Management Theory and Practice - Article Example

Management Theory and Practice Affiliation: Introduction Management is a very age old practice and has always been deemed to be successful in making organizations increase their profit. This has for a long time been attributed to the managerial theories which are not only taught in schools but in training and managerial seminars as well. Research in the recent decades has led to the conclusion that managerial practices, which are taught from the theories, are eroding the management field and are leading to negative management practices. This is as a result of the assumptions made in some of the managerial theories which the managers tend to take as the truth and they incorporate them in their managerial practices (Ferraro, Pfeffer and Sutton, 2005). This is despite the fact that they are not facts and are simply mere assumptions. Managers are usually taken upon as being coercive, and dwelling more on punishing the employees than having any rewarding relationship with them. Managers take greater care of shareholders and investors, aiming to please them and even develop trusting relationships with them, which totally lacks with the employees. This is a great assumption made by a combination of different managerial theories all emphasizing the little or no significance the employees pay to a manager, and do not contribute to the ultimate success of the organization. The theories and especially those surrounding the issue of managerial culture and politics dwell on the myth that employees are easily replaceable but that is not the case with shareholders who are also investors. Another example brought forward about the assumptions in management is in topic of motivation. Theory X by McGregor leads the managers to assume that the sole purpose of employees going to work and in them having an interest in the job is the money they get (Bush, 2003). With such as assumption, the manager only tries to motivate the employees by increasing their monetary benefits such as allowances and salaries. This is at the expense of controlling them, mistrusting them as well as coercing them into their jobs. The ultimate result of this assumption and the practices of the manager is the avoidance of responsibilities by the employees, as well as lacking any ambition to develop the organization, unless they are coerced into doing so. The employees lack incentive to work with the management and this generally affects the overall work performance of the organization. The assumptions made in the managerial theories taught in schools and managerial trainings have increased significantly the bad managerial practices. They provide partial analysis of the situation and managerial practices and lead to the lack of ethics in management as well as social nature in corporate social responsibility and management in general (Garvin, 2008). Management was initially meant to be a social science as it involves working directly with people be it employees, shareholders, investors or government officials. The managerial theoretical assumptions have however driven the management field into physical science. devoid of any human emotions, feelings and interaction. The assumptions have led to the belief that the most important issue in management is having control and maintaining bureaucracy in the organization at all levels. This is especially emphasized in the power theories. The Lysenko syndrome as explained by Carey (1977) is a perfect example of how the managers have made managerial work to be purely scientific and devoid of any psychological and sociological aspect. This leads to it being a purely inhumane field despite its definition. Theories relating to decision making and leadership as explained by Brocklehurst, Grey and Sturdy, (2010) indicate how managers view themselves as invincible. They therefore instead of being leaders and sharing the decision making role, handle it themselves without involving any other parties. The teaching in schools on management does not emphasize on managers being leaders or the difference between the two. If leadership for the managers is emphasized, they would completely ignore the assumptions that most theories portray and focus more on the important aspects of management, the first being inclusiveness. The article by Brocklehurst, Grey and Sturdy, (2010) questions the dominance that the field of management has been portraying. It also concludes that the dominance approach managers have been using in the field without incorporation of human relations is the sole reason why the field has been declining and receiving negative reviews. According to Bush (2003), managers have been taught to focus more on the hierarchy in the organization which leads to them making all the decisions, not being concerned with the welfare of the employees and especially those in the low-level job as well as holding their positions with independence. The courses taught in management have neglected instilling the humane side managers should portray but rather dwell on the business aspect. This has led to managers holding themselves in position of status and commanding more than is expected of them. They have neglected strict adherence to code of ethics and professionalism the rest of the professionals follow, and this has affected their practice legally and morally. The management theories that the managers can use to foster human relations with especially employees, such as leadership and motivation theories are surrounded with assumptions. These assumptions heavily lie on the fact that there are inherent characteristics and traits necessary for maintaining human relation. Anyone not possessing these characteristics and traits is not fit for leadership and management. Most managers therefore act on these assumptions and manage purely on technical basis. The assumptions in the managerial theories mentioned above also lead to the managers believing that human relations and giving decision making power to the employees reduces the power and authority of the manager. Literature on management tends to deduce that the manager in such a scenario will be considered a weak manager and hence his rules and decisions undermined (Tsoukas and Knudsen, 2005). This is not a good picture to paint for the shareholders and investors who want ruthless management of their money and assets. The recent literature that is rising questions on the management models and their negative effects on the managers and their management in organizations, have sparked debate on the root cause of the management problem. Changes have been made in the curriculum regarding the management theories being taught. According to Ghoshal (2005), the academic research and not the courses themselves on management are what are to blame for the negative management practices and attitude of managers. When the managers are taught, they have to incorporate all that they have been taught into their organizations and this is where the problem becomes evident. They incorporate chosen aspects of the managerial theories and this includes the assumptions since they are more dominant in the academic research and tend to be emphasized more (Gill and Johnson, 2010). With this knowledge about the literature, the solutions are still provided by the same critiques and they involve not only changing the literature, but what is being taught and emphasized to the managerial students. Adetule, (2011) indicates that there is a lot of pretentious knowledge being passed in management courses which leads partial analysis being made about the important points to consider in management. They leave out the human interaction and relation part when teaching about management and this causes majority of the problems being experienced in the field of management. If the managers cannot be able to incorporate human relations in their management, then it is rather obvious that they will have difficulty interacting with their employees, and this is likely to cause human labour problem in the organization. Employees would leave the organization for a better one where the management is interacting with them frequently and letting them be involved in decision making process. The other alternative is them engaging in their work devoid of any emotions and energy reducing productivity (Chapman, 1998). Management is a social science and hence aspects of sociology and psychology should be incorporated in managerial practices. According to Mesny (2009), managers need to dwell on four sociological positions which are homology, superiority, circularity as well as complementarity. These four positions encourage managers to have more objectivity and reflexivity when handling people, learn to complement others as well as combine effectively the scientific knowledge and what is referred to as common sense. These sociological aspects combined with the physical science aspect of accountancy and business will make the manager all rounded and eliminate focus on only managerial assumptions (Greenhalgh, 2007). Managers need to offer the same trust to employees as they do to the shareholders. The trust will go a long way into fostering teamwork and good leadership. The above will eliminate some of the assumptions surrounding management and leadership as well as relations between managers and other stakeholders of the organization in general. This has been one of the major assumptions stipulated by most managerial critique literature and hence if way can be found to not only evade but completely eliminate it, then it should be taken immediately. Teachers and training tutors should learn to shift the focus of the managers during lessons and make them focus on what is most important in management. They should emphasize more on the ethics surrounding management and what constitutes ethical and unethical behaviour. This will lead to reduction of the cases of unethical practices being carried out by managers all in the name of increasing profits or benefiting themselves (Frey and Meier, 2005). Corporate social responsibility should also be emphasized upon. CSR not only leads to giving back to the community but puts the organization on the limelight at all times. When the organization is constantly on the limelight, the manager will ensure to always be on the best ethical behaviour and follow the management rules to the letter without incorporating the assumptions discussed above. CSR also occupies the mind and time of the manager further stretching his schedule. This minimizes the time the manager may have been using to scheme negatively about the company or just paying much attention to the shareholders. The CSR also involves recruiting others and seeking employees to be in charge and participate and this will provide more bonding time between manager and the employees (Schwartz, 2011). Conclusion Managerial theories are very effective in teaching and guiding managers of management practices. However, they have assumptions which the managers emphasize more upon and this negatively affects their performance at work, leads to a straining relationship or even an absent one with the employees and causes mistrust issues at work. A manager is required to be well rounded and ready to combine the scientific aspect and the social science one in his managerial practices (Baron and Kreps, 1999). This is the only way to ensure that performance keeps on escalating through teamwork and good management. Care should be maintained to ensure that they always think and act within the set ethical and legal standards. Reference Adetule, J. (2011). The Handbook on Management Theories. London: Author House. Baron, J. and Kreps, D. (1999). Strategic Human Resources: Frameworks for General Managers. New York: Wiley. Brocklehurst, M., Grey, C. and Sturdy, A. (2010). Management: The work that dares not speak its name. Management Learning, 41(1), pp. 7-19. Bush, T. (2003). Theories of Educational Leadership and Management. New York: SAGE. Carey, A. (1977). The Lysenko Syndrome in Western Social Science. Australian Psychologist, 12(1), pp. 27-38. Chapman, G. (1998). MBA Quality Signals. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 8 (4), 29-48. Ferraro, F., Pfeffer, J. and Sutton, R. (2005). Economics Language and Assumptions: How Theories Can Become Self-Fulfilling. Academy of Management Review, 30 (1), 8-24. Frey, B. and Meier, S. (2005). Selfish and Indoctrinated Economists? European Journal of Law and Economics, 19 (2), 165-71. Garvin, D. (2008). Managing Quality: The Strategic and Competitive Edge. New York: Simon & Schuster. Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad Management Theories Are Destroying Good Management Practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), pp. 75-91. Gill, J. and Johnson, P. (2010). Research Methods for Managers. New York: SAGE. Greenhalgh, A. (2007). Case Method Teaching as Science and Art: A Metaphoric Approach and Curricular Application. Journal of Management Education, 31 (2), 181-194. Mesny, A. (2009). What do ‘we’ know that ‘they’ don’t? Sociologists’ versus nonsociologists’ knowledge. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 34(3), pp. 671-695. Schwartz, M. (2011). Corporate Social Responsibility: An Ethical Approach. Massachusetts: Broadview Press. Tsoukas, H. and Knudsen, C. (2005). The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory. New York: Oxford Handbooks Online. Read More