Page Title

The Evolution of the Concept of the 'Executive' from the 20th Century Manager to the 21st Century Global Leader

August 30, 2007

"Discussion about what makes a good manager/executive/leader and how to develop such archetypes of commandership has been an ongoing debate for millenniums. As early as 400 BC, Socrates noted that management skills were transferable from one setting to another; it is just a matter of understanding the key areas of needs by a given group (Watson, 1869). A glance back through the pages of management history illustrates that many management gurus of the early 20th Century had their beliefs about what constituted the qualities of a top notch manager. Fayol, Follet, Simon, Davis, and many others made important contributions to our understanding of management skills and competencies.

In the early part of the last century, the United States experienced a major transition from a basic agrarian economy to an industrialized society. Technology focused on the mechanization and the production of goods, the business and economic sectors became contributors to critical societal issues (i.e., employee rights, child labor, health/safety in the workplace, taxation of corporate entities and the role of corporation in a society), and improvements in communications and transportation broadened external prospectives from local to national and indeed, international concerns. In the three decades following World War II, large American corporations benefited from the weakened economies of other nations such as Germany and Japan. The years from the early 1970's through 1991 were a period of economic adjustment for the United States and much of Western Europe. Companies in the United States faced an increasingly competitive and rough economic environment laced with technology advancements, government interventions, and many international dynamics (Ferris, Schelenberg, & Zammuto, 1984). During the 1990's, the need to increase speed and responsiveness led to increasing useof virtual teams, new forms of organization, virtual offices, and more adaptive policies and procedures. The dawn of the 21st Century found the United States facing more economic uncertainty and increased government regulation.

Chester Barnard developed the concept of what a manager/executive needed to learn to remain a viable part of the organization and to guide those for which he was responsible. He outlined five key competencies that every executive of 'the future' (as perceived in the early part of the 20th Century) needed to brace themselves with beyond their formal institutional instruction: 1) broad interests and wide imagination and understanding, 2) superior intellectual capacities, 3) an understanding of the field of human relations, 4) an appreciation of the importance of persuasion in human affairs, and 5) an understanding of what constitutes ration al behavior toward the unknown and unknowable (Barnard, 1948).

The McCall and Hollenbeck (2002) empirically based qualitative study conducted interviews wit over 100 global executives stationed throughout the world. Their extensive interviews lead to the following list of competencies: 1) open-minded and flexible in thought and tactics; 2) cultural interest and sensitivity; 3) able to deal with complexity; 4) resilient, resourceful, optimistic and energetic; 5) honest and authentic; 6) possess stable personal life; and 7) value-added technical or business skills. One additional interesting and apparently new facet to the development of the global executive is the importanceof personal responsibility for their career paths.

There are a number of parallels between the way that Barnard described the 20th Century Executive and how today's leaders of the 21st Century depict their roles as articulated by McCall and Hollenbeck. First, broad interest and wide imagination seems to be another way to say open minded and flexible. Second, Barnard spoke of superior intellectual capacities, where the leaders of today reference value-added technical and business skills. Third, perhaps the human relations in Barnard's day were framed in a more domestic backdrop and focused on respecting employee and employer relations. The fourth comparison evolves around personal attitude, both the manager of the 20th Century and the leader of the 21st Century need to understand the importance of persuasion, optimism, and resourcefulness in dealing with others. The fifth and last direct parallel between the authors addresses the need for dealing with ambiguity.

Two common themes run through the two lists. First, both executive images capture the value of and the human relational skills needed to succees. A second commonality that ties the two together is the thought that first-hand experience in the lead role as CEO is still the most helpful step in the development of an executive. It appears that nothing can replace being in the trenches(Heames & Harvey, 2006, p. 29-41)."

Reference: Heames, J.T., & Harvey, M. (2006).The evolution of the concept of the 'executive' from the 20thcentury to the 21st century global leader. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 13, No. 2.

Back to Top >

Created: 2007-07-02, Updated: 2008-12-28