Classical Management Theory - Essay Example

Define ical management theory and explain how this type of management is not appropriate in today’s workplace The ical management perspective relied heavily on the placing of tasks and activities on the middle and lower tiers within the organization’s echelon. It focused more on carrying out the tasks at the lower levels and as such there was less accountability and answering when it came to the top management hierarchy present within the organization and indeed running the whole show. The same has changed and that too for the better so to speak. The classical management theory has completely faded out and the contemporary management perspective has superseded it on all counts. At the present, the work is supposed to be carried out by a basis of sharing and caring within the organization’s regimes which was not the case say two decades down the road. (Cyert & March, 1963) The changing times have seen that the business world has evolved and so have the different methodologies and the ways and means through which it is carried day in day out. One needs to realize the fact that business is a consistently changing world and in this world only the people who are ready to change are successful. Thus to put it in the related context, change is the only constant in the world and in the business scheme of things, changing to suit the will and desire of the customers and/or the stakeholders as well as doing one last bit to bring in more revenues and profits for the company just plays the right trick for the business to succeed both in the short term as well as in the long run. (Lamb, 2005) Organizations which stagnate over a period of time and do not change because of one pressure or the other usually die out quickly. The ones that have existed thus far have relied a great deal on the phenomenon attached with change and consistent upgrading of the needs as put forward by the business and its norms. The changing market structure might call for changing strategies and lines of action that would all target the people for whom the product is actually designed as well as the competitors with whom the clutter is being broken in the environs of the marketplace. (Fonseca, 2002) Thus competition brings in more and more quality at the end of the company with regards to its products as well as more sales in the form of its varied and changed stance on focusing towards the customers rather than the product itself. Every big business or multinational that is existent in present times credits itself on to the vision of an exemplary personality which started it all when the going was tough and when there was a huge competition in the related market. Thus to withstand pressure and competition is the hallmark of any successful and long lasting business, company or enterprise, whichever term we might quote it as. Organization structure impacts the manner in which work is basically carried out. More than anything else it adheres to the different purposes of the discrete services and the related achievements with the passage of time. This brings to light the notion of discussing the structural basis of the organizations themselves. For starters, these organizations might not be that easy to understand at the very beginning. These can encompass a variety of different aspects, features and traditional mindsets which make up their structures. To start with, we see that an organization can either be formally aligned in its ways and means of doing things and different processes or the same might just be in a way informal in quite a few of its activities and tasks. (Lyons, 2002) The manner in which it runs across this paradigm is something that needs to be studied in depth before we reach further consensus on their purposes and the kind of achievements that they have had. The communication within an organization can flow in one of three ways or in all the three directions. This means that these three directions pave the way for the ease of communication and there are as such no barriers to arise from the whole equation. The first communication flow is from top to bottom, which means that the communication starts from the top management and goes down towards the middle and lower management. (Megone, 2002) The second form could be the one that starts from the lower or middle management and goes up towards the top management. The third communication flow could be in the kind of peer to peer communication and interaction. This means that the employees and the workers at the same level communicate within their own capacities and as such there are no hindrances arising from the whole communication matrix. Apart from this, within an organization the communication also flows in a formal as well as an informal manner. Where the communication is more formal and sophisticated, the interaction is usually done through paper and written requests whereas the informal talk is also called ‘grapevine’ and is mostly done in a casual manner without any such paper work to document the very same. All said and done, delegation of work is a significant aspect if we look at the work regimes within the present day organizations and management hierarchies. A management within a firm needs to change its position with the changing times otherwise it will literally vanish away from its competitors and more so the customers, for which it actually exists. It must bring about certain efforts which are geared up to make it sound, look and eventually feel different from the rest of the lot and in the long run, have a selling proposition in it and in its products that help it in winning the customers time and time again. Similarly, it needs to make sure that its staff members and employees are amongst the best in the industry and that they can relate with the norms and routines of the top corporations working hand in hand with each other but competing on the business level. The managers need to look at several different angles which are related with the business itself. (Llewellyn, 2002) This means that there is a general sense of negativity attached with the way in which managers perform their tasks. It also gives air to the notion that managers know nothing about what the requirements of the stakeholders are in the whole equation but then again this assumption might just not be correct as well. The managers might just be thinking about the long term scenarios and therefore have to sacrifice the short term interests of the stakeholders for their long term ones. However this is all pretty confusing to understanding and more so within the business circles and the related processes in which managers perform their duties and tasks. (Bassett, 1993) In the present times, organizations are doing their utmost in order to know more and more about their valued customers and stakeholders. For this, they have devised certain strategies which are in line with the values that their business has set for itself. These values are thus deeply intrinsic within the mission and vision statements of the company. In order to gain further knowledge about the customers, research is being given proper emphasis which would eventually discern the exact basis for the customers to come and make that vital purchase. It is a fact that the business world of present times can have a lot of improvement within their ranks if they adopt the policy of working towards the establishment of a performance management system. This would guarantee them a lot of success as their employees and workers would dedicate their whole hearted efforts towards the well being of the company as well as towards their own individual capacities. The usage of sound planning on the part of the managers is very imperative as it ensures that the same is not only important to the whole well being and the actual basis of the business but also the manner in which it invites the short term gains and incentives that come along all this while. (Neely, 2002) BIBLIOGRAPHY Bassett, Glenn. (1993). The Evolution and Future of High Performance Management Systems. Quorum Books Cyert, R.M. & J.G. March. (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Prentice- Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ Fonseca, Jose. (2002). Complexity and Innovation in Organizations. Routledge Lamb, Larry F. (2005). Applied Public Relations: Cases in Stakeholder Management. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Llewellyn, Robert N. (2002). The Four Career Concepts: Managers can learn how to better develop their people by learning how they’re motivated – Management Tools: Supervisor Resources. HR Magazine Lyons, Mary Frances. (2002). Leadership and Followership – Career Management. Physician Executive Megone, Chris. (2002). Case Histories in Business Ethics. Routledge Neely, Andy. (2002). Business Performance Measurement: Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press Word Count: 1,366 Read More