MICHAEL DEMPSEY - Cranfield University

434
regarded themselves as people
orientated whilst still trying to be clear
and decisive.
Delegation was often seen as going
with the grain of the union in which
FTOs traditionally had more
autonomy that many workers in other
organisations – even if many found it
difficult because of whether staff
could accept it, either because of their
own capabilities or because of their
pressure of work.
Negotiation was seen as a common
approach to dealing with people,
often because they were familiar with
that. One manager described himself
as a referee ‘I should wear black
shorts really’. Similarly, some
managers saw managing conflict as
being an important component of their
roles.
A people orientated style of
management arose sometimes from
training courses, although in one
union the lack of directive managers
was something that arose specifically
from one course. Trying to achieve
consensus was more typical,
sometimes by going with the results
of a majority approach (on office
layout). Many mentioned an open
door policy as being important, as
was giving support to staff.
Often managers struggled with the
distinction between management and
leadership. Typically they saw
leadership as involving ‘soft’ skills but
some associated it with being elected
or appointed to give industrial
leadership and therefore involving
autocracy and, sometimes,
unpleasantness. General Secretaries
recognised their responsibilities to
take the union places and identified
that as leadership. One manager
wanted to lead based on her history