Introduction
The purpose of the study was to determine the identity of middle manager using the particular of focus group conversations. According to the article, “Who is ‘the middle manger’?” by Harding, Lee, and Ford (2014), the definition of middle management is very clear and consistent in many literature. However, there are insufficient literatures on middle management roles and identities. In order to understand identity of middle management, the researchers setup three scenes to identify middle manager by the analysis of the participants’ behaviour. As a result, the performance of middle managers is complex and contradictory.
The controversial role of middle managers
Middle management is the intermediate management in organisational hierarchies, are responsible for implementing the executive management’s policies and plans and above the lower levels of junior staff (Uyterhoeven, 1972). Although there is a coincident definition of middle management, the controversial performance of middle management has been discussed in many literatures. Following the definition of middle management, middle managers should have skills that receive strategic plan from top manager and deploy it successfully by control over junior staff (Harding et al., 2014). However, they have not been considered part of the strategy process (Floyd & Wooldridge, 1992). They just like ‘a passive linking pin’, doubtfully carry out the instructions of the top managers and fully implement throughout the organisation (Rouleau & Balogun, 2007).
The prescriptive responsibilities of middle mangers are considered a kind of top-down strategic management. Traditional management style can reduce productivity and cause bottlenecks, since the power was centralised. Instead, bottom-up approach is increasingly popular because it empowers employees to think more creatively. Therefore, middle-level