Managing the Organization Using the Contingency Thinking Theory - Coursework Example

There is Only One Best Way to Manage (Student Name) (Course No.) (Lecturer) (University) (Date) There is Only One Best Way to Manage Introduction Effective management practices determine the achievement of organizational goals. With the demand of meeting organizational needs and proper management of resources, there have been increased pressures of finding better ways to manage the organizations and reforming organizational structure. According to contingency thinking theory, there is no one best way of managing organizations as presented by the old management theories (Torrington, Hall & Taylor, 2005, 155). The major theories that support one best way of managing organizations are Weber’s bureaucracy theory and Taylor’s scientific management theory. The essay aims to oppose the stand presented by the old theories that there is only one best way of managing the organization using the contingency thinking theory. Management theories It is important to note that there is no one best way of management while using the contingency theory in thinking. Effective leaders often recognize that there of no best way of managing resources; as a result, they focus on adoption of their style depending on the development level in management of resources. After the World War II, the management formalism remained the dominant view of the management and organization. However, the previous theories of management dominated the view of organizations and management, which led to the creation of classical management theories like bureaucracy and Taylor’s scientific management theories (Grandori & Prencipe, 2008, 235). Taylor’s theory referred to the study of the work processes with an aim of reducing time while maximizing the productivity of the labour and minimizing all the unneeded movements. Such theory believes that within the capitalist economy, agreement is only achievable through the application of power. Weber’s theory researched further and noted that the studies on bureaucracy and classification of the legitimate authority are based on rational-legal, charismatic, and traditional. According to the theory, materials and various economic forces are responsible for shaping the history and concerned with the white-collar functionaries and administrators responsible for the management of plans and intellectual parts. The study on Taylor’s theory by Henry Mintzberg resulted in criticism. According to Mintzberg theory, obsession with efficiency seems to allow measurable benefits to overshadow the less quantifiable social significance completely while leaving behind the social values. In addition, Robert Merton also criticized Weber’s bureaucracy theory through noting that bureaucratic features that Weber believed to improve rationality and efficiency, could actually associate with the inefficiency and irrationality. In conclusion, Merton noted that bureaucracy contains its destruction seeds. In the post 1950s, some of the researchers on management tried to establish ways of successfully managing and organizing organizations. The main objective of such studies was to end with the best organizational structures. However, their findings revealed that successful and effective organizations do not apply the classical management method of thinking (Garud & Gehman, 2014, 11052). The implications of integrating the classical management method assisted in development of new direction in organizational management with contingency thinking being one of the directions. Contingency thinking has a unique perspective; nonetheless, it does not rely on the single best approach in managing the organization but offers the managements the opportunity of considering the manner that each approach operate. In addition, it also focuses on the differences between organizations and management to the other. Management Approach As noted, the best management to the organization is relative, and there is no best way of managing organizations and resources. Various criticisms of the classical management theories led to the establishment of the methodical deregulation of the new ideas and principles to facilitate organizational management. However, shifting from the prevailing and all pervasive classical theories of management to contingency thinking the approach was important (Modaff, Butler & DeWine, 2012, 127). The contingency theory offers the best management approach considering that it states that the best way of organizing and managing organizations depend on the nature of the environment that the business needs to relate. To understand the effectiveness of the contingency theory, it is important to note some of the challenges associated with classical theories of management. The emergence of the theory was due to the negligence of various aspects that affected the style and organizational management approach. Therefore, there could be no one best ways of managing the organizations. According to the organization theory, there is one best way of managing the organizations. However, Joan Woodward as one of the pioneers of shifting from the organizational theory to the contingency approach of thinking, revealed the effect of technological advancement on the organization. According to Woodward, advancement in technology creates different types of demand, which needs to be met through effective and appropriate organizational structure. Usually, the commercially successful firms employ complementary function and form (Stoichev, 2014, 99). In the 1960s, different scholars including Fredrick Fiedler noted that an effective management styles depends on the situational contingencies including the nature of the task. Nonetheless, the agreement ended there considering that the scholars failed to reach a consensus on the major roles of the leaders and the contingency factors, which influenced them most. The major role of the organization is to ensure routine achievement of the collective responsibilities, which makes it easy, cheap, and unproblematic in achieving organizational goals. Through integration of contingency thinking approach, the managers are able to combine the ideas associated with uncertainty within the environment and external factors that influence work with the context-specific features of the decision-making and leadership. The contingency thinking theory seems to point different managerial practices, methods, styles, and functions vary depending on the particular circumstances that the situation presents (Kramar, 2013, 1072). Although while experiencing intense and increment in uncertainty in the management of the organizations, it is no surprise that the organizations that employ classical management methods tend to demand solutions. Contingency thinking assists in finding the appropriate manner of managing the organization. Some businesses could concentrate of hiring the management consultants with an aim of assisting in the identification of the effective ways of dealing with organizational situations, laws, new policies, competitors, and political issues. Managing People There is an old saying that goes, “people are people” which means that each person contributes personal baggage with them to work. In most cases, people tend to make wrong decisions, act rashly, and concentrate on defending their comfort zones. People have their agenda, which have nothing to do with work agenda, which most managers tend to promote. Considering that people are the best organizational assets, it is inevitable to find solutions on the factors that influence them. There are many books published on the management of people and managers might at one-point practice different styles. In most cases, the classical theories of management have been criticized for ignoring the needs of the people and rarely considering the human errors. In addition, the classical theories of management ignored the changeable performance of the people (White, 2009, 135). Contingency theory presents different underlying factors associated with management of human resources. According to the theory, the organizations are open systems that require careful management to ensure satisfaction and balancing the internal needs, development of strategies for adapting to different environment situations; there is no one best way of organizing considering that the appropriate form depends on the various types of tasks and environment in which the organization operates. The concern of the management needs to focus on achieving the alignments and good fits using the most appropriate style of management. From such factors, it is evident without any doubt that effective management and organization depend on variety of important factors, which are mainly external to the organization. The basic types of contingency include organizational production technology, the size, and the task environment. Through applying the contingency thinking approach, the management ensures effective delivery of the goals and objectives from a different perspective compared to the manner in which management is presented within the old management theories. The old theorists assumed that they discovered the one best way to manage the organizations, which the current theories hold that there is no one best way. In simple term, the circumstances, situations, employees, and conditions do not have be identical. Therefore, based on the contingency thinking, there are many methods the managers could practice, which majorly depends on the situation faced. Conclusion Businesses experience different challenges; therefore, to solve them, it is important to develop strategies and methodologies of solving. However, the old theories associated with management assumed that there is one best way of managing the organizations, which from the analysis seem impossible. To keep the dominant classical culture the metaphor, most of the strategic managers have become inflexible alongside the inability of managing the change with the necessary quality. Moreover, the managers are equipped to deal with issues associated with organizational change in different ways: rational and methodical. Most of the successful organizations lack similar hierarchies and organizational structures advocated through the management of the theorists. Considering that there is no one best way, good structures tend to vary from one situation to another. In the real world, few managers seem to understand the complexities associated with environment and most of them have moderate levels of understanding the environmental complexity. Considering that not all the task environments are complicated in dealing with, there is no best way of measuring the effect associated with the organizational structures. References Garud, R., & Gehman, J. (2014). Theories of Performativity and the Performativity of Theories. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2014(1), 11052-11052. Grandori, A., & Prencipe, A. (2008). Organizational invariants and organizational change. European Management Review, 5(4), 232-244. Kramar, R. (2013). Beyond strategic human resource management: is sustainable human resource management the next approach? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(8), 1069-1089. Modaff, D. P., Butler, J. A., & DeWine, S. (2012). Organizational communication: Foundations, challenges, and misunderstandings. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Stoichev, K. P. (2014). The Role of Business Continuity Management in the Business Management System. Science Journal of Business and Management, 2(3), 97-105. Torrington, D., Hall, L., & Taylor, S. (2005). Human resource management. Harlow, England: FT Prentice Hall. White, P. A. (2009). Not by contingency: Some arguments about the fundamentals of human causal learning. Thinking & Reasoning, 15(2), 129-166. Read More