Subordinate evaluations of high-performance managers Oxana Bayer Department of Innovative Technologies in Pedagogy, Psychology and Social Work, Alfred Nobel University, Dnipro, Ukraine Olexandr Krupskyi Faculty of Economics, Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro, Ukraine, and Evgeniy Bondarenko HR, Media Group Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine Abstract Purpose – The study investigated the factors considered by subordinates when evaluating the productivity of their managers, in addition to how those factors influenced such feedback. Design/methodology/approach – A questionnaire survey was conducted among participants. The results were processed using a cluster analysis (K-means method), the Mann–Whitney U test and the χ 2 -Pearson test. Findings – The survey results were used to categorize managers as highly productive, moderately productive, or lowly productive. Recommendations for how to increase productivity were then determined. Research limitations/implications – The implication of our study in perspective research lies in particular in showing the mediating character of constructive feedback in subordinates’ viewing manager efficient. As for practice, knowing subordinates’ feedback makes it possible for an organization to influence the quality of supervisor-subordinate dyad. DTEK company has already put into practice the results of our study into corporate education and learning. In particular, recommendations for how to increase productivity (through giving constructive feedback, time to talk in private to an employee and expressing gratitude for good work) are discussed. Practical implications – The results indicated that highly productive managers tended to professionally develop both themselves and their subordinates. They provided subordinates with constructive feedback as well as the opportunity to talk in-person. These managers were also experts in the activities performed by their subordinates and showed gratitude for their accomplishments. Originality/value – This study examined managerial efficacy as reviewed by subordinates. A theoretical analysis was conducted to outline the factors typically associated with managerial productivity (e.g. interpersonal skills, synchronizing projects, technical knowledge and handling work-related frustration). Keywords Managerial productivity, Subordinates, Managerial efficiency, Managerial competence Paper type Research paper Introduction Because of world crises, market oversaturation and increasingly tough competition, many companies tend to view advantages as existing not only in raw, technological and material resources but also in individual and psychological features of the company, especially— quality management. A great deal of relevant research has been devoted to the relationship between psychological characteristics (Helfat and Peteraf, 2015), leadership (Vera and Crossan, 2004) and competitive ability (Sirmon and Hitt, 2009). A slightly different angle involves seeing this issue through the relationship between competitiveness and professional managerial culture (Giberson et al., 2009), organizational culture in established companies (Byrne and Bradley, 2007) and the tools used to form an employee culture (Kogut and Zander, 1996). It is also thought that a leading top manager is important. However, relevant research has only been conducted from the viewpoint of top senior managers, their business partners, business owners or the associated financial results. Views regarding top managerial success or efficiency may differ according to employee position, corporate Evaluating the productivity of managers The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/0143-7739.htm Received 15 February 2019 Revised 17 May 2019 Accepted 21 July 2020 Leadership & Organization Development Journal © Emerald Publishing Limited 0143-7739 DOI 10.1108/LODJ-02-2019-0080