Contemporary Aspects of Management - Essay Example

Contemporary Aspects of Management al Affiliation Contemporary Aspects of Management Introduction Management, as a principle or science, pertains to the function of coordinating different individuals’ and/ or group-entities’ efforts, towards the accomplishment of set objectives and goals. This is in reference to organizational and business functionality, which both require the utility of available resources both effectively and efficiently. It thus comprises of various aspects i.e. organizing, planning, leading/directing and staffing, in addition to the requisite control of the initiative or organization towards attaining set goals. The aspect of resourcing generally encompasses both the deployment and subsequent manipulation of existing resources such as human, financial, natural and technological resources. As a discipline, it encompasses different interlocking functions i.e. corporate policy formulation, organizing, controlling, planning and directing a given firm-entity’s resources, towards the achievement of set policy objectives. For such to occur, there is need of an effective communication platform, an optimal environment for enterprise, the presence of human motivation, and the course/ direction of organizational progress. From the above, management consists of six core functional aspects forecasting, organizing, planning, commanding, coordinating and controlling. Management, as well as the presence of organized activities, has existed for many millennia in the past (Gomez-Mejia, David, & Robert, 2008).. Contemporary Management Practices: a Historical Basis In the past, especially the past millennia, witnessed the increased systematic investigation of management as a concept. This was through acquisition of a common knowledge body, thereby leading to the formalization of the discipline’s study (Gomez-Mejia, David, & Robert, 2008). As Adam Smith was to portray in his work – The Wealth of Nations (1776), economic gains and advantages, sought after by organizations and the society, could best be achieved through division of labor. This division, subsequently results in increased productivity, by way of enhancing individual worker output, in terms of dexterity and skill-input. This saves time, augmented by enhanced inventions and mechanization, thereby contributing to efficiency and organizational effectiveness. Best attesting to this, would be the European Industrial Revolution, which began in the UK, during the late 18th century. This entailed massive mechanization measures, which subsequently replaced human input, thereby increasing both production rate and product standardization. The result was that huge profit margins were realized, enabling firms to further expand and grow, leading to big organizations and multinational enterprises. This would inadvertently necessitate the formalization of management practices (Smith, 1776). Towards realization of the above, was the fundamental contribution of the classical approach methodology, referring to the overall contributions of both general administrative and scientific management theorists. The latter, contributed fundamentally to the outlook of how to enhance the output of operative personnel. The former is concerned with the organization’s overall contexts, in terms of efficiency and effectiveness. Of importance, was the founding of modern management theory (1911) because of Taylor’s book – Principles of Scientific Management. Here, he was able to describe the theory by way of utilizing scientific methodology as the best avenue of conducting business and organizational enterprise. Regarded as the father of scientific management, he was very appalled by the existing worker inefficiency he witnessed. This was because the employee force present, majorly utilized different techniques for the same job, thus his need of correcting the situation through introduction of scientific methods of management. Of critical importance in this venture, was the Taylor’s need of creating a mental revolution amongst the workforce and management present (Taylor, 1911). This was achievable through the definition of clear guidelines on improving overall production efficiency; founded on four principles. These include the development of different fields of science for the different elements of individual workloads, replacing the traditional ‘rule of thumb’ method, and the selection of workers in a scientific manner, to later on teach, train and develop them. The third is the essence of ensuring worker-management cooperation, thereby ensuring that all work is done according to principles developed. Last, is the need of dividing both responsibilities and work, on an almost equal basis, between the existing management and workforce present. This provides uniformity, which is essential in enhancing both efficiency and effectiveness within an organizational structure. This would thereby contribute to both management and workers gaining advantages; the former in terms of profit realization, with the latter enjoying increased wage earnings. Henry Fayol and Max Weber, did contribute to management thought, through their development of the – general administrative theory. Fayol stated 14 principles of management, which he (as well as others) foresaw as fundamental truths applicable to all manner of management endeavors. These he apply provided as being inclusive of: - division of labor (specialization); authority and delegation of duties; order; discipline; respect of the unity of command (hierarchy of command); unity of direction (organizational culture, goals and aims); worker remuneration; the subordination of individual interests for the achievement of greater goals, and the observance of the scalar chain of command. In addition, is the need for equity, employee initiative, and ensuring stability of the personnel’s tenure of employment, as well as promoting team spirit (esprit de corps) with the aim of building organizational unity and harmony (Richard, 1976). It is on the above initiatives that contemporary aspects of management are enshrined, further focusing on long-term competitiveness and sustainability. Weber’s contributions, further went into enhancing the aforementioned principles, through his development of – a theory of authority structures. He described organizational activity as being the foundation of existing relations of authority; referring to the ideal organization as a bureaucracy. In such an organization the presence of authority hierarchy; formal selection of employees; the presence of specialization (division of labor); the existence of formal regulations and rules; impersonality, and career orientation. Contemporary Management: The Principle of Control Management in the contemporary arena, operates mainly through five basic functions i.e. organizing, planning, coordinating, commanding and controlling. Planning pertains to the decisions made concerning what needs to be done, in terms of action plans. Organizing regards ensuring that both non-human and human resources are in place for effecting conduct of enterprise. Coordination pertains to the creation of structures, essential towards the accomplishment of set organizational goals. Commanding on its part, necessitates the determination of what ought to be done, in regard to prevailing situational concepts. The function of controlling, which essentially regards the checking of organizational progress achieved against existing plans is also important. This fundamentally regards delegation, which pertains to logical techniques and rules essential in aiding the process of effective delegation. This pertains to both duties and role-play by both the workforce and management present, as it is a two-way process. Through effective delegation, there is an improvement of overall performance, as there are no confusions, or hiccups to duty performance. This, is applicable to both individuals, as well as teams undertaking various projects within an organizational context (Stroh, Northcraft & Neale, 2002). The need for delving into the aspect of delegation, is due to the intertwined nature of managerial control, and task/ duty delegation. Control is a vital function as it aids in checking errors (both real and potential), thereby enabling pertinent actions in terms of corrective measures. Such actions are enforced to minimize deviation from set standards, in addition to attaining the organization’s stated goals in a desirable manner. Consequently, according to contemporary concepts, control is defined as the ability of foreseeing and adequately mitigating various issues or errors detected. This proactive approach does not necessitate the presence of an error, before dispensing requisite measures. Thus, control regards the need of setting organizational standards, in addition to actual performance measurement, and engagement in necessary corrective measures. As Foyal portrays, control pertains to the undertaking, of ensuring that all aspects of an organization are carried out accordingly, to the adopted plan. This includes the presence of orders and delegation of duties, as well as observing the various principles provided. The core function of control thus, is towards pointing out mistakes, with the aim of rectifying existing flaws, as well as the prevention of future recurrence. As a systemic function, vital in adjusting operations to the set plans’ specifications, it also pertains to the maintenance of allowable limits of variation, from the organizational objectives present. Thus, the control subsystem present, harmoniously functions with the operational system present. This degree of interaction, is dependent on the latter’s nature, as well as its overall objectives and stability. Stability pertains to the system’s capacity of maintaining an output pattern that is without huge fluctuations. Of importance, is the response rapidity present, as it regards the speed at which a given system is able to correct existing variations, and hence return to its normal projected output (Rue, Nabil & Lloyd, 2013). Control: Elements and characteristics To be noted is that there is a correlation between the planning and controlling functions. Planning as a process pertains to the establishment of set organizational methods and objectives with control entailing the measurement and direction of actual performance, against the set goals of the organization. Control as a system, is composed of four basic elements i.e. the condition/ character to be controlled, the sensor, the comparator and the activator. The above four are influenced by the characteristics of control. Thus, control is a continuous management process, which is embedded in all levels within an organizational hierarchy. It is closely linked with planning, and henceforward looking, as a tool for the attainment of organizational activities. As an end process, it provides a comparison between planned and actual performance, thereby aiding in the pointing out of errors within the execution process. Inadvertently, it aids in minimizing costs, as well as saving time through achievement of set standards of measure. The first element is that of condition or characteristic, which is measurable, having a correlation with system/ organizational performance. In terms of the characteristic, this entails the output present, during a given state of processing with a condition referring to a resulting influence of the system present (Robert, 1970). The sensor as a control element, refers to the means of measuring the above condition or characteristic in terms of impacts and overall effects on the organizational system present. The Comparator on its part, determines the need, importance and influence of correction, through comparison of what is occurring, with that which has been planned already. To be noted is that it is usual and hence under expectation for some form of deviation to be present. However, when such deviation goes beyond the unacceptable, corrective action is needed involving varying preventative actions, which are indicative of good control measures being implemented. Lastly, the activator refers to all forms of corrective actions initiated, with the aim of returning organizational output/ production to the expected threshold. Principally, is the core importance of information, as the optimal medium of control. This is due to the essence of sensory data flow, and the subsequent feedback of corrective information, enabling better control of the prevailing condition or characteristic. Control function provides the process of setting performance standards, in addition to accounting for actual performance present. This is through a comparison of the actual organizational performance output, with the set standards (Richard, 1976). Control as an aspect is further categorized accordingly, into three general classes i.e. operational or organizational control; machine or human control systems, and open- or closed-loop control. In terms of organizational or business feasibility, a perfect plan is unattainable, as not all possible variations of input can be anticipated, and neither can organizations function purely as predicted. This thus, necessitated the need for designing control into prevailing organizational contexts and systems. While requiring more thought input, there is also present, operational flexibility, thus making it possible to utilize undetermined input, as well as unpredictable components in the operational measures. In terms of a closed-loop system, control is exercised due to the nature of the operation, as opposed to either pre-determined or outside arrangements. The control device, provides the system element vital in serving and measuring organizational/ system performance. An essential component is feedback, as found within a majority of organizations, which possess information patterns similar in nature to closed-loop systems. The aspect of goal keeping necessitates feedback, crucial in enabling organizations achieve their pre-determined goals. This thus necessitates continuous availability of indicators, concerning the degree of goal(s) attainment (Stroh, Northcraft & Neale, 2002). In terms of machine or human control, control elements are easily available in machine systems. Here there is present the expectation of precision, due to the quantifiable nature of the characteristic; in addition to the fact that both normal and standard variations to be expected, are described in specific terms. Thus, in automated machine systems, information input is utilized towards achieving specific output measures, through continual adjustment. Thus, when even small variations occur, the correctional process is able to kick in, adjusting optimally for effectiveness to be achieved. This is due to the automated system’s high structural nature, designed with the aim of accepting specific forms of input thereby producing specific output measures. This is due to the programmed nature of such a system, essential in regulating input transformation within a narrow variation range. Concerning human control systems, control is complex due to the difficulty of determining control elements. This is informed by the fact that the relationship, between associated characteristics and objectives, is not clear-cut. Most importantly, is the fact that character measurement is often extremely subjective; with it being impossible to quantify the required new inputs, as well as difficulty of defining the expected standard measures (Rue, Nabil & Lloyd, 2013). Consequently, in such systems, Man should act as the controller, when judgment is required and measurement is subjective in nature. Direct control is often necessary, through human interceding, to divert output to the desired channels. Organizational control is closely associated with Weber’s – bureaucratic theory – associated with concepts such as hierarchical authority, control span, and closeness of supervision. In recent times, a difference has been defined concerning control processes, as either dealing with daily operations or emphasizing on the nature of the systems or organizational design. While feedback is present in both, organizational control is more inclined towards the review and evaluation of the arrangement and nature of the system’s components. Operational control on the other hand, is more concerned with the adjustment of daily inputs. Overall, the direction of organizational control emanates from the strategic plans and goals set by the organization. Subsequently, an organization’s general plans are converted into specific measures of performance i.e. return on investment, earnings, market share and budgets. Conversely, operational control aims at regulating daily output, which is relative to costs, specifications and schedules (Gomez-Mejia, David & Robert, 2008). Conclusion Control is essential to the overall productivity and competitiveness of any given organizational entity. Thus, the setting of proper control limits or standards is a difficult affair to accomplish, especially concerning management setting standards that are acceptable to the employee force present. The setting of standards is essential in enabling greater control measures within organizational contexts, aimed at further enhancing the chances of goal attainment. Thus, standards ought to be not only as precise as possible, but also need to be communicated to all stakeholders concerned. Pertinently so is the fact that communication on its own is insufficient, further requiring the presence of understanding. Of core, importance is dealing with the unresponsive nature of individuals to correction and corrective measures taken. Through proper initiation of control, in addition to positive motivation and leadership, the achievement of greater responses to existing input requirements. Because a majority of control issues emanate and are related to the design structure present, solutions should therefore be focused on this area. References Gomez-Mejia, L.R., David, B.B. & Robert, L.C. (2008). Management: People, Performance, Change, (3rd Ed.). New York, New York USA: McGraw-Hill. Richard, A.J. (1976). Management, systems, and society : an introduction. Pacific Palisades, Calif.: Goodyear Publishing Company. Robert, N.A. (1970). The management control function. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press. Rue, L., Nabil, I. & Lloyd, B. (2013). Supervision: Key Link to Productivity, (10th Ed.). McGraw-Hill/ Irwin. Smith, A. (1776). The Wealth of Nations. Stroh, L.K., Northcraft, G.B. & Neale, M.A. (2002). Organizational behavior: A management challenge. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Taylor, H. (1911). Principles of Scientific Management. Read More