The Role of a Modern Industrial Manager - Essay Example

The Role of a Modern Industrial Manager Introduction Management is a key component in our everyday life. Although we may not notice, it is present in the way we do things. From as simple as taking care of our household to being a CEO of a multi-national company, management plays a crucial role. It may be simple when we are using it to fix our schedule or for time management but its complexity becomes more evident when it is applied in a greater arena like in the work place. Techniques, theories and principles are studied and applied to become better managers. Any organisation would simply fail in the absence of good management. Therefore, understanding the role of industrial manager would be highly beneficial and could dictate the success of an organisation. The Role of a Modern Industrial Manager To have a clear understanding of management and the role of an effective manager, one must first take a look at history. As early as 3000 BC, there has been evidence of formal management where business transactions were recorded through written documents (Pindur, Rogers and Kim 1995). As the years went on, people realised the importance of management and started laying down theories and principles reflecting it. The years progressed and different concepts and techniques were born. Leaders learned the value of delegation of authority (Smith 1776). Specialization in tasks was learned to be effective in the work force. These, along with many others, became managerial techniques. The 19th century gave birth to what is known as classical management (Pindur, Rogers and Kim 1995). Aiming to provide a scientific foundation for the management of organisations, this school of thought soon became the most popular among those who study management. The Industrial Revolution had a hand in its development. When workers were transferred o factories, replacing small home-based shops, a need to efficiently manage the work force arose (Pindur et al 1995). Classical management was both scientific and administrative. It believes that through scientific management, productivity may be improved (Taylor 1911). It was said that successful industrial managers are born and not made. Nevertheless, systematic or scientific management when executed properly will show us that, the foundation of good management rests upon theory and principles and not merely genetic inheritance or nature (Taylor 1911). Another point of classical management is to discredit the old notion that the interests of employers and of employees are conflicting. Scientific management reiterates that these two are actually the same (Taylor 1911). This may seem doubtful at first since we are used to believing that the interest of the employer is to have greatest output at the lowest possible cause, specifically low wages. As for the employee, he wishes for high wages at the most appropriate working environment, like proper working hours. According to the scientific management thinking, if the employer and employee meet eye to eye and are able to work amicably, they will produce higher outputs. Consequently, this would allow the employer to give the corresponding increase in wages and at the same time, have enough to show growth in the company (Taylor 1911). The role of the manager or the employer, therefore, is to provide that atmosphere of working hand in hand with the employees. He has to find balance between organisational needs and those of individuals (McGregor 1960). If he can motivate them well enough, greater output would be ensured, not only securing growth for the company but also for the employees. It is also the duty of the manager to make sure that his work force is up-to-date. Human resources are significant and keeping the employees abreast, especially to innovations in technology, would also improve productivity (Johnson, Kast and Rosenzweig 1963). Efficacy and efficiency were what its administrative background, on the other hand, called for (Pindur et al 1995). In the early 1920s, another school of thought emerged. Behavioural management was directed at addressing the need to incorporate human aspects of management (Pindur et al 1995). This came about because there are practitioners who challenged the concept of Classical Management. Some scholars believed that this type of management is incomplete. Behavioural management looks at the behaviour of employees or individuals in an organisational setting. Equity became one of the leading concepts studied in this approach. Proponents believe that how employees view their job input in relation to the outcomes as compared to their fellow employees become a deciding factor in the effort that they exert (Pindur et al 1995). The other concepts such as motivation, cooperation and group dynamics are just some born out of this school of thought. In the Second World War, a need to centre on decision making and problem solving became imminent. Better military techniques pushed for a type of management that is highly quantifiable. As such, quantitative management came about. Mathematical models were utilized for organisational planning and tactical operations (Pindur et al 1995). This approach was extremely technical. It involved statistics, complex models and computer simulations. Using this type of management, managers make decisions by carefully using linear programming and other things that are technology dependent. However, the problem with mathematical management is that it cannot relate so much to human behaviour. It cannot predict human responses in organisations and requires heavy mathematical processes to come up with solutions (Pindur et al 1995). All these 3 types of management soon became integrated into what is known as Modern Management (Pindur, Rogers and Kim et al 1995). Using different approaches, management was discussed, studied and scrutinized from all angles. Managers became defined as being in charge of planning and organising, and taking the role of leaders (Robbins 1991). From these models that surfaced throughout history, we can identify the role of an industrial manager. I believe that his role covers addressing productivity, efficiency and efficacy of the work force. It is his responsibility to ensure that his employees get equitable compensation and are treated in a humane and respectable manner (Fayol 1949). Moreover, in an evolving modernized world, employees are not treated as mere subordinates anymore, but “partners” in the growth and development of the company and organisation where they belong. Lastly, the main responsibility of producing sound decisions and superb leadership and control should also be served by an industrial manager. In the book, The Nature of Managerial Work, the author Mintzberg (1973) observed 5 US executives and tried to understand the mechanism on how they operate as managers. His observation allowed him to define a management process that involves careful planning and decision making. He initially thought that reflective thinking took up majority of these people’s time, considering that their decisions would greatly affect the company. However, his findings show that being a manager could mean that you have less time in your hands for reflective thinking. The executives he observed met daily challenges that are unexpected and had to be resolved immediately. He deduced 10 specific roles of managers from his study, which he further classified among 3 categories (Mintzberg 1973). First were the interpersonal roles. He stated that as a manager, one should be the key figure actively present in coordinating with network within and outside the organisation. He must be visible, performing numerous social duties (Mintzberg, 1973). The next role is said to be of an informational nature. Here, the manager is expected to disseminate, monitor and transmit information, again, within and outside the organisation. Lastly, Mintzberg (1973) classifies the manager to have a decisional role. He handles the planning and reviews of projects, acts as an anchor, keeping the organisation afloat despite internal problems and disturbances, and finally the negotiator—coming in between other organisations and his. This theory has been tested and supported by other proponents. Of course, there are modifications depending on the actual scope and the dictated power of the manager. Why then do companies and organisations continue to fail despite close attention to these management theories and principles? I believe the answer to this lies greatly on change. Personally, I think the other main role of an industrial manager is to be flexible, responsive and adaptable to change. There are proponents of management theories who claim that what has been thought to be effective in the past are not equally competent today. During the time of Abraham Maslow, he formulated his concept of Hierarchy of Needs based on the thought that individuals do not want to work and are not motivated to work (Bobic and Davis, 2003). Such is not the case today. We are now living in a globally competitive era where the internet allows faster transactions and communications across continents easier. The market gets saturated everyday and it is up to these important managers to ensure that their organisations get a position at the top. Being able to adapt to change or to respond to it proactively, I believe, is a key role to an effective modern industrial manager. As an example, there are the management approaches of Koontz (1980) which originally classified into six. After nearly two decades, he expanded it into eleven (Koontz 1980). Before the emergence of the integration of the 3 school of thoughts I described earlier, a proponent by the name of Harold Koontz identified six 6 main roles of a manager he derived from existing theories. He felt the need to finally sum up the roles offered by different schools of thought for the differences and the upsurge in the number of theories were creating confusion in practicing managers (Koontz, 1980). This gave birth to what he called the management theory jungle. Koontz said that there is a need to tie the theories together to provide better guidance for managers. Two decades after he released his findings, he was compelled to yet write a new one reviewing what has evolved into 11 schools of thought for management theories. He, himself, had realised that by moving forward, change is inevitable and we should always be ready to make necessary adjustments to accommodate new findings or information. As a modern industrial manager, I think this is crucial as well. Furthermore, Koontz (1980) added that managers should also play a role in the streamlining of theories. They should be the ones that should bridge the gap between professionals and the academe so that what is taught in actual school can be applied by individuals in the company scenario. Conclusion As one can see, the answer to the question of the role of an industrial manager is rather complex. It cannot be summarized in just a few words. Different scholars and practitioners have devoted time to study and developed principles and theories hoping that they could improve the way organisations are run. What is even harder to answer is what makes a manager highly effective. I believe that the answer to this is to always a strike a balance among these many theories. There are benefits and setbacks one might encounter when he decides to stick to only one kind of theory for effective management. Keep in mind that these approaches are not opposing or necessarily conflicting. To have a good knowledge and background of management theories, approaches and even history may provide managers ideas and make them more efficient in their field. As a manager, one should be open to understanding and applying the varying schools of thought. Specifically, mangers should never neglect employees’ welfare and at the same time keep in mind the growth and interest of the organisation. Innovations in technology and perspectives are always evolving and so, the manager should keep an open mind to such things. He should not only equip himself with knowledge from trainings and the like, but also include his workforce in the modernization and development of his company. In the end, it is the interplay of all these things that will define the role of the modern industrial manager, specifically one that is highly successful. References Bobic, MP and Davis, WE 2003, ‘A kind word for theory x: or why so many new fangled management techniques quickly fail’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 239-264. Fayol, H 1949, General and industrial management, London, Pitman and Sons Johnson, RA, Kast, F E and Rosenzweig, JE 1963, The theory and management of systems, New York, McGraw Hill. Koontz, H 1980, The management theory jungle revisited, California, Academy of Management. McGregor, D 1960, The human side of enterprise, New York, McGraw Hill. Mintzberg, H 1973, The nature of managerial work, New York, Harper and Row. Pindur, W, Rogers, SE and Kim, PS 1995, ‘The history of management: A global perspective’, Journal of Management History, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 59-77. Robbins, SP 1991, Management (3rd edn), New Jersey, Prentice Hall. Smith, A 1776, An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, London, University of Glasgow. Taylor, FW 1977, The principles of scientific management, New York, Harper and Brothers Publisher. Read More