rock or the frog and hold it to know it’s reality.

On my communication response style I scored empathic 11, critical 7, searching 18 and advising 24.

I am quoting from the booklet now. ‘From the field of transactional analysis we’ve learned that people have three ‘ego states’ that show up in our dealings with others: the parent state (I’m OK, you’re not OK); the child state (I’m not OK, you’re OK); and the adult state (I’m OK, you’re OK). Transactions at work are usually most effective when conducted between persons who are operating in the adult state (mutual trust and respect working towards a win-win outcome). Transactions tend to deteriorate when we lapse into the parent state and treat others as dependent on us or less competent than we are’.

Critical and advising are parent state responses and empathetic and searching adult state responses.

On my theory X (parent-child) I scored 77%. On my theory Y (adult-adult) I scored 96%. ‘If both scores are high it indicates a strong management style responsive to different types of employees/situations.’

My overall composite was 72%. Out of 68,072 managers, senior managers averaged 58%, middle managers 54% (which is what I was then), 1^st line managers 49%.

 

Part of the scoring was the 360 degree appraisal (picture). You can see what my manager thought of me and also what I thought I was good at! When I look at it now I feel sad, not that my manager couldn’t say, ‘oh Hazel! I am so sorry! I got you entirely wrong!’ because that would be unrealistic and potentially untrue, but that she couldn’t say ‘Hazel – you scored very highly. Well done!’ I left the organisation shortly after this so I am uncertain what they actually did with the information.