Theories of Management and Translation into Practices of Management - Research Paper Example

Theories of Management and Translation into Practices of Management Table of Contents Introduction 2 Theories of management and translation into practices of management 4 Conclusion 14 Reference 15 Bibliography 17 Introduction Management is regarded as the development of bureaucracy which draws its importance from the important need of strategic planning and coordination, direction, and the controlling of large, complex processes of decision making in organizations. Thus, management essentially entails acquiring management competences and effectiveness in key areas such as problem solving, management of human resources, administration, and organizational leadership. Broadly speaking, management is considered to be one of the most important human activities. From the time when social organizations were formed for accomplishing goals and objectives, human beings have felt the need for management and coordination of individual initiatives and efforts. With the increasing reliance on group efforts, organized groups expanded and became large, subsequently accounting for the increasing importance and complexity of management. Henceforth, the managerial theories have gained importance with regards to the way managers manage these complex organizations. However, surprisingly there are numerous managers across different parts of the world that have attained immense managerial success even without the basic knowledge of management (Olum, 2004, p.1-2). There are unequivocal views about managers who have applied mixed management theories in their day to day activities and practices have attained greater success in managing their organizations effectively and efficiently and helped them in realising organizational goals and objectives. Instances show that theories of management cannot be directly translated into practices in the organization and thus managers belonging to the contemporary organizations must appreciate their respective roles in the organizations while seeking to achieve set goals and objectives (Olum, 2004, p.1-2). Leadership Defined Although there is extensive investigation in the practice and study of leadership and management theories, there is no such definition of leadership or management which is unanimously accepted. The popular textbook by Yukl (2010) has defined leadership as the process in which people influences others so as to make them understand and agree to their terms with regards to what needs doing and in the process facilitates individuals and collective efforts to attain shared goals and objectives on the organization (Laguerre, 2010, p.6). The definition developed by the author not only suggests and includes efforts for influencing and facilitating the present works undertaken in the group, but it also ensures that individuals in the group are ready and prepared to encounter future challenges and problems at the workplace. Even though the definition of Yukl is highly comprehensive, there are several researchers who have out forth such definitions which are more narrowly focussed. For example, researchers like Coons & Hemphill (1957) believe that leadership is nothing but the behaviour of a person or individual which helps to direct the activities and performance of a group towards shared goals and objectives. Kahn & Katz (1978) believes that leadership accounts for the influential increment above and over the mechanical compliances with the custom directives in the organization (Laguerre, 2010, p.6). The varying definition of leadership also accounts for its difficulty in practical application in the organization. It is because perspectives differ between individuals and this accounts for the reason how different researchers define management and leadership as per their own perspectives (Daft & Lane, 2008, p.4). As a consequence of the above fact, when researchers conduct leadership studies, they assume different definitions of leadership such that confusion in the interpretation of results can be eliminated or removed. Thus there exists a constant ambiguity about the ways researchers have defined leadership and agreed upon. It is crucial to settle the choice of definition of leadership in order to develop leadership in the organization. Ideally it is important to know exactly that which needs to be developed in the organization (Zingheim & Schuster, 2007). Theories of management and translation into practices of management The most important difficulty in translating management theories into practices is borne out of the fact that management refers to solving complex problems which keep changing and emerging over time in the course of organizational struggle and thus no fixed theory can be used for the purpose. Problem solving must be attended with identification of problems, analysis and finally implementation of remedial actions for resolving them (Dalkir, 2005, p.96). Secondly, administration includes implementing already established instructions for execution, controlling, communicating, delegating and managing crisis. Thirdly, human resource management must be grounded through the strategic integration of the workforce of the organization, assessment of the workforce and idea exchange between workers and shareholders. Finally, the organizational leaderships are said to be originated and developed along the lines of interpersonal relationship in the organization, team work and group activities, motivation of performance, personal integrity and general managerial skills of personnel (Olum, 2004, p.4). The three most noteworthy theories of leadership are contingency theory, the path goal theory and the normative theory of leadership. The contingency theory proposed by Fiedler emphasized the need for placing leaders in a situation which was most suited for them or to train the leader to change the situation in order to match his own style. According to the views of House (1971), the path goal theory addresses a different contingency. In this case, the focus is less on the situation or the behaviour of leader and more on the provisions enabling conditions for the success of the subordinates at the workplace (Griffin, 2007, p.354). The normative model, on the other had differs with regards to advising leaders about the decision making behaviours which would be appropriate for the situation and the need for decision acceptance and quality. This approach has been particularly popular and has generated wide acceptance because of its applicability upon leaders. It means that in spite of the leader’s traits and degree of power or influence, it is possible to improve the effectiveness of the leader in different situations. The contingency theories have invited high empirical support and also controversy. Harte and Pohlman (1985) have been heavily utilised in the contemporary studies of leadership, such that they have left substantial drawbacks (Lunenburg & Ornstein, 2011, p.116). Firstly they are distinctly different from each other and as such it is extremely difficult to establish distinctive periods in that era. All seem to provide partial answers to the leadership puzzle but fail to provide complete answers for the same. They are also said to be extremely cumbersome for systematic day to day managerial practices (Mobley, Li & Wang, 2011, p.342). According to the views of Bass (1981), the difficulty of practical applications of the leadership models are borne out of the fact that leaders remain so involved in decision making and responding towards organizational brush fires, they have little time left to analyse situations through complex models. In spite of the fact extensive research efforts were provided in that phase, the theories originated during that era have remained less utilised in practice. Except for the crucial recognition of the interactive characteristic of the initial leadership eras, little understanding was available regarding the nature of these interactions in practice (Seters & Field, 2002, p.7). Extensive research went into finding the relevance of leadership theories in practice and the forthcoming era in leadership theories. The idea was to highlight which academic researchers expended their efforts in a better way to understand the phenomenon and in critical elements in leadership which must be practiced by managers to improve their leadership effectiveness. In the beginning leadership theories had been very one dimensional, individualistic and internal processes in which only the leaders’ personality traits, characteristics, and behaviours were taken into consideration (Manning & Curtis, 2002, p.16). With the addition of new variables into the leadership conceptualization, the examination of the evolutionary tree of leadership demonstrates a narrowing and integrating. It is likely that eventually more and more variables will be added to the concept which will broaden the understanding of leadership. So far, the theories of leadership have been less interactive with the organization structural factors, fast paced changes, complicated and complex technologies and multiple decision arenas. It is expected that in future years, they will be become more practically applicable among the widely dispersed players, multicultural contexts and the extensive political activities (Seters & Field, 2002, p.12). Hunt and Blair (1985) have recognised a number of drawbacks or limitations of the past leadership research efforts. The four major pitfalls identified by them are that they focussed primarily on the interpersonal aspects of the leader; restricted or limited set of explanatory variables; inadequacy of relevance of policies, and non programmatic past research in the field. With this, researchers have added another limitation, i.e. too little emphasis has been provided to the conceptual dynamics of the applied questions such as leadership development and leadership selection (Zaccaro & Horn, 2003, p.3). As per the views of Klimoski and Zaccaro (2001) majority of the existing research on leadership focuses on the extent of direct direction and supervision and the major units of analysis is regarded as the relationship existing between the leaders and the followers. Klimoski and Zaccaro (2001), the analysis mainly regarded the leader’s characteristics, the follower’s characteristics and also the relationship existing between them. Interaction style of the leader has received the maximum attention in literature. The basic dichotomy between the consideration style or the relationship oriented leadership and the task oriented or structuring leadership styles has been dominantly prevalent among the social exchange theories and the interpersonal theories of leadership. The contingency theory used by Feidler uses the versions of the two constructs for defining the extent to which leader’s attributes interacts with the situational parameters for influencing the effectiveness of the leader. The other theories of leadership have described the ways in which leaders vary their application or employment of leadership styles and behaviours as per the situational demands of the organization (Zaccaro & Horn, 2003, p.4). Very little research has gone into the extent to which the different leadership styles are applicable in different organizational settings and structures. As noted, the theories of leadership are focussed primarily on direct leadership. While most of the organizational leaders are engaged in such processes with subordinates, there are some leadership processes which are likely to add significant values to the higher organizational levels and which involves indirect and system wide influence in the organization. The responsibility of the middle level managers is to manage multiple units and provide directions to the managers at the lower levels. They are also responsible for taking a two way perspective involving both upward and downward influence of the other leaders in the organization. The executive level managers are responsible for providing system wide directions and influence and in many instances it is seen that they do not meet the followers whom they lead. The interpersonal theories of leadership are seen to fail in such instances and cannot be applied in the organizational setting. Thus such leadership theories are difficult to the applied in practice in the modern organizations (Zaccaro & Horn, 2003, p.4). Research on Theory and Attempts to Implement There is some research which suggests that transformational leadership theories and concepts can essentially be utilised for developing transformational leaders. For example, researcher Crookall (1989) undertook a field experiment called FRLP or the Full Range Leadership Program. The design of the experiment aimed to test the impacts and effects of training programs on the improvement and enhancement of leadership qualities of supervisors and also their effectiveness in different vocational and industrial shops in the prison systems. As per the findings of Crookall (1989), the performances of both the samples were found to improve in the experiment. This result was a contrast with the comparison of the three other groups of supervisors who were provided with training on transformational leadership styles and were found to be performing better. This was apparent in terms of betterment of productivity, attendance and also citizenship behaviours among the inmates (Laguerre, 2010, p.21). The study of leadership is particularly important for identifying its application in the non traditional settings, in this case the prison. The study demonstrates that the transformational style of leadership development is effective even in non traditional settings and structures. This is a contrast to the research limitation which states that leadership theories are not precise about the kind of organizational structures and settings which are appropriate for them. The above finding demonstrates the effectiveness of transformational leadership styles and development in non traditional settings and structures too (Furjanic & Trotman, 2000, p.2-3). Barling, Kelloway and Weber (1996) had undertaken a survey on twenty managers in the Canadian Banks. The participants belonging to the training group were evaluated with the help of the multifactor leadership questionnaire (MLQ). The subordinates of the leaders were evaluated as per their response to the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire. After completion of the assessment, nine managers were provided with training sessions familiarising the participants with concepts on transformational leadership (Laguerre, 2010, p.21). This was followed by the individual one to one sessions in which the trainers assisted them with personal development plans. After completion of five months, data was gathered with regards to the branch employees’ perceptions of their managers’ leadership effectiveness and also their organizational commitment along with two measures of financial performance of the branch. The results generated through the study clearly showed that those subordinates who were under the supervision of the trained leaders showed significant positive and favourable perceptions about their leaders and also high organizational commitment. Particularly managers who had received the training were found to be favourable in the eyes of their subordinates in terms of charisma, intellectual stimulation and also individual consideration as compared to those managers who belonged to the non training control groups (Laguerre, 2010, p.22). Some amount of support was also extended with regards to the branch level financial indicators which were also affected. The study reveals true and positive consequences of applying leadership theories and concepts and their effectiveness in improving the performance and productivity of leaders. It is seen that application of the theories can actually help in enhancing and improving the leaders’ effectiveness and efficiency which subsequently reflects through improved performance of subordinates who are under their supervision (Laguerre, 2010, p.22). The effectiveness of leadership training and development programs are particularly reflected in the survey. The fact that managers trained in leadership programs perform better and attain better perceptions from their subordinates shows that leadership training programs are particularly effective in organizations. Not only do they enhance personality and performance of individuals as leaders but also improve performance and productivity of subordinates in the course of the program. The consolidated performance of many different individuals under the leadership and supervision of a single person reflects through improved financial performance of the department and the organization at large (Laguerre, 2010, p.22). Berson’s and Avolio (2004) conducted a study on transformational leadership development of individuals in the organization. The researchers had conducted a survey to measure the relationship existing between the style of leadership between the top level managers and middle level managers in the telecommunication organizations in Israel and their effectiveness in communicating the strategic organizational goals. A total number of 2200 employees were taken into the survey (Laguerre, 2010, p.23). The participants were made to rate their respective managers as per their leadership effectiveness and unit and organizational outcomes, such as the nature of influential tactics used by supervisors and their styles of communication etc. Fifty percent of the sample were made to rate their managers as per the kind of influential tactics they used; while another half of the sample were made to rate to their managers or supervisors according to the communication styles of management. The leadership styles of these managers were rated according to MLQ analysis. The styles of communication were measured with the use of 18 item measure generated by Bass and Klauss (1982), which assessed parameters such as extent of carefulness of leaders; open or two way communication styles; extent of carefulness of leaders as transmitters in the organizations etc (Laguerre, 2010, p.23). The survey results revealed that leaders rated as more transformational in nature demonstrated prospector strategy with regards to their perceptions and articulation of strategic goals in the organization. Ratings of the transformational leadership of those leaders who were perceived and articulated organizational prospector orientation of goals against those with defender orientation showed that leaders with prospector orientation had higher ratings on transformational leadership. The results throw light on the effectiveness of transformational leadership styles in organizations. Moreover the prospector orientation is seen to be greatly appreciated over the defender orientation of the transformational leaders with regards to their articulation of organizational goals and objectives. The cumulative analysis of the above survey results not only demonstrates the suitability of application of leadership styles in the organization but also their effectiveness in communication and people management too (Laguerre, 2010, p.23). The perception of ethical leadership not only considers the leader but also his constituents, such as his followers and the key stakeholders of the organization, situation or context faced by the leader along with his constituents, the processes and skills of the leaders and lastly, the outcomes that follow. It must be understood that leaders are foremost member of his own organization and the stakeholder groups. Considering the same, his vision, purpose and values are aimed towards the betterment and benefit of the organization and stakeholders. Since leaders consider their constituents as stakeholders with common purpose, vision and values, the follower and stakeholder constituents possess their own autonomy and individuality (Freeman & Stewart, 2006, p.3). This must be respected and esteemed at all costs in order to maintain a moral community. It is the responsibility of the ethical leader to embody the vision, purpose and values of the organization and constituents within the understanding of the ethical ideals. The connection between the goals of the organization and the external stakeholders and internal employees are laid down by the ethical leader. They work towards the creation of an open and two way communications process and maintains a charitable understanding of the various views, opinions and values of its constituents. They remain open to the opinions and ideas of other people with the aim to improve and lead the organization better (Freeman & Stewart, 2006, p.3). Managers in organizations are increasingly faced with the dilemma of choosing between practices favourable for the business and ethical practices. The problems are a vivid reflection of the deep rooted, chronic problems which remain embedded in the people management and governance systems and practices. Such practices and systems are seen to allow both behaviours which are opposite to each other. On one hand they demand ethical behaviours in the business, and on the other they undermine such behaviours in order to yield business results. Such problems can be apparent in the form of non-articulated and weak authorities and accountabilities; the deficiency of ownership of elected boards and stakeholders, systems of compensations which not only alienate people but also requires corrupt and selfish behaviours in the business requires to go ahead (Jaques, 2003, p.1). These are examples of some of the dysfunction induced system which cannot be restored or repaired. It is essential to bring about change in the system completely in order to bring them to the company’s ethical terms (Trevino, & Nelson, 2010, p.27). Most of the managerial systems have many layers in the organizational hierarchy such that managers supervise their subordinates and juniors. The problem with having few layers is that managers find it difficult to concentrate on their own work and remain more engaged into managing subordinates’ activities and performances. The existence of too many layers in the hierarchy causes the subordinates to manipulate their work and situation so as to get proper pay and career recognition at the workplace. It is seen that a common pattern of optimum layers for all the managerial hierarchies exists in the organizations worldwide. They can range from two layers in the small organizations to as much eight layers in the super corporations. The number of organizational layers is determined by the magnitude of the top executive’s role in terms of the time required for completion of the work. The structure is aimed to bring about or generate an effective and comfortable relationship between the managers and the subordinates in different levels of the organization and provide managers with the right amount of authority to manage his subordinates (Jaques, 2003, p.1). Conclusion The study reveals that the application and implementation of managerial theories in organization is a difficult in complex organizational structures and processes. Additionally the external organizational environment also keeps changing dramatically and emerging with time. Research has revealed the successful operations of numerous organizations in the absence of strictly followed managerial rules and procedures at the workplace. However, there are certain results which have particularly pointed out the leaders practically trained in the management practices have attained more favourable opinion and views of their subordinates as compared to those who were devoid of any kind of training. Lastly, it is seen that ethical practices must be rooted into the organizational hierarchy rather than changing systems and procedures in order to be effective. Organizational structures and procedures play role in determining the extent of existence of ethics in work practices. Reference Daft, R. L. & Lane, P. G. (2008). The Leadership Experience. Cengage Learning. Dalkir, K. (2005). Knowledge Management In Theory and Practice. Butterworth-Heinemann. Freeman, R. E. & Stewart, L. (2006). Developing Ethical Leadership. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.corporate-ethics.org/pdf/ethical_leadership.pdf. [Accessed on June 07, 2012]. Furjanic, S. W. & Trotman, L. A. (2000). Turning training into learning: how to design and deliver programs that get results. AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn. Griffin, R. W. (2007). Fundamentals of Management. Cengage Learning. Jaques, E. (2003). Ethics for Management. Management Communication Quarterly : McQ; Aug 2003; 17, 1; ABI/INFORM Global pg. 136. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.esf.edu/for/germain/Jaques_3_29.pdf. [Accessed on June 07, 2012]. Laguerre, J. C. (2010). Can leadership be developed by applying leadership theories?: an examination of three theory-based approaches to leadership development. [Pdf]. Available at: http://digitalcommons.ric.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=honors_projects. [Accessed on June 06, 2012]. Lunenburg, F. C. & Ornstein, A. C. (2011). Educational Administration: Concepts and Practices. Cengage Learning. Manning, G. & Curtis, K. (2002). The Art of Leadership. McGraw-Hill International. Mobley, W. H., Li, M. & Wang, Y. (2011). Advances in Global Leadership, Volume 6. Emerald Group Publishing. Olum, Y. (2004). Modern management theories and practices. [Pdf]. Available at: http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/AAPAM/UNPAN025765.pdf. [Accessed on June 06, 2012]. Seters, D. A. V. & Field. R. H. G. (2002). The Evolution of Leadership Theory. [Pdf]. Available at: http://apps.business.ualberta.ca/rfield/papers/evolution.PDF. [Accessed on June 06, 2012]. Trevino, L . K. & Nelson, A. (2010). Managing Business Ethics. John Wiley & Sons. Zaccaro, S. J. & Horn, Z. N. J. (2003). Leadership theory and practice: Fostering an effective symbiosis. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.elsevier.com/authored_subject_sections/S02/misc/leaqua_art1.pdf. [Accessed on June 06, 2012]. Zingheim, P. K. & Schuster, J. R. (2007). High Performance Pay. [Pdf]. Available at: http://www.paypeopleright.com/bizsum_High_Performance_Pay.pdf. [Accessed on June 07, 2012]. Bibliography Allen, K. (2011). Complete MBA For Dummies. John Wiley & Sons. Bacal, R. (2004). Manager's guide to performance reviews. McGraw-Hill Professional. Catano, V.M. (2009). Recruitment and Selection in Canada. Cengage Learning. Cohn, J. & Moran, J. (2011). Why Are We Bad at Picking Good Leaders A Better Way to Evaluate Leadership Potential. John Wiley and Sons. Egner, T. (2009). Behavioral Leadership - The Managerial Grid. GRIN Verlag. Fallon, L. F. Eric, M. D. & Zgodzinski, J. (2011). Essentials of Public Health Management. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Furjanic, S. W. & Trotman, L. A. (2000). Turning training into learning: how to design and Gitlow, A. L. (2004). Being the Boss: The Importance of Leadership and Power. Beard Books. Green, S. D. (2011). Making Sense of Construction Improvement. John Wiley & Sons. Martin, J. (2010). Key Concepts in Human Resource Management. SAGE Publications Ltd. Miller, K. (2008). Organizational communication: approaches and processes. Cengage Learning. Millward, L. (2005). Understanding occupational and organizational psychology. SAGE. Okafor, P. C. (2009). Self-Confrontation, Self-Discovery, Self-Authenticity, and Leadership: Discover Who You Are and Transform the Leader in You. AuthorHouse. Siddons, S. (1999). Presentation skills. CIPD Publishing. Wilton, N. (2010). An Introduction to Human Resource Management. SAGE Publications Ltd. Read More