The Principal Object of Management - Essay Example

Management Models: An Overview “The principal object of management should be to secure the maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled with the maximum prosperity for each employee”. In today’s fast paced, hi- tech world, the demand for efficient systems of management in organization is very high. We experience the greatest complexity of human management techniques, from households, governments, trade unions through multi-faceted business empires. This has aroused a drive towards bigger, better and more complicated systems of human resource management. Coupled with the innovations in such systems is the parallel growth of study and research in the same field. Most scholars have proposed different models of organization management as well as different models of choosing the model that best fits an organization. He is fast to note the interests of both the employer and employee are the same, and one cannot prosper without the other. Both the employer and the employee should train each individual to produce at his highest possible level of efficiency In his book, “The Sociology of Organization: Classical, Critical and Contemporary Reading, Handel, Michael (2003) provides a collection of several scholarly articles on Organizational Theories. I will examine some of the models in the collection, highlighting their weaknesses and their strengths. Weber, (2009, pg 50) classifies authority basing on the allegiance pledged by the subjects to their leaders. He identifies three types of authority. In Rational Authority, the subjects submit to authority by virtue of legal issues. They don’t have any intimate relational issues with the senior. This system is common in firms which have established themselves over time such that the subjects submit to the leader by virtue of submitting to the firm. A good example is in today’s modern states, whereby the citizens are not directly loyal to the president, or the government, but the legal system of the nation. Traditional authority, in its part features subjects who submit to traditions surrounding the authority. For instance, the subjects of a kingdom pledge their allegiance to the king’s son simply because he is of a certain blood line. He contrasts both of these to Charismatic Authority, in which subjects devote themselves to an individual based on her expertise and exceptional character. He argues that the most superior form of administration in any organization is bureaucracy, which in its part implies individual domination by knowledge. This attributes to the precision of decision making, clarity and consistency of knowledge. However, he the system encourages abstract relations between the administrator and his subjects; those based exclusively on performance. In Weber’s argument, there is an implicit assumption that speed in performance is very important. That by living decisions to an individual or a smaller group, the productivity would increase. On the contrary, smaller groups tend to lack opposing views. Therefore, a leadership made of a group of malicious individuals who were appointed to that position solely to their skill will likely plunge the organization in to debts or a collapse. An instance can be seen in Hitler’s government, who rose as a charismatic leader, became a bureaucrat, and was later fell to the Allies Forces for making wrong key decisions, and appointing malicious individuals to control his forces and ministries. Taylor, Frederick is well known for his Scientific Management as an administrative strategy. He is of a different view from Weber, arguing that the best way to improve productivity in an organization is by sharing the labor between the employees and the employers. This model considers three key areas. Firstly, the administration draws up a scientific plan for every employee’s job, basing on careful observation of the employee. It takes up most of the work done by the employees, and ensures that every employee’s task is preceded immediately by someone higher in authority, and then finally carefully selecting and training the employee to enable him perform at his most efficient level. The administration provides friendly help to the juniors, rather than coercing them or leaving them to struggle alone. It is hence the responsibility of the management to understand the best initiative for the members of the organization, as these will ensure the highest possible profits to the organization. With these divisions of labor, there will be mutual understanding between the employer and the employee, and the productivity of the organization will go up, ensuring high prosperity for the owner and high prosperity for the employee. Scientific Management is the most effective form since it reduces the work force put on the worker, as well as inculcates a system of developing them. (Taylor 2009, pg 100) Taylors’ view can be seen to have worked in several organizations. As compared to Bureaucracy, it creates real intimate relations among the employers and the employees. Most American Film Industries are now breaking from the traditional reliance on world famous stars and recruiting new ones, training them towards their vision and working with them to produce Hollywood Block Busters. Godwyn and Gittell (2011, pg 73) have identified two main forms of organizational structures. The mechanistic approach of organization applies subtle definitions of members’ roles, commonly known as job descriptions, or responsibilities, and a hierarchical system of administration; where authority comes from the top, trickling downwards. They contrast this to Organic Organization which lacks a clear boundary of member roles, besides exercising a more lateral form of administration; in that decision are made almost equally by everybody in the organization. The mechanistic structure is more suitable for maintaining a stable production, and is more useful in an organization characterized by lengthy routines. It is relatively easier to maintain, as well being characterized by high specialization. However, a lot of effort goes into preparing the details of a mechanistic structure and defining the key responsibilities for everyone involved. When coupled with scientific management, this system allows its members to puts the individuals goals at the fore front. One is able to pursue their ambitions while serving the greater goal of the whole organization. An example of this system can be seen in the running of colleges and Universities. Whereas a lecturer is able to pursue his goal of research in a certain field, she serves the University goal of providing information and knowledge to their clients and the word at large. On the other hand, organic structures are deemed suitable for an organization undergoing rapid changes, whether in the prevalent market conditions, mode of production or its administration system. They are on their part more difficult to establish and maintain, besides having low specialization of labor. Most movements begin this way, later adopting more sophisticated systems as their numbers grow. Clegg, Kornberger, and Pitsis (2011, pg 167), explores the issues surrounding employee ownership and management in organizations. They argue that the administration of employee owned businesses have to balance between organizational governance and work management. When defining the model to be used in the organization, the administrators tend to be influenced by three theories of administration, namely, authoritarian, whereby the administrator makes all the important decisions and closely monitors the subordinates; bargaining, whereby the administrator persuades the employee to make a decision, and community democracy where decisions are made corporately. They argue that the model of management which will successfully promote the development of employee ownership will have to combine several aspects of these three models (Clegg, Kornberger, and Pitsis 2011, pg 167) In conclusion, we have seen that there many models of management systems. It would be of importance to point out that, no one of these management models is superior to the other. Every organization is unique. It is hence very important for the administration to understand the basis of their organization and choose a model that best fits them. Works Cited Weber, M. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2009. Print. Pg 50-100 Handel, Michael. The Sociology of Organization: Classical, Critical and Contemporary Reading. SAGE, 2003, 2nd edition. pg 1-200 Godwyn, Mary and Gittell, Jody. Sociology of Organizations: Structures and Relationships. Pine Forge Press, 2011, pg 73 Clegg, Stewart, Kornberger, Martin and Pitsis, Tyrone. Managing and Organizations: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. SAGE, 2011, pg 167 Read More