Foundational Philosophies of Management - Article Example

Foundational Philosophies of Management-Sheila Affiliation Philosophies of Management Introduction Every leader seems to have a set of intrinsic urge to guide others to a certain direction. Having such a mission statement, does aid in communicating to other people and self about what one may perceive as essential in different management systems. One gets a clear purpose to link the decision making process in his or her life. It does enable one to have a clear path of direction especially when it comes to leading and directing a group of people or employees. Different management philosophers may have different views and perceptions towards the management process. Some may postulate that senior citizens do not have to understand the information technology and, therefore, can only depend on built systems in order to survive in the modern world while others may believe that there is a way to help the senior citizens to cope in a technology-ridden world. The way a management philosopher regards the issue of senior citizens and interaction with information technology determines their management style. Different philosophers have diverse views on the management philosophies. However, each philosopher tends to lean on his direction as being the most successful and the one to be emulated. Sheila Walton is an investment philosopher working with Spence Asset Management. Her core role remains sitting in various boards meetings and aiding in the formulation of investment ideas. Sheila Walton is involved in developing complex and advanced investment products, which can be used by investors in the firm. Sheila seems to have a management philosophy that bends on the side of not needing to have the older people to understand the technology, or the information. She believes that as long as the information technology can be on the use to design the best investment policies, the seniors do not have to understand it, and they can depend on investment advisors in order to develop this. Consequently, her main challenge is to develop advanced investment policies using advanced analysis tools. Sittig & Sigh (2012) does not advocate the lack of better analysis tools to help in making better products for the older citizens for investments. However, his emphasis is on the fact that information systems and information technology should be used as a barrier against the older people who don’t already have a way to access the information since they may to be computer literate. Holroyd-Leduc et al. (2011) do not do not perceive her ideations kindly, and, therefore, look for better ways to deal with the issue. They are ambassadors for modern systems that are made to help older citizens in interacting with information technology. It means that there is a need to guarantee that senior people who may not be well exposed to modern information technology to have a way to access, analyze and use information rather than depending upon others to do it. Malley, Cohen & Grossman (2010) does not believe that the older generation fails to have the capacity to understand and relate with the modern technology. In retrospect, he believes that it is possible to have a system that helps the senior citizens to be able to access and use information without necessarily needing the aid of other persons. It can be useful in helping them to make their own decisions. Their philosophy seems to be geared towards empowerment of the individual by placing the information and the power to decide on his or her own hand. It is unlike Sheila who seems to believe that the power of the individual to decide is not necessarily important and that as long as the person ends up well, it is justified. As a result, it seems that Sheila, in light of information processing, believes that the end justifies the means. In her philosophy then, although the person is not given the power of having the information, the end justifies that lack of access to the information. Sheila’s philosophy seems to edge on the belief that older citizens are not able to adopt new technology, especially information technology. As a result, she seems to believe that instead of trying to develop ways to help them adapt to the new technology, it is better to use the same technology to develop services and systems, which will help them, get the services they need. This stand is very different from that of Sharpe who believes that with the right planning, it is possible to create a system that is able to help senior citizens to be able to adopt the information. Due to her view that there is no need for senior citizens to be given access to information technology or the information, Sheila focuses on the delivery of high-class investment portfolios. She regards this as the only way to guarantee that the technology can and will benefit these people. Her philosophy is then informed by two fundamental realities. First, she does not believe that there is a way to help senior citizens to be able to access and use IT in an effective manner. She does seem to believe that even if there were such technology to help these people access the information technology, the results would be futile because they still would not be able to use the technology and information to make useful decisions. Secondly, she seems to believe that the end justifies the means. In this regard, she seems to think that instead of having the senior people be able to adapt to new technology, it is better to helps them to use indirectly the technology for their own benefits. These two factors separate her from the way she looks at the way the information technology should be utilized and the way it can be made available to the people (Mohan, Bishop & Mallows, 2013). Part II: Research trail The articles were found as a process of looking at two fundamental issues. The first one is the issue of senior citizens learning infuriation systems. By searching for articles and information sources that dealt with this issue, it was now possible to identify how some different authors have tried to look at the issue. This search on the part of information systems and e-learning perspectives provides this research with the materials on how some management philosophers look at the way new technology can be made easy to use by the senior citizens who are not well exposed to this new technology. The credibility of the articles is based on the qualifications of the authors and their publishers. Malley, Cohen & Grossman (2010) are all high-level computer and information systems experts. The books were published by Springer-Verlag publisher, which only publishes highly vetted academic and professional works. Flow chart for the research process References Holroyd-Leduc, J, M., Lorenzetti, D. Straus, S, E., Sykes, L & Quan, H. (2011). The impact of the electronic medical record on structure, process, and outcomes within primary care: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2011; 18:6, 732-737 Mohan, M, K., Bishop, R, O & Mallows, J, L. (2013). Effect of an electronic medical record Information system on emergency department performance. The Medical Journal of Australia. 198 (4): 201-204. Malley, A, S., Cohen, R, G & Grossman, M, J. (2010).Electronic Medical Records and Communication with Patients and Other Clinicians: Are We Talking Less? Sittig, D. & Sigh, H. (2012). Electronic Health Records and National Patient-Safety Goals. The New England Journal of Medicine. 367:1854-1860 Read More