Strategic Management and Leadership - Assignment Example

?Running head: MANAGEMENT Strategic management and leadership Introduction In any business or organization, private or public sector, management plays a major role, the resources at hand may include; materials finance or people and it’s up to the management to utilize these resources properly and get the most out of them. In order for the company to achieve maximum results, the main objective of the manager is to organize, plan and implement carefully to gain the best results. The type of management, hence implementing, may determine the thin line between success and failure the correct style for the organization is important. The private and public sector all have a managing system designed to run the organization’s operations from day to day. As was created at privatization, the British railway industry structure still remains much the same according to the Department of transport (1992: 33). Giving of incentives efficiently to both train operators and privately owned infrastructure providers was a fundamental principle that to some degree still remains and by being made to suffer the financial setbacks of their inefficiencies, this reduced the call on the taxpayer. That is a discipline is meant to be created in any other shareholder company, through take the taxpayers to the companies the risk in which the value of the owners' assets are at stake. The Nation railway in the United Kingdom was run by an executive committee of rail company managers and controlled by the government in the First World War. A decision then had to be made in 1919 on how the railways would be returned to the private sector. In 1947 in order to provide an economical, efficient, adequate and properly integrated system of inland transport, a British Transport Commission was set up (Department of transport, 1992: 33). Over the succeeding fifty years especially in 1979, most of the transport companies were forced to return to private ownership as the government ownership failed to deliver on the benefits which had been hoped, and the emphasis was placed on the advantages of competition and the commercial’s discipline. Due to its narrow definition of costs, British Railways was highly criticized, for example, not taking account of savings in urban congestion or environmental damage and not considering the social or economic development needs (Casmir, 1994, p. 63). In the early 90’s the problem the government was trying to solve was a familiar one with that of the national railways, that is how to without unacceptable reductions in the scale of the railway service, reduce the demands on the national taxpayer. The main principle running the British railway was not changed after the 1990’s policy of privation. The main aim of this policy was to maximize the railway sector competition and come up with a low-cost efficient railway sector. The implementation in the beginning did yield results where the customer service, ticketing, time table and traffic improved greatly. However the strategy set soon fell foul as a result of management strategies and styles applied and interference from politics as a result of a change of government right after privatization. The new labour government was not comfortable with privatization of the railway industry. Later Railtrack ran into financial trouble and the government took its opportunity to acquire the control of the railway industry again. Unfortunately the British railways provision of service declined greatly with no competition and the lack of proper management. For any organization to survive today’s market, it is utmost that they establish an ongoing process of coping with current market demands, with the management level going back to the drawing board to review the company’s vision, lest they become obsolete. Any public sector thinking about carrying out strategic management change, should first understand the type of organization they have in the sector. To understand organization means to look into the level of competencies, look at the stakeholder’s attitudes, values and beliefs and lastly their motivation. The public institution should design a development program only after fully carrying out the organization’s analysis. Understanding the changes needed in both the public and private sectors, are the guiding principles in any strategic management process, as well as how to create the roadmap to sustain improvements that lead to better performance and how to implement and manage these changes. While keeping up with today’s challenges, setting a successful platform in the future in strategic management is the most difficult part. Management styles The making of a successful manager is determined by the people’s ability to apply these theories and adapt well to their surroundings. Each style of management has its advantages and disadvantages, disadvantages can increase if a manager decides to stick to one stagnant management model, and this can lead to less success, low staff morale and lack of confidence by the manager. In the democratic type of management, workers are more involved in major decisions that affect the organization; management therefore makes a final decision based on what majorities of the workers have seen to be important (Northouse, 2009, p. 44). This approach assists management to get new ideas from the people who are involved in the day to day running of the business and also they get well informed hence making the right decisions for the welfare of the company. Paternalistic management, leaders from the workers encourage from feedback, and this is basically encouraged in order to boost and maintain loyalty and morale. The leader will listen to the suggestions and ideas from the workers, but at the end of it all the manager is the one who will make the final decision, and the decisions should be in the best interests of the business and overall the employees. In autocratic management according to Northouse (2009, p. 44) the manager cuts an imposing and knowledgeable figure. In this type of management other people’s suggestions and judgments are not considered or listened to, instead decisions are made by a must and without involving anyone else. The attitude adopted here is truly my way or the highway kind of management. In Laissez-faire the manager is seen as more of a mentor than as a leader, that is; management pulls back a bit to just provide some guidance when it is needed. Thus the employees have the freedom to instill their own ideas and creativity in specific areas in the company. Top-level managers in the National railway are responsible for organizing and overseeing the whole company or organization. These managers include directors, CEO’s, chief executives and big bosses. In the middle level kind of management, it is the job of management to carry out plans handed down to them by top-level management. The department managers and area supervisors in the middle level are answerable to the top-level managers. Low-level managers include; sector leaders and supervisors, and they are answerable to the middle level managers. The low level managers are responsible for motivation and general supervision in the company. The manager has to be flexible as it is not an easy task to choose the correct management style, as certain styles of management call for particular situations. There are two arguments that support the difference between private sector management and public/nonprofit management, and they represent the real differences of how private businesses and public programs work hard to meet their objectives. Private sector organizations operate under economic efficiency unlike the public sector, which works with objectives that can be clearly measured (Wolmar, 2001, p. 16). As much as they share similar management methods, private and public sector management are not completely similar. One can argue that the values of the private sector differ from those of the public sector by agreeing that the ends of administration differ from the means. The fact that accountability is largely different in private and public organizations would base our second argument. A great number of people are subject to accountability by managers in public organizations and in turn there is a greater influence of those they are accountable to (Bauman, 2001, p. 6). This plays a major role in the decision making process as public administration is widely under public scrutiny. While trying to achieve results, the public manager of the railway will mainly attempt to please as many people as possible in order to achieve results. Another factor according to Bauman (2001, p. 24) that may influence the accountability of the public manager is because research supports the notion that the organization’s commitment is not strong in the public sector and this adds to the complexity of management. The national railway in the United Kingdom is accountable to the shareholders and mainly focuses on maximizing the bottom line, thus they operate without the balances and checks of the public sector. The public and the private sector have a blur yes, and scrutiny is definitely subject to the business man in public more than in the past, but generally, public managers maintain accountability to more people than the few that the private sector managers have to account to. Public organizations as observed by Gould & Kolb (1964, p. 72) are more transparent than private organizations and there is little demand for “sunset clauses” and other methods to make sure the ability of the private sector to function is not overshadowed by the power held by public organizations. As the railway sector enters a new millennium, it’s important to focus on new approaches to management in the public sector. With the emergence of a global economy, increased social demands, advances in technology and the need to give more social services with the fewest resources possible, public organizations are being challenged by market dynamics. The pressure for change has increased due to the widespread need for scrutiny in organizations, and this is having heightened media attention and accessible globalized information systems that are critical of government lack of efficiency in service delivery (Callanan, 2009, p. 150). The public sector has been slow in responding yet there are response mechanisms that have cropped up in the private market to meet the recent challenges. Given the bureaucratic process and fiscal constraints axiomatic to the rail sectors, this is understandable. However in order for the public sector to maintain overall service quality and gain improved performance, a new approach that will add in strategic management tools is needed. A shift away from traditional ways of looking at public management and organizational design is the approach that current public policy models are reflecting, while at the same time the systematic process for sustaining and creating improved performance that brings about change in the environment, is clearly absent. There is evidence according to Day and Antonakis (2011, p. 58) that shows there is a change that is affecting the national rail sector in the UK and the metamorphosing structures and processes in most of the public organizations, is how this change manifests itself. Strategic Management and leadership There is a big challenge to the ingenuity and managerial skills in countries due to the internal and external environments faced by organizations. One of the most important aspects of a public sector senior manager’s job is to strategically manage the organization in relation to the organization's environment (Hansen, 2010, p. 78). It also involves determining the goals, purpose and missions of the organizations; the range of activities it is to pursue and the principal plans or policies of achieving these goals, the nature of the economic and non-economic contribution intended for its community, employees, shareholders and customers and the kind of economic or non economic organization it intends to be. The emphasis placed by Porter (1985, p. 78) on policies and strategies, interdependence of goals or purposes and organized action in the interest of stakeholders, is what is important in this definition. The determining factor in an organization's ability to position itself in reality to its environment, make use of its strengths and build a strong identity is based on the existing coherence and unity. The performance of the organization as a whole depends on the strategic management (Armitage, 1995, p. 23). A number of steps are involved in understanding the railway’s strategic management involves: First, understanding of the competitive strength and weaknesses should be generated with a shared view of goals and vision. Second, the strategy should be tested in relation to the general socio-political environment and general macroeconomics and against the internal resources. Thirdly, the end results should be in line with the understandable, acceptable, coherent and achievable strategies and objective. Fourth is the implementation of the strategy (Normore, 2010, p. 15). In strategic planning, processes can vary from those that evolve mainly by their own volition, to those that are consciously highly formalized and formulated. In the first case, the emergence of patterns of thinking in other parts of the organization are detected as they do form the basis of new strategic initiatives, and it's up to the manager to give direction and vision in this light. The management in some cases will be required to uproot any emerging patterns that are not worthwhile or desirable. A winning strategy may occur in the future where patterns that emerged initially holding little promise, and one needs to know how and when to intervene when it happens, and with good judgment (Morrison, 2009, p. 9). Strategic management of the national railway is conducted in various ways; from top-down, where senior executives job is to come up with strategies; from bottom-up, where the basis of organizational planning is strategically developed by divisions or departments; interactively, where there is integration of strategies that emanate from the top of the organizations to the lower levels; or semi-autonomously, where strategic initiatives are developed by strategic units within the organization and approved at the organizational level with little or no changes (Bauman, 2001, p. 11). Managers in this sector have a big task to ensure they improve on their strategic management abilities, employee’s well being, effectiveness and organizational survival, especially since strategic management is regarded as being an area of weakness in public organizations. The involvement of senior managers in developing of strategies is kept at a minimum, as the view is the sector should be largely mission driven in this initiative. With the most effective methods available, mission driven organizations have their disadvantages as stated by Kotter (1990, p. 105) as this block the employees to further pursue the organization's missions. However on the part of the employees, mission-driven organizations require high levels of commitment, a quality that is rarely found for understandable reasons in government organizations in developing countries. In strategy making, the extent to which there is managerial involvement should vary according to employee characteristics, area of specialization, features of its internal and external operating environments, the type and size of the organization and organizational level (Hood, 1991, p. 5). A constant aspiration in public service is the pursuit of increased productivity, but the main concern for public organizations is to increase levels of service provision (Bartolomei, 2011, p. 11; Winsor, 2004, p. 26). The ability of the public service to provide and maintain better services and the challenge of renewing the public service capacity with smaller budgets will require the management, to consider a smaller number of public employees with multiple skills. Managers running the railway sector ought to understand the importance of individual development management, the process by which people, various training programs, and technology are combined and coordinated so as to effectively achieve organizational objectives. To make management development successful as emphasized by Levy (2010, p. 238), the procedure should be consistent, and not a one time event. Training is essential because it enhances the employee’s competencies which they later apply to the providing railway services. The railway industry should have long term and short term goals in sync with the management’s long term and short term goals. The team leaders should guide all through the employees in the management development process. Sometimes the workers are starting out in their careers, while others are new in the organization and may not be familiar with the goals and objectives of the company. On the part of the rail administration, the current crisis has raised queries about its leadership and adaptation. In order to improve people skills, build greater capacity to work across organizational boundaries and to address the adaptive or bad problems related to changes in culture and changes that require solutions which must come from outside the current reputation, there is a dire need for adequate leadership development (McGee and Wilson, 2005, p. 17). There is need not only for collective leadership of change across the public service, but also for good leadership within organizations to increase the capacity for development. In order to support focused leadership development, there is a need to mobilize recently established senior public service (SPS); develop a more diverse public service that is in line with the society it serves, through recruitment and other means; move away from responsive acting to reflective action; and learn from what has gone before (Otazo, 2007, p. 12). In order to incorporate the public at length and immediately it’s important that the SPS is spread beyond the civil service. Conclusion A constructive platform for reviewing and developing capacity in the civil service has been provided by the Organization Review Process (ORP). However there needs to be some improvement which should be extended across the public service, and merged with as a whole by the government and secured reviews. There is a need for coherent and formalized approaches to workforce planning in the face of reduced numbers and increased mobility. In the light of known resource constraints, organizations should critically access current and future budgetary staffing requirements; this is to ensure resources in the future are appropriately geared towards government priorities. In the current environment there is a serious challenge as far as the motivation for public servants is concerned and in this case performance related pay is not an option, neither is it a solution. Instead non-pay initiatives such as emphasis on team and team performance, higher delegation and enhanced leadership should be pursued. In order to add some incentive on joined up approaches, there is a need for various processes such as pooled budgets and focus on outcome targets that cross-cut various departments. It has been agreed upon that greater expertise is needed across the system in change management, as has been recommended by the department in charge of transport. The ability to build coalitions of support for change and capacity to lead people is a talent that is vital for managers to have, and this would greatly ensure that attention is given to change being the order of the day rather than occasional or periodic and the leaders engage in change mainly for development. References Armitage, A. (1995). Comparing the policy of Aboriginal assimilation: Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Vancouver :UBC press. 23-25. Bauman, Z. (2001). Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World Polity. London: Cambridge press. Pp 6-23. Bartolomei, K. (2011). Types of educational leadership Theories: a teaching method strategy. New Jersey: Routledge. Callanan, M. (2009). Fostering a more integrated public service: working through networks at central and local level’, Administration. Vol. 57, No.1, pp.149-187 Casmir, F.L (1994). Building communication theories: a social/cultural approach. Melbourne: Routledge. Day, D. V and Antonakis, J. (2011). The nature of leadership (2nd Ed.). New York: Sage publications. Department of Transport (1992). New Opportunities for the Railways. The Privatization of British Rail, Cm 2(1); 33. Gould, J. & Kolb, W. (1964). A dictionary of the social sciences Eds. New York: Free press. Hansen, E.G (2010).Responsible leadership systems: an empirical analysis of integrating (1st Ed.). Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag. Hood, C (1991). A Public Management for all seasons? Public Administration,69; 3-19. Kotter, J. P. (1990). What leaders really do?Harvard Business Review, 68; pp.103-111. Levy, R. (2010). New Public Management end of an Era? Public Policy and Administration, Vol. 25 no. 2 234-240 McGee J. Thomas H. and Wilson, D. (2005). Strategy: Analysis and Practice. New York: McGraw-Hill. Morrison, M. (2009). Leadership and learning: Matter of social justice. London: Library of congress Normore, A. H (2010). Global perspectives on Educational leadership reform (1st Ed.). Bingley: Emerald group publishing ltd Northouse, P. G (2009). Leadership: theory and practice. New York: sage publications Otazo, K. (2007). The truth about being a leader. New Jersey: FT press Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: The free press. Winsor, T. (2004). A 2004 DfT Rail Review - Submission by the Rail Regulator, Office of the Rail Regulator, 6 May. Wolmar, C. (2001). Broken Rails. London: Aurum Press. Read More