Administrative Creativity of General Managers and Administrative Department Managers in the General Administration

Departments: An Applied Study of a Selected Sample in Ministries, Republic of

Yemen

By Saleh Mohammed Ali Alkolaibi

Supervised by Prof. Dr. Shihab Rasheed Albaiaty

Doctor of Philosophy (General Administration)

2012

Matriculation Number: Ye 226

Abstract Title: Administrative Creativity of General Managers and Department Managers in the General Departments: An Applied Study of a Selected Sample in Ministries, Republic of Yemen. Researcher: Saleh bin Mohammed Ali Al Kulaibi Degree: PhD in public Administration Philosophy Discussion Committee:

1. Dr Abdullah bin Abdullah Al Sanafi Chairman 2. Dr Fuad Al Hamadi Member 3. Shihab Rasheed Al Bayati- Supervisor

Date of Viva: / /2011 Study Objectives: The current study aims at identifying the availability of creativity elements in general managers and department managers as well as their application of such elements during the administrative creativity process. It also recognizes and studies the methods of used administrative creativity and the extent of allowing their subjects to reach administrative creativity. Study Method: the analytical and descriptive method Study Sample: all general managers and department managers in the ministry under the study amounting to 350 managers. Statistical Analysis: To analyze and interpret the study data, the researcher used frequencies, percentage, contrast analysis, T-test, averages, deviation, in addition to Sefi effe tests. Vital Results: The study revealed a number of results summarized by the researcher as follows:

1. Administrative creativity elements are averagely found in the managers.

2. The most common element among them is the originality, then direction persistence and fluency and flexibility. Challenge identification element comes last.

3. They averagely practice the administrative creativity process. 4. The most commonly applied step of administrative creativity is implementation of ideas, the least is identification of challenges. 5. They suffer hindrances of administrative creativity of which the most common is motivation, the least is mental hindrance. 6. They averagely enable their subjects to practice administrative creativity. 7. They practice individual styles of administrative creativity to a large extent, whereas they poorly practice group work styles of administrative creativity. Essential Recommendations:

1. The top leadership in ministries ought to give full support which encourages general managers and department managers to use untraditional methods to deal with challenges and situations, and to take initiative to improve administration work in ministries.

2. It is important to implement intensive training programs to general managers and district managers to apply administrative creativity process in order to be able to identify challenges, to gain skills of evaluating concepts and skills to implement ideas. These skills are crucial to reach administrative creativity.

3. Ministries represented by its top leadership should work to lessen hindrances of administrative creativity in order to enable managers to practice such creativity. This can be done through less centralization, provision of training to develop motivation, and enabling managers to practice new ideas without criticizing or mocking.

4. Managers should encourage the spirit of initiative in their subjects through giving support and confidence.

5. Managers are supposed to practice group work styles of administrative creativity more which enables their subjects to participate in identifying, dealing with, and resolving problems by using new ideas and methods.

:

Public administration

- . -

,

,

, .

- -

.

.

,

.

.

,

, , ,

.

) ( ,

, , , , ,

.

, ,

.

, . :

: ,

.

.

, ,

.

.

. .

.

.

.

:

, . .

.

.

, .

.

,

.

, ,

, .

. :

, , : " " " " ,

.

, , , : . ,

: , " "

. , , :

.

. ,

: :

.

.

.

.

. : :

.

.

.

.

.

,

.

. : :

: . . . . : ,

. . . : ,

. . . .. , , : ,

. : , ., :

: ,

. . . . . . . . . .

. 2011 -2010

: ,

, .

,

: :

. . :

. . :

) 10( , , )30(

, ,

).30( (

, )140( , , ). 350 ) 210(

: ) 166( , ,

:)6( .) 5(

.) 38( .) 41( .) 30( .)23(

.) 26( :

, ,

%) 87(. ,

: ) 30(

, %)94(

. :

: , , , ,

)ANOVA , ) t 3 , ) Dunnett3 ) .

: ,

:

, 2006, , ,

.

, , .

. : .

,

, , , ,

. ,

)1(

:2008,

)1( , , ,

2006, 1427, , ,

,

, .

, : ,

) ( , )(

, )2(

: 2006, ,

, , , ( ,

,

, )3(

, 2006, .

. ,

, :,

.

.

. )4(

, 2006,

.

)2( , , , , , ,

.2008, 1429 )3( , ,

543 463, 2006, 1426 )3( , 182, , , , )4(

. 2006, 1427, , ,

,

: ,

.

.

.

.

)5(

, 2004, ,

, ,

. .

, : ,

.

.

)6(

, 2007, .

,

,

,

, , )5(

2006 - 1426, , , , , , , )6( ,

.2004 - 1424, ,

)7(

, 2006, .

, :

, . ,

.

.

,

)8(

, 2003, ,

. , ,

: ,

, ,

, , , , )9(

, 2008,

, ) , , :(

, .

, : ,

, , , , )7(