llion in profit. Initial contact took place through correspondence with the key informants. Subsequent visits involved numerous meetings with the key informants and an opportunity to analyze official documentation and archival records, MTD policies and syllabi, including training, expatriation and socialization. However, access to the training institute was denied, 'as a matter of policy'. While it would have been helpful to interview managers taking courses at the time, this was not a serious handicap since 10 of the 25 informants were IPI graduates. The rest considered themselves eligible; a stint at head office was thought to be a good omen. Also , I was satisfied that sufficient training documentation was available at the head office.The first phase of the research thus focused on making sense of the reality of MTD through informal discussions with managers and other staff, studying the MTD literature, and observing behaviour in the open-plan offices, seminar lounges and recreational areas. The key informants frequently helped me to select other informants randomly and purposefully (Patton 1980) -- thus obtaining a sample of managers from different backgrounds (functional and national). The second phase comprised formal interviews, each lasting up to 90 minutes. A total of 25 managers were interviewed, 10 from the European region and based at the Centre. The rest were selected opportunistically from those on assignments at the Centre; they were from Asia, Africa and South America. Four of the former and 6 of the latter were IPI graduates.IP has an integrated career development system that tracks and categorizes high-potential management as follows: (A) 10 percent, senior managers, e.g. members of corporate boards (directors), works managers of large companies; (B) 20 percent, upper middle managers, e.g. marketing managers, production managers, management accountants; (C) 70 percent, lower middle managers, e.g. departmental productio...
