Approaches to management and leadership - Essay Example

?Running Head: Approaches to Management and Leadership Approaches to Management and Leadership [Institute’s Approaches to Management and Leadership To study management and leadership, it is quite important to know that the goal of management is always to gain profit and to increase the rate of surplus. Western notions of leadership and management are distinct as to say that these compel tasks to be done by hook or by crook. For that, Western approaches to management have always been strictly based upon certain principles. The primary objective that includes all those principles is the objective of economic gain. Financial stability or the policy called Laisez Faire has always been on the forefront of promoting business by any means. In achieving this purpose, the workers or the employees are considered to be a means towards an end. In the Marxist point of view, the employees are next to commodities that are extensively used to generate revenue (Kumar & Ghosh, pp. 2-4, 2003). Whether we talk about the 19th Century when agricultural society was transforming into an industrial society or we talk about the contemporary world, the Western approaches have always been alike. Earlier, in the Western society, employees were treated a little less than human and were merely considered as means. Western philosophers and theorists like Plato, Machiavelli, Karl Marx, John Adair and many others have proposed certain theories that are applied to the Western management approaches and concepts. The theories like situational, trait and contingency theories are inculcated in the leadership concepts and these advocate that leaders have the mandate to use power and control over the manipulation of circumstances or adapt certain traits that they think are required in the present situation and that enhance their skills. Experts suggest that the approach towards leadership in the Western parameter revolves around certain traits that are utterly distinctive and differentiate the Western writers from the Eastern concepts. These characteristics are goal orientation, at first. Western leadership approach tend to direct itself to a certain prescribed goal while having multiples of these, however, Eastern theorists do not tend to think that having one single goal in mind can work in the long run but a leader is one who has to manage multiple tasks together. Secondly, the concept of leadership in the West also stresses upon the characteristic of one-on-one relations. As mentioned earlier, the leader has more than merely a cursory view of the work that the subordinates assume. Moreover, the individual concerns get individual and formal time rather than incorporating them in a socialized gathering. Thirdly, Western approach bases there results on a short-term level; they are indeed goal oriented but they tend to achieve a single goal at a certain point in time and attain there short-term prospective before moving forward. Rationalism and a logical attitude is the final characteristic that defines the Western arena of leadership. The Western leadership concept tries to base all its step, methods and procedures on appropriate reasoning rather than on emotional grounds. Marx argues that the people in the managerial position are in control of the means of production of the organization and thus are not liable to any one. He analyzed that they have the power and thus, they exploit the subordinates in order to make a task done and meet the goals of the organization. Moreover, the theorist also cites that these are the people who are in close contact with the owners who gratuitously rely upon them as making and breaking of policies for the organization since they are considered as the best skilled people for this job. Thus, the overall control comes in handy to the managers who try to perpetuate the school of thought, which they have already learned from their learning institutes (Kumar & Ghosh, pp. 73-74, 2003). One major thing that separates the Eastern concepts of management and leadership from those of the Western ones is the stress given upon social values in the former concept. Western concepts and approaches do not tend to emphasize upon social values and these are strictly avoided to have any impact in either the domain of work or among co-workers. Social concepts are treated differently while economic goals that are integrated in management are treated as an entirely separate field. In addition to that, the Marxist view also explains the visible justification of all the means of making profit as far as it reaches its goal. The surplus value always stands out in terms of management and comes as priority over ethical and moral standards. Thus, when the managerial position is considered authoritative and assuming the position of the boss, it is up to the position how it makes other people work for it. This, in turn, makes class differences and strata among the different people working below the leadership who are liable to adhere to the norms prescribed by the bosses irrespective of their likeness and dislikes. He based his theories and approaches to the mere concept of division of labour (Kumar & Ghosh, pp. 74, 2003) in which every individual is responsible for his own tasks and the position he assumes should reflect in his behaviour and attitudes. Experts analyze that it is essential to note how this management approach gets disseminated among the new Western management and Leadership and how Marxist view still persist. They claim that big and popular business schools tend to have a major influence on making these approaches survive in the contemporary Western world as they keep on producing business elites with the similar kind of predetermined ideology and school of thought (Western, pp. 19, 2008). Critical theory that is applied to leadership and management shows extensively how the different positions, structures and internal strata of organizations affect the organizational environment in the domain of decision making and decision flowing. These leadership position, further defines the dominance of various people within the organization who, soon, start receiving even social privileges due tot heir positions. Critical theory further claims that these leadership and managerial roles have transformed the social institutions into rather material institutions whose only purpose is to make the human beings in the sub-ordinate levels into continuous productive machines with minimum emotions and maximum material productivity. The theory also passes its judgement upon the gradual inculcation of an organizational leadership positions into people’s social lives and how their authority makes their social lives powerful even outside the organizations. The positive side of this theory to leadership is to make sure that humans are treated as humans and their well being stands out as the first priority (Western, pp. 21, 2008). It emphasizes on the human side of leadership and makes the leaders responsible to assist the employees wherever they fall short of skills or ideas. It also focuses upon thinking and working on a community level and a societal level and to include everyone who could be of some help since every individual possesses a point of expertise and it claims that this is what leadership is supposed to mean. It suggests that if leaders adapt such characteristics, then a healthier more productive environment could come into being. Thus, in a more neutral kind of perspective, leadership in the contemporary Western world contemplates the traits of visionary and a hero and the one who succeeds in motivating and influencing his subordinates or followers to do what he actually wants them to do (Western, pp. 36-37, 2008). Western approach to this field includes the art of persuading the employees by the strategic means of motivation and other gestures so that they feel inclined towards the work they do and thus profit could be made possible, which is the primary goal. In the modern Western world, emphasis is given to ‘dispersed leadership’ in which the different segments and departments of an organization are responsible for making and working on their separate objectives which, at the end, cumulate in the collective objective of the organization (Western, pp. 42, 2008). This egalitarian approach is becoming widely popular among many of the contemporary thinkers and theorists who are obsessed with the idea of making profit. Thus, this calls for a decentralization of power where segmented forms of controls are provided to the segmented leaderships to avoid chaos and anarchy. As a matter of fact, the contemporary approaches to management explain the basic attributes of the managers to be workable within an organizational setup. They say that the critical thinking process and the ability to perform it is a prime responsibility of the managerial and leadership positions. These days, the world has become quite competitive with a number of people opting to assume managerial positions but the organizations are looking for more expertise in critical thinking and rationalisation. Rationalisation, as we mentioned earlier, is an integral component of the Western approach in this field. Thus, certain characteristics are defined by the experts to make use of their critical thinking vis-a-vis identifying and challenging assumptions, Creating contextual awareness and Identifying alternatives (Thomas, pp.5-6, 2003). The first one deals with the ability of the managers to check for the assumptions that humans take for granted as a natural phenomenon and then challenge those and check out workable formulas for those hidden assumptions. This is critical of the managers because the employees would be busy doing their respective tasks but the general management of the organization is in the hands of these very managers. The second one demands the managers to realize how their perceptions are shaped in accordance with the lifestyle and circumstances they are exposed to. It is essential for them to be aware if they get manipulated or directed by the ideas of their external environment or other predispositions which could affect the working of their organizations. The last one assumes the major position in a managerial task. The managers are in such a position that has to be prepared for any kind of calamity that might take place at any time under any circumstance. A more theoretical term for this idea is to have options for conflict management. They should possess solution to presumed problems so that they might be able to retain their leadership values in the eyes of their employees. Rationality in management, as also mentioned earlier, possesses a very important position in studying the approach towards management. Critics (Thomas, pp.27-28, 2003) have realized the significance of this very disposition in leading a successful managerial career to achieve the required goals. This continuously calls for controversies on part of the functions of the managers. According to Max Weber, there are two propositions to rationality that is adopted by the managers, one is objectively and the other is subjectively. The objectively rational arguments or propositions of the managers include the application of scientific knowledge and theories to the attainment of goals of the organization. Subjectively rational arguments that the managers usually do are on the basis of the arguments that they think are right and logical according to their own ideologies and schools of thought (Thomas, pp.27-28, 2003). Frederick Herzberg’s theory of motivation (Miner, pp.61-63, 2005) became quite applicable in the aspect of management and leadership. This approach talks about how motivation is done from the managerial point of view which is many a times based on false representation of job titles requiring tough tasks but luring people to those positions and making them work harder for the achievement of the objectives of the organization (Miner, pp.61-63, 2005). Such motivations might also involve false praise of the employees so that they may think they are working fine and thus, their bosses have more expectations on them. These employees then start working day in and day out also looking forward to appraisals and promotions. This kind of strategic motivation from the managers thus prove to be fruitful in making the employees interested in their work even if they were initially not and make them work harder. This also implies the art of management in motivating only those with whom their interest lies. Management is basically a position that knows everything about every individual working under the organization and thus the strengths and weaknesses of these people are quite explicitly exposed to their employers and leaders. Since, this is the case, the managers tend to applaud the employees on their strengths and persuade them to do more. This way, the labour force is always likely to come under the pressure built by their employers and they are likely to retain to the same position for ages. It is in the managers’ hands to know the weak points of the workers so that they could persuade them on those points to work for the organizational goals. It is explicitly observed that the end result of motivation is to achieve the vested interest of the managers and their self-made policies (Miner, pp.53-55, 2005). More theorists have worked upon the idea of motivation and persuasion in the arena of management. Another is Abraham Maslow who assessed the psychological needs of the humans and made it a point to motivate and force them to perform certain tasks. It is essential to note that there are two kinds of motivation in any level of management that could be employed to make people perform certain activities. The first is intrinsic motivation, when people work because they feel internal satisfaction and they feel internally motivated to do this. This usually happens when the leaders and the managers make a healthy environment for their employees to work where their minds are at peace and they feel an urge of dedication and interest towards their work and institution. Here, managers have the prime responsibility to make them think that their cognition can work at the maximum level in that particular environment and thus their skills are best portrayed in that position. The other kind of motivation is extrinsic which relies more on external visible benefits that persuade the employees to work because they know that they are going to get a material benefit in return whether in shape of higher wages or promotions in the designation, but when are sure of getting something in return, they motivated extrinsically. Considering the Maslow’s theory, he proposed a framework for the managerial functions to cater to certain needs of the employees so that they can achieve what they want (Simons, Irwin & Drinnien, pp.150-155, 1987). His first proposition maintains that it is primarily important to make the employees feel that their psychological needs are taken care of within the atmosphere of the organization. To fulfil the individual’s psychological needs is the most important element to achieve success. If a person is not mentally satisfied, his cognition would remain on lower levels and the output of his work would not balance with the input of resources. Secondly, Maslow cites that managers ought to show their employees that they are secure and safe within the organizational territory and that they should fear about anything as long as they are within their workplace. The third category is that of social needs. Humans are social animals and they needs to be in a socially active environment to cater to that need. As mentioned earlier, the earlier theorists, many before Maslow, failed to consider social values within the organization and even it is practiced at many places in the Western world. But, many organizations, in achieving the surplus, think that employees’ social demands and requirements should be met in order for him to work effectively and efficiently (Simons, Irwin & Drinnien, pp.150-155, 1987). The second last is the esteem needs which convey the message to the employees that they are being respected, cared and loved by their employers. The employers do use power but they show that they care for their workers’ needs and demands. Showing that would motivate them indirectly even when they actually do not practice the same. Employees are merely bread earners for their families belonging to lower class levels, thus, when they are taught extensively that they are cared by the management, they start believing them and relying on their said statements. Lastly, Maslow (Simons, Irwin & Drinnien, pp.150-155, 1987) stresses upon the self-actualization needs of the employees which tells them that their management thinks that they too possess an individuality of their own which stands out from other employees. All these needs make a pyramid shape which start from the basic needs aforementioned and ends at the tip of the pyramid with self-actualization. The Western management and leadership are increasingly adopting these principles because of their successful applicability in different countries and an endorsed productivity. Contingency theory (Clegg, Hardy & Nord, pp. 57-58, 1996) as also referred to earlier, basically states that no organizational structure could be considered as absolute in terms of its effectiveness and success. Every organization differs from the other like every individual differs from other individuals according to their needs and interest. It depends on the nature of the organization to adopt and reject certain kinds of management approaches so as to think that they fit perfectly to their structure. For instance, a centralized decision making system could prove to be successful in an organization which is not very big but an organization that works in a multiple way and incorporates many different departments might require their setup to be decentralized to have an organized and peaceful system (Clegg, Hardy & Nord, pp. 57-58, 1996). Therefore, the approaches would differ when the size, nature, resources and strategy of the organizations differ. In the contemporary business environment, organizations are employing specialists and experts in the fields of communications and public relations. His is, primarily, being done to organize and manage the internal public of the organization and to portray a positive image to the outside public which are actually the consumers of the organizations or are in any way related to it. These public Relation officers are skilled with communication strategies whether written or verbal and they, being aware of the profiles of different individuals, assist them in bringing the best out of them for the organization (Kotter, pp.10-15, 1990). Much of the earlier part of the paper discussed the popular kind of theories that have been prevailing even in one form or the other in the contemporary Western world. However, the rapid technological advancements, urbanization, industrialization and other globalization factors happening worldwide have marked shift in the application of management and leadership approaches in the Western and the rest of the world alike (Clegg, Hardy & Nord, pp. 60-62, 1996). Nevertheless, the later part of the paper gives accounts of the current situation and how the managers transform their concentrated authoritative in a much blended manner. The power remains the same; however, euphemism in the names and titles of the designation used for different employees in the organizations and their different job descriptions are certain strategies used to attract people but the division of hierarchy in the organizations is still the same and even today the management people and the leaders enjoy all the privileges or the power that they hold and many a times exploit their power to meet their vested interests. Since, Critical Management Theory (Clegg, Hardy & Nord, pp. 60-62, 1996) points out and analyzes all these basic points of the management characteristics and functions, the organizations are working to make their image look decent and sophisticate din the eyes of the masses by employing public relations. At the end of the day, what are generally practised are merely the policies set by the managers and the owners together and the employees, willingly or unwillingly, work in a collaborative manner to achieve those set goals. This might be affected if the communication flow and pattern observed in an organization is not merely one way but a two way communication approach is followed by the management which gives consideration even to the feedback and suggestions of the employees as to improve their position for betterment. Even in this case, the management adopts what they feel is best according to their interest since the overall authority lies in their hands. They decide what would finally bring surplus and what not and the approaches mentioned in the paper are adopted in accordance to that. References Clegg, S., Hardy, C. & Nord, W. R. 1996. Handbook of organization Studies. Sage Publications. Kotter, J. P. 1990. A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs from Management. The Free Press. Kumar, P. & Ghosh, A. K. 2003. Organisational Theory and Behaviour. Anmol Publications. Miner, J. B. 2005. Organizational Behaviour: Essential Theories of Motivation and Leadership. M.E Sharpe. Simons, J. A., Irwin, D. B. & Drinnien, B. A. 1987. Psychology-The Search for Understanding. West Publishing Company. Thomas, A. 2003. Controversies in Management: Issues, Debates, Answers. Routledge. Western, S. 2008. Leadership: A Critical Text. Sage Publications. Read More