James March and His Contributions to Business Management - Essay Example

James march and his Contributions to Business Management Background James March was born in 1928 in Ohio, Cleveland. James March earns respect for coming up with a theoretical perspective on management, which utilizes theories in behavioral sciences, including psychology to support, to support his perspectives. James March is considered the Carnegie School’s core member who worked closely with Herbert Simon in the formulation and development in the organization theory approaches. He is also popular for having developed the firm theory perspective, in collaboration with the Richard Cyert, in 1963. Later, in 1972, James March worked closely with Cohen and Olsen to come up with a systemic approach to the decision making process in the organizations. This approach came to be referred to as the Garbage Can Model (Ahuja, 2007). March earned his BA degree from Wisconsin University. Later, he enrolled in Yale University, where he earned Masters in Arts degree, followed by a Ph.D. The academic work scope covered by James March is relatively broad. However, understanding the process of decision-making in companies, organizations, society and individuals is considered as one of his major focus. In this area, March has made an exploration of the factors that affect the processes of making decisions, including leadership, politics, orientation of risks, stakeholder’s vested interests, challenges pertaining to delivering and heeding to advice and impediments to processes of exploring and exploiting the opportunities by the organizations. Aside from beings a researcher, James March also served as teacher and leader of universities. As a matter of fact, James March is known for having served as a professor to prominent scholars, such as Jack Parker, whom he taught at the Stanford University. James march is widely celebrated for his research work on organization and organization decision-making processes (James, 1957). He received several awards for research and teaching. As a way of communication and interaction with society, James March has featured in various books, interactive seminars, articles, poetry and films. James March served as faculty member at the Carnegie Institute of Technology, as well as University of California, since 1953. Since 1970s, James March served at Stanford University. He has ever been elected to serve the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, National Academy of Sciences and even the National Science Board. As if not enough, he has served as a member of the Royal Academy of Sciences Sweden, and Academy of Science and Letters, Norway (Huff, 2000). He has received honorary doctor degrees from various universities, which include those from the Copenhagen School of Economics, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and Swedish School of Economics, University of Bergen, Helsinki School of Economics, Göteborg University, Dublin City University, Budapest University of Economics, University of Poitiers, York University, Stockholm School of Economics, University of Southern Denmark, Uppsala University and University of Trento. Contributions to the Field of Management According to Cohen, March and Olsen (1972), the garbage Model is one of the achievements by March. The Garbage Can Model can be effectively elucidated based on four variables, all of which are a function of time. One of the variables is a stream of choices, which is denoted by m. This is a fixed number in which the choices are assumed. Each of these stream choices is subject to the decision structure and entry time. The entry time is the time for which the activation of the decision takes place while the decision structure comprises of a list of parties that are eligible for the decision making process. The second variable is the stream of problems, which is a number of assumed problems denoted by w. This is dependent on the time that the problem is visible, as well as the energy requirements that are assumed to effectively resolve the problem. This is also predetermined by the access structure, which is a list of problems to which the listed problem has access. The third variable is the rate of flow of solutions. Here, the verbal theory is employed in expounding the problem. The verbal theory is said to assume a stream of solutions, as well as matching problems with corresponding choices of solutions. The process is such that relatively simple assumptions sets are generated, with the focus directed on the rate at which the solutions are assumed to flow into the system. Considering that there may be different decision flow rates, as well as varying efficiencies in the solution search procedures, it is theorized that the varied amounts of energy would be required to solve the organization problems, at different times. Further, it is also theorized that such variations may at times be only consistent with certain variables. The fourth variable is the participants’ stream of choices, which is the number of participants that is denoted by v. The participants are always characterized by the available energy’s time series. In this regard, each participant has the potential of offering only a specific amount of energy required by the organization, in every time series. The model depicts a set of two types of organization segmentation. The first organization segmentation entails the process of mapping choices into the decisions while the second form of segmentation entails mapping the choices out of the problems. The model also utilizes various assumptions. These include the energy additivity assumption, energy allocation assumption and problem allocation assumptions. Understanding these variables and assumptions is particularly pivotal in tackling organization problems through the processes of making decisions (Cohen, March and Olsen, 1972). Another celebrated achievement by March is the insights offered in Organizations, which was collaboration with Herbert Simon. Here, the focus was directed on aspects of organizations that considered employees as system instruments, as well as psychological components. They also focused elements that determine the affective behaviors of human beings, going as far as touching on the cognitive processes that affect organization motivational behaviors. This piece of work may be considered as a literature review of related theories, inferring that the shifting perspective on the area was necessitated by executive’s experiences in the field, developments in the field of scientific management, economics, social psychology and sociology. It is worth noting that a significant part of the organization theory advanced by the classical school may be categorized into two. First is the scientific management approach, which relies on empirical research to support its perspectives. This was purposed at developing a operation procedures that could be effectively utilized by the organization to attain a state of effectiveness. The second one may be labeled as the administrative management school. This was aimed with developing a way in which tasks could be organized and allocated in a manner that optimizes the organization effectiveness. This touches on how tasks could be grouped into jobs and how jobs could be organized based on the order of administration hierarchy, as a way of minimizing the costs of performing the organization tasks. Thus, simply put, the classical theorists are aimed at developing principles with that could be effectively utilized by all forms of organizations to maximize the outcomes. In this case, organizations are considered as elements that are evolving towards complexity. On the other hand, individuals or parties that make decisions are considered as the processors of information. The behavioral model works in the following fashion. When the satisfaction is relatively low, the search for solution is likely to be rapid. When the value of the reward expected is high, the level of satisfaction and inspiration is also expected to be high. The converse is also true (Ahuja, 2007). Economic incentives are considered as the main incentive to efficient operation of the institutions. These have the potential of enabling the organizations to gravitate the efforts of the employees towards the attainment of goals. Human beings are considered as being rational, which is the feature that makes them optimize the outcomes. A man in the organization is such that he comes up with activities, as a way of responding to the stimuli. As information is communicated in the hierarchical fashion, pieces of evidence are often replaced by the conclusions arrived. In response to the dynamics underlying cognitive limitations, the ideal decision making model should give considerations to the satsficing approaches, search for both solutions and action consequences, formulation of repertoires for dealing with recurrent problems and action programs to tackle various issues in the area (Cyert & March, 1963). March approaches lays emphasis on the need for organizations to treat employees as psychological components of the systems. This approach lays emphasis on the human organizational behaviors. This theory was founded in response to the emergence of various human organizational movements that emerged, which aimed at addressing human welfare. As such, this theory focused on areas such as morale, motivation and organizational citizenship behaviors. Employees, as a component of the organization, are elements of economical and psychological needs. In this regard, motivating them would entail according them psychological and economic needs. This theory was an opposition response to the scientific management theory, standing against the organizational practices that deprived and humiliated its employees. When employees were motivated, the organization realized success that could be comparable to the results by organization’s proficient leadership and structure. Thus, the approach assumes and overemphasizes that economic and social reward is the best way of motivating workers to ensure organizations attain success. The application of this theory would be characterized by improved relationship among stakeholders, consideration of organizational employees as human beings that needed motivation, and acknowledgement of the necessity for managers to pursue knowledge that enables them understand how desirable workplace relationships and organizational citizenship behaviors could be achieved. The approach is realistic as it acknowledges the fact that human behavior and motives may hinder or catalyze the effectiveness of the organization, depending on the motivation (Cyert & March,1963). Importance of the contributions to the managers practices It is not uncommon to witness organization and management heed to various approaches developed and advanced by March. Garbage Can Model is argued to be effective in formulating decisions for organizations whose goals are not clear such as in Universities and some education institutions. Indeed, these is further reinforced by contingency theory holds that there is not universally agreeable way of managing organizations or making decisions. A single style of tackling problems and formulation of decisions may only be suitable for a certain case, and not all cases. The style of management, organizational structure and nature of decisions are all determined by the external and internal factors. Examples of such external and internal factors include the organizational size, the mode of adaptation of the organization to its environment and nature of resources and organizational routines. In the specification relating to the management of the organization, the contingency theory holds that organization cannot be managed based on a single principle. The organization components and structure should be such that they co-exist with the environment, as well as with organization subsystems. In relation to leadership, the contingency theory holds that success of organization leaders can only be described in terms of the tasks, and contributions made by the subordinate groups (Ahuja, 2007). The choices in the universities are often made based on oversight and flight. Additionally, the decision-making processes are often load-sensitive. Decision makers have the potential of tracking one another, leaving problems unsolved. The order of choices, problems and decisions are known to change continuously. If these are well understood, there is always the provision of discussing the problem based on the context of the choices. The eventuality is that the problems are often resolved, but not in the order in which they come. The appealing feature of this model has made it possible for various organizations, especially those with unclear goals, to utilize the model in tackling problems. The approach is now applied for most institutions and organizations whose goals are not often clear. March and Herbert insights in organizations has stirred managers towards embracing approaches that treat employees as a psychological components, rather than as mechanical aspects of the system (Huff, 2000). Organizations are increasingly focusing on the ways of changing human behavior, considering that human behaviors have far-reaching impacts on the effectiveness of organizations. The eventuality is that important aspects of organization and human behaviors have been explored, and organizations are striving to heed and maximize the outcomes. For effective functioning of the organization, the general employees should uphold various behavioral conducts. These include; one, the employees should maintain positive work attitudes. It is necessary that the employees are available, always ready and willing to work. The management, on the other hand, should promote the good behavior by recognizing those that are dedicated, focused, working extra hard for organizations’ wellness. Two, the employees should be friendly as well as courteous to the colleagues, the management, and the customers. It is through these behaviors that work environment can be friendly and welcoming. This harmonic environment upholds desirable working atmospheres. While not all employees are perfect, with every employee a subject personal stresses, a harmonic work environment makes it possible for workers to place aside their differences and strive for a common goal. Three, it is important that workers uphold the spirit accomplishing work within the set datelines. More often than not, meeting of datelines is associated with both personal responsibility and organization. The challenge has been for the organizations to manage these areas in a manner that maximizes the outcomes (James, 1957). Beisdes, it has been the expectation that the bosses should posses various qualities that mobilizes affective human behaviors. For example, bosses are required to be assertive. Assertion is perceived as desirable quality compared to submissiveness and aggressiveness. While it is good behavior for the general employees to be submissive, it is appropriate that bosses uphold assertion. Aggressive bosses are associated with brutality, inconsideration and excessive dominion when dealing with other employees, while Submissive ones are associated with subtlety, shyness and vagueness. On the contrast, assertive bosses are associated with tactfulness, politeness, effective communication, cordiality and positivity. The assertive qualities enable the bosses to be suited to achieving desirable results. Two, bosses should administer equality among the staff members. Bosses should not promote gender, racial or ethnical bias. This creates a harmonic working environment. Bosses should serve as good examples against acts of sexual harassment. Bosses are also required to be influential. It is worth-noting that influencing does not entail manipulation or excess use of power. Bosses should establish as well as maintain suitable working relationships between employees and customers. This will in turn trigger acceptance of his ideas by other employees. Bosses should use their persuasive skills in logical presentation of concepts. In turn, other employees will appreciate and consent to his proposals. Effective communication is imperative to good influencing capability. Four, bosses should be good negotiators. Negotiators fit in satiations that are contradictory, with each side inclined securing self-vested interests. However, at the end of the negotiations, the parties arrive and concessions. Better negotiators are known to be considerate to each side. These qualities are suited to decision making, a role associated with bosses. Additionally, bosses should promote cultural diversity. Diversity management are efforts that are aimed at creating as well as maintaining a working environment that is positive; where the differences among individuals with diverse cultures are considered as a strength rather than as weaknesses. This is especially in consideration to the fact that at the work place, a staff with differing upbringing, nationalities as well as cultures is a usual phenomenon. In addition, it is important that a boss exhibit respect to the other employees, irrespective of whether they worker under him or not. Conclusion James March earns respect for coming up with a theoretical perspective on management, which utilizes theories in behavioral sciences, including psychology, to support his perspectives. March has made an exploration of the factors affecting the process of making decisions, including leadership, politics, orientation of risks, stakeholder’s vested interests, challenges pertaining to delivering and heeding to advice and impediments to processes of exploring and exploiting the opportunities by the organizations. However, the most appealing of the contributions are those that lay emphasis on the need for organization to give consideration to the treatment of employees as psychological components. All these approaches have been particularly heeded by the various organization managers. Another achievement is the insight of on the decision making processes. References Ahuja, H., 2007. Advanced Economic Theory: Microeconomic Analysis. London: Gardners Books. Cohen, M., March, J. & Olsen, P., 1972. A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1):1-25. Cyert, R. & March, J., 1963. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. New York: Sage Publishers. Huff, A., 2000. “Citigroups John Reed and Stanfords James March on management search and practice”. Academy of Management executive 14(1): 34-45. James, S. 1957. Community Conflict. Glencoe: Free Press. Read More