Managing for the Future - Essay Example

Managing for the future Introduction The application of modern management theories by companies have been the of increased attention devotedby management researchers (Battisti and Iona, 2009; Chen & Huang, 2009). Studies conducted by these authors explain the adoption of modern management practices by companies in order to pave a pathway towards innovativeness (Mol and Birkinshaw, 2009). A considerable proportion of these researches have talked about the rationale perspectives of managements and its essential features. It was revealed that the rationale perspective on management focus on the practices adopted by leaders and organizational managers that are aimed towards achieving productivity and efficiency (Bloom and Van Reenen, 2007). While explaining the primary features of rationale perspective on management, majority of the researchers talked about traditional management practices and assumptions set forth by acclaimed researchers such as Henry Fayol, Henry Ford, Fredric Taylor and Douglas McGregor. Extensive research was conducted by these researchers on scientific management and they all came up with their own models of effective management and leadership. In light of these facts what follows is a critical evaluation of the rational perspective on management and the extent to which these perspectives are relevant to contemporary managers. Critical evaluation of the main features of rationale perspective on management Main features of rationale perspective on management can be identified through the scientific management theories proposed by Taylor and Fayol. According to them management is perceived to be a rational activity that is mostly concerned with introducing and implementing the most efficient and effective ways of allocating resources to attain the required organizational purpose. This is clearly evident from the 14 management principles that have been stated by Henry Fayol. Regarded as the father of management, Fayol’s management principles have brought about a paradigm shift in the approaches taken by managers in the 20th and the 21st century (Shakir, 2014). The management framework proposed by the scholar enabled managers to learn about the ways to organize and coordinate with their subordinates in a productive manner. Even though the principles are not widely applied in the contemporary business environment but they surely do serve as a guidance framework for organizational managers (Kumari and Arora, 2013). Majority of the 14 principles are considered as common sense by managers of the ongoing times but in the yester years those principles were regarded as a revolutionary accomplishment in the area of management. Fayol’s management principles were very effective when it came to establishing coordination and collaboration among employees (Mitchell, 2013). The scholar emphasized a lot on the importance of team work, effective resource allocation, flexible work environment and unified leadership and command. These are concepts that are dominant in the modern business environment as all the aforementioned aspects are considered to be critical success factors for organizations. The prime aim of organizational managers is to make sure that resources are alloted properly. Not only does that allow companies to achieve economies of scale but it also enables them to make sure that resources are not wasted in any manner. This is one of the fundamental features of rational perspective on management. Henry Fayol’s 14 principles of management also emphasized on effective management of resources and that is why the theories are regarded as a major reflector of the rational perspective on management in the 20th and the 21st century (Mindtools, 2014a). However, what Henry Fayol’s theory failed to encompass is the importance of adopting an appropriate leadership style. The principles mostly emphasized on team work, employee welfare and work environment. There was no elaboration on the contribution that an appropriate leadership style has on the success of a company (Bell and Martin, 2012). Leadership has been the nucleus of many researches that have been conducted over the recent past. Organizations all over the world have stressed about the contribution that a leader has in directing the workflow process (Giannantonio and Hurley-Hanson, 2011). In fact the aspects of perfect management that have been proposed by Henry Fayol cannot be executed without the application of an appropriate leadership style. Given the fact that the rationale perspective on management indicates the importance of effective resource allocation, the implementation of an appropriate leadership style becomes even more important. This is one aspect that was not considered within the theories set forth by Henry Fayol (Mindtools, 2014a). Another fundamental feature of rationale perspective on management can be identified in the theories stated by Henry Ford of Ford Motor Corporation. The aspects of management that this acclaimed leader introduced are considered by many as a revelation in the field of management. Henry Ford’s idea often termed as post Fordism refers to a major transformation that the leader brought about in the field of process engineering (Rahman, 2012). Post Fordism stressed on the importance of mass production and its amalgamation with mass consumption that facilities steady economic growth. The alteration from craft production to mass production helped the leader to create a market that is based on economies of scope and scale. The underlying strategy behind the attainment of economies of scale and scope has been to emphasis on functional specialism and infinitesimal division of labour. This is another rationale perspective on management that is dominant in the contemporary business environment. Organizations all over the world strive to attain economies of scope and scale by distributing their fixed expenses. This in turn enables them to reduce the cost incurred behind operations. Henry Ford also focused on efficient allocation as did the theories of Henry Fayol and their contributions are regarded as rationale perspectives of management (Rahman, 2012). As mentioned above, post Fordism only emphasized on specialization of functions and appropriate distribution of labor. This is precisely because of the fact that the main rationale behind fordism strategies was to enhance productivity in a rapidly developing automobile industry. Unlike Fayol’s principles post Fordism did not stress on the importance team work, employee engagement, and work environment. Attention was only paid on productivity. Even though enhancing productivity is the primary agenda of majority of the organizations in the modern business environment but post Fordism theories proved to be inadequate when it came to strengthening the organizational administration process. Ensuring a robust administration framework is a fundamental determinant of organizational success in the present world however post fordism completely overlooked this aspect of organizational development. Establishing a robust administration framework is extremely critical for organizations in order to streamline business process. This enables organizational managers to make sure that a strong coordination exists between each and every functional department in the business. Having such a framework in place is extremely important for companies (especially manufacturing) so as to enhance operational efficiency and productivity. However this is one aspect which was completely overlooked within the post Fordism theory (Willamette, n.d.). Frederick Winslow Taylor’s theory is also relevant to the rationale perceptive on management that is dominant in the contemporary business environment (Hatch, 2012). Taylorism sets forth the concept that there is only one accurate method to conduct a particular activity. This theory is in complete misalignment with the several modern approaches such as management by objective, business process reengineering and continual improvement (Huczynski, 2012). These management approaches encourage individuals to assume responsibility as well as emphasize on pushing the decision making process through all the levels within an organization (Egan, 2013). Teamwork and collaboration are the areas where Taylorism is at odds with the current management practices. Taylorism theory emphasizes on breaking down tasks into small steps (Bell and Martin, 2012). Thereafter focus is given on individuals regarding the ways in which they perform the steps assigned to them in a better manner. On the contrary, contemporary management theories emphasize on examining the work flow mechanism more holistically with the underlying aim of evaluating efficiency and enhancing productivity (Giannantonio and Hurley-Hanson, 2011). The acute management specialization that Taylorism highlights is in complete contrast to the contemporary management ideals regarding the ways to create a motivated and satisfied workforce (Mindtools, 2014b). Prevalence of rational perspective on management on contemporary management practices A vast majority of managers in the contemporary business environment emulate the management principles and theories introduced by Fayol and Taylor. Even after that one can still identify the approach that is taken by managers in the present world. Management principles outlined by the aforementioned scholars are used as a guidance framework but there is certain degree of restriction to their applicability in the current business surroundings. There are two reasons that justify the aforementioned statement and that is the rapidly increasing intensity of competition in the modern business environment and the changing perspectives of modern day managers regarding applying management styles in order to tackle such competition. Contemporary managers do emphasize a lot on productivity and efficiency through the attainment of economies of scale and scope but this is only the first step towards their aim of creating a sustainable business. Establishing a sustainable business has been the primary agenda of majority of the organizations that operate currently. This is a part of their corporate social responsibility strategies that not only allows them to preserve the environment but also enables managers to enhance their reputation as a sustainable business (DiGiuseppe and Bernard, 2013). Contemporary managers emphasize a lot on the implementation of effective leadership styles. This is precisely because of the fact that achievement of the aforementioned objectives would become virtually impossible without the guidance and direction provided by an able leader. Contemporary managers, employing an appropriate leadership style, put equivalent emphasis both on the productivity of the organization and welfare of the workforce. They focus lot on creating working environment that enables employees to attain all round development. They believe in establishing a robust communication framework between themselves and their subordinates in order to give them ample flexibility for negotiation (Levinthal, 2011). Contemporary managers always participate proactively in discussion with the subordinate employees in order to make sure that they have clear understanding of the organizational objectives. This is a modern approach that allows managers to discuss critical issues with employees which needs to be addressed with immediate effect. Managers in the contemporary business environment emphasize a lot on free channelization of information which puts them in a better position to identify the strengths and weaknesses within the organization (Armstrong and Taylor, 2014). Participating proactively in discussions enable managers to make the employees understand their value within the organization. By doing so managers are able to consider the opinions of employees while making key decisions aimed towards business development. This is one of the fundamental management strategies followed by managers that enable them to enhance the level of engagement within the employees. They believe that making employees a part of the organizational decision making process helps them to bring the best out of each and every employee which in turn increases their individual efficiency and productivity (DiGiuseppe and Bernard, 2013). Contemporary organizational managers also focus a lot on establishing a strong organizational culture. Organizations in the current business environment employ people from diverse cultural background. Given this situation, it becomes extremely important for managers to ensure employees understand and respect each and every culture. The fundamental agenda of organizational managers is to establish an organizational culture where the performance exhibited by one employee serves as a motivational factor for another employee. Another rationale behind establishing a robust organizational culture is to ensure that each and every employee work with integrity (Vaccaro, 2012). It is the responsibility of the manager to ensure that employees abide the ethical codes of conduct set forth within the corporate governance framework of the organization. The only one way of ensuring that ethical codes are being followed is to create a work culture where employees are aware of the importance of conducting ethical business. This not only enhance the reputation of the company as an entity which thrives to conduct business transparently but also allows the company managers that prevent any situation of wrongdoings which might later result in financial loss. Managers in the contemporary business environment pay more attention towards enhancing their brand image as a reliable company as this is one way for them to gain significant competitive advantage over rival companies and thereafter create a sustainable source of profit (Vaccaro, 2012). These are contemporary management strategies which were neither encompassed in the principles set forth by Fayol nor in the theories proposed by Taylor. These contemporary rationale perspectives on management have been driving organizational success over the last decades or so (Armstrong and Taylor, 2014). Relevance of rationale perspective on management to contemporary managers The rationale perspectives on management that have been evaluated in the previous section are very relevant to the requirements of contemporary managers. Managers in the contemporary business environment strive to attain competitive advantage against their rivals. Their primary objective is to gain a considerable proportion of the market share which in turn will enable them to create sustainable source of revenue and henceforth profit. Organizational managers in the present world are more concerned about their corporate social responsibility. According to them having proper corporate social responsibility strategies at place enables companies to serve the society in a better manner which in turn enhances their reputation. Managers have stressed on the importance of emphasizing on the stakeholders rather than devoting full attention on the shareholders (Levinthal, 2011). Managers in the current business realm believe that keeping in mind the needs and requirements of stakeholders and thereafter fulfilling them appropriately can create a path that directs towards sustainability. As mentioned above, establishing a sustainable business by all means, whether it is to become environmentally or financially sustainable has been the primary agenda for majority of the organizations. Managers have thrived to make sure that the work environment within their offices suites the needs and demands of each and every employee. Contemporary managers have increasingly focused on the welfare of their employees in order to make sure that both the employees’ and the organization’s objectives are completely aligned. In that way managers are able to encourage employees to demonstrate productivity in their performance (DiGiuseppe and Bernard, 2013). Free flow of information is another aspect that is getting increasing attention in the modern business environment. Not only is this a way for managers to make sure that business is conducted transparently but it also puts managers in a better position to strengthen collaboration and coordination among various functional departments with the organization. Free flow of information facilitates effective communication between managers and their subordinates which in turn serves as a guidance framework for managers to identify critical issues within the organization’s internal control. For example, free flow of information is one of the major drivers of an effective supply chain management process. It enables managers to monitor the fact that the cycle of raw materials delivery to finished product delivery is conducted with optimized efficiency. By ensuring free flow of information managers are able to make sure that counterfeit products are not being distributed within the company’s supply chain network (Armstrong and Taylor, 2014). Therefore, the facts that have been mentioned in this section highlights that modern management practices, like the conventional management principles, are aimed towards enhancing organizational efficiency and productivity. However the difference lies in the approach that is taken by managers in order to attain this objective. From the researcher’s standpoint, modern management practices are more flexible and broad which not only allows companies to become successful but also sustainable in the long run. Even after the implementation of effective management strategies, managers face many challenges in their quest towards achieving success and sustainability. One of the major challenges that have recently been noticed is presence of a culturally diverse workforce. Managers often find it quite difficult to manage a workforce that is culturally diverse. They often encounter issues related to employee mistreatment done by another fellow employee as well as cases of conflict of interest (Vaccaro, 2012). Employees are found directing other’s culture which in turn becomes a discriminatory issue thereby weakening the organization’s work culture. These issues more often than not results in deteriorating coordination and collaboration among team members. Another challenge faced by managers while dealing with a culturally diverse workforce is biasness. Two employees from same culture are often found supporting each other whereas they strongly dislike to work along with people from different culture. Such behaviour exhibited by employees motivates others to do the same and ultimately it becomes a recurring process. Issues like this have severely deteriorated the ambience of what was before a stable work environment in many organizations. Ergo, even after implementing effective management strategies, managers have found it relatively difficult to tackle this challenge. Conclusion: Non rationale perspective – alternative ways of management Considered as an alternative way of management, the non rationale perspective considers people to be highly creative. This is an important assumption as considering people to be creative is one step forward to creating innovation (Bell and Martin, 2012). Contemporary managers whose approach is directed by a non rationale perspective have a broad vision. They are what we call leaders of the future. Their approach towards efficiency and productivity are rather conventional. Leader following such alternative form of management strategies, manage their employees in such a way that they are able to adapt to any circumstance (Hatch, 2012). This approach is same as outlined within Mintzberg management theory. The theory states organizations should be like amoebas by developing capability to incessantly adapt and change according to the suitability of their environment (Huczynski, 2012). Adopting such an approach will allow managers to progress towards the organizational goal from multiple directions. Leaders of such wisdom and vision are seldom found in the contemporary business environment as the rational perspective on management still dominates the thought process and approach of majority of the organizational managers (Egan, 2013). However, in order to make the world a better and safer place to live, it is extremely important for managers to adopt leadership styles that are driven by non rationale perspective on management. Reference List Armstrong, M. and Taylor, S., 2014. Armstrongs handbook of human resource management practice. London: Kogan Page Publishers. Battisti, G., and Iona, A., 2009. The intra-firm diffusion of complementary innovations: evidence from the adoption of management practices by British establishments. Res Policy, 8, pp.1326–1339. Bell, R. L. and Martin, J. S., 2012. The relevance of scientific management and equity theory in everyday managerial communication situations. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 13(3), pp. 106-115. Bloom, N., and Van Reenen, J., 2007. Measuring and explaining management practices across firms and countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122, pp.1351–408. Chen, C. J. and Huang J. W., 2009. Strategic human resource management practices and innovation performance—the mediating role of knowledge management capacity. Journal of Business Research, 62, pp. 104–114. DiGiuseppe, R. and Bernard, M. L., 2013. Rational-emotive consultation in applied settings. London: Routledge. Egan, G., 2013. The skilled helper: A problem-management and opportunity-development approach to helping. Connecticut: Cengage Learning. Giannantonio, C. M. and Hurley-Hanson, A. E., 2011. Frederick Winslow Taylor: Reflections on the Relevance of The Principles of Scientific Management 100 Years Later. Journal of Business Management, 7. Hatch, M. J., 2012. Organization theory: modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives. Oxford: Oxford university press. Huczynski, A., 2012. Management gurus. London: Routledge. Kumari, S. and Arora, M., 2013. Employees’ Perception Towards Implication Of Henry Fayol’s Principles. Journal Of Business Management & Social Sciences Research, 2(6), pp. 6-12. Levinthal, D. A., 2011. A behavioral approach to strategy—whats the alternative?. Strategic Management Journal, 32(13), pp. 1517-1523. Mindtools, 2014a. Henri Fayols Principles of Management. [online] Available at: [Accessed 9 January 2014]. Mindtools, 2014b. Frederick Taylor and Scientific Management. [online] Available at: [Accessed 9 January 2014]. Mitchell, B., 2013. Resource and Environmental Management. London: Routledge. Mol, M. J. and Birkinshaw, J., 2009. The sources of management innovation: When firms introduce new management practices. Journal of business research, 62(12), pp. 1269-1280. Rahman, M. H., 2012. Henry Fayol and Frederick Winslow Taylor’s Contribution to Management Thought: An Overview. ABC Journal of Advanced Research, 1(2), pp. 32-41. Shakir, M., 2014. Using Henry Fayol’s Principles for Better Classroom Management. Public Policy and Administration Research, 4(11), pp. 72-77. Vaccaro, I. G., Jansen, J. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A. and Volberda, H. W., 2012. Management innovation and leadership: the moderating role of organizational size. Journal of Management Studies, 49(1), pp. 28-51. Willamette, no date. Fordism, post-fordism and the flexible system of production. [online] Available at: [Accessed 9 January 2014]. Read More