Management & Leadership Style within Organisation - Coursework Example

Case Study Affiliation The aim of this paper is to analyse a case of Ministry of transport and to link the case with management and leadership theories. The main focus of this analysis is on the root cause of problem which has raised many questions on the progress and reputation of ministry of transport. At the end of this analysis recommendations have been provided to further improve the performance of this ministry and to resolve issues facing by the people. Management is not a new activity, people are arranging and managing things since Stone Age therefore it is an activity which every human has done. In stone age even, people formed small groups in order to manage their day to day tasks, from hunting to taking care of infants. As society has progressed so have different styles of managing. And in such an advance fast moving age, importance of groups along with reliance on group efforts has been given more importance. In multi-national firms and corporate giants; strong emphasis is being laid on leadership and management. The Ministry of transport is also consisted of large number of people working together in the form of teams. There are separate teams for each division to perform different activities. And each division team reports of Director General, the head of the ministry. The main departments which work under the ministry of transport are Road Construction, Road Repairs, Traffic Control, Engineering, Road safety, Communications IT, Planning, Finance and Contract Legal. Each department was assigned specific targets and Public Reforms Commission has monitored their performance for last six months. On the same day when Director General awarded his staff a bridge collapsed, this is the worst scenario because the employees have been awarded because of their good performance and a serious accident took place. This incident has raised many questions on the integrity and performance of ministry of finance. After the award ceremony The Director General started a meeting with the heads of all the departments to discuss way forward results of each of the divisions. The performance of the departments is not satisfactory; expect the performance of division of finance and corporate legal. The department of Road Safety has worst performance and this is an alarming fact because road safety is a serious issue and media has raised critics on this poor performance. Moreover, Road Safety department is not solely responsible for its poor performance because road safety is highly dependent on road construction and maintenance. Due to this reason heads of each department started pointing out mistakes of others. It is easy to pin point other’s mistake but it is really difficult to analyse your own. The main problem in the ministry of transportation is lack of coordination and taking of responsibility. No one is ready to take the responsibility of the poor performance and everyone is blaming others. The Director General is a flexible person and due to his flexibility and lenience departmental heads are not taking serious actions to improve their performance and just blaming each other. Sometimes senior manager or Chief executive officer has to take serious and harsh decision to tell its people what the company wants from them because it is the responsibility of top management to train its employees and to motivate them to achieve organizational mission (Kelly). So, it is the responsibility of General Director of ministry of finance to motivate its people to work better. During his speech he said that the organization is a family and everyone is doing their best. This statement is not appropriate in situations where there is a serious accident took place. Furthermore, a good manager should be a good leader, because he/she is the one who has to take his/her team towards the road of success. It is important to remember that a leader needs to keep both internal as well as external factors in mind while operating or designing different strategies for future course of action. In the case of ministry of transport the DG should tell the external and internal factors to all departmental heads so that they will work in a progressive manner. The DG in his speech mentioned that all you need to run a government agency is fear and a sense of belonging. He contradicts himself because when employees committed towards organizational goals then they do not need to work in fear. Employees who do not feel sense of belonging work just because of fear, so there should be only element either sense of belongings or fear. In order to increase the effectiveness of the organization it is necessary that each person understands his/her accountability and work according to organizational culture and norms. It has been revealed from the past stories of organizations that when organizations face problems they implement different management theories to increase organizational productivity and quality. But there is not a single theory which can be applied in all organizations because each organization is different from other in terms of nature of work, culture, and people. So, to increase productivity and effectiveness it is necessary to understand the key issue due to which an organization is facing trouble and they select a specific management style. The ministry of finance is a large organization so there is a need to understand which management theory is best for the organization. The best way is to use different theories depending upon the department, purpose, and workforce. Systems Theory System theory explains that the success of any organization depends on the system. If system is integrated and employees know their responsibilities then they work better with mutual understanding for the sake of organization (Kelly). It is a theory that allows managers to examine the workplace and coordinate work with employees in a better way and to achieve organizational mission. Managers of ministry of transport should adopt system theory to increase coordination between different departments and to increase overall organizational performance. In one point Mr Trang (head of the Road Construction Division) raised a question that why the targets of planning, contract legal and finance departments are on national level while other departments have targets on regional level. His question is very important because there should be single criteria to judge the performance of all departments. Contingency Theory This theory explains that managers make decisions on the basis of current situation rather than a single strategy fits for all. It is necessary for managers to take appropriate actions on the basis of current scenario so that problem will be tackle successfully. Manages who are rigid towards their actions and make decisions on the basis their past experiences cannot solve different problems effectively (Murugesan). In order to improve effectiveness of Road Safety department and other departments, managers of ministry of control should analyse the problem first. Moreover, the performance of one department is dependent on the performance of other department so in this scenario all managers should work together to find out the solution to improve organizational effectiveness and performance under the supervision of Director General. Chaos Theory Change is inevitable, so organizations should accept change and work accordingly. Although internal organizational actions and circumstances san be controlled but external cannot be controlled. The accident of bridge collapse cannot be controlled because it was an accident and nobody predicted that something like this could happen. In order to deal with this type of sudden incidents the ministry of transportation should have contingency plans. Chaos theory explains that change is unavoidable and sudden events cannot be controlled so, organizations should stabilize their structure and functions by conducting proper contingency planning (Wetherly). The reason provided by Mr Athos (head of Road Safety Depertment) is not satisfactory because he totally blamed maintenance department. He further suggested that the organization needs to gain employees’ trust. This statement is not appropriate because in this organization the problem is not to gain employees trust but to have a proper check and balance system. Classical Management Theory The classical management theory focuses on organizational structure and goals. According to Henry Fayol all employees should work for the betterment of organization. This should focus on what is good for the organization and how they can play their role to achieve organizational goals (M. Govindarajan). The people of ministry of transport do not follow classical management theory therefore they are least concerned about organizational goals and fame. They all work individually and do not cooperate with each other. This is the main reason for the poor performance of whole organization. Only two departments which achieved their targets are finance department and contract legal department but there two departments are general for all the four regions of the state. Moreover, these two departments are responsible to provide assistance and central services to all regions so; the performance of these two departments is questionable. The heads of these departments need to provide explanation of their performance. Additionally, the poor performance of road safety department is somehow also related to the assistance of finance and contract legal department so it negatively affects the image and reputation of their two departments. By adopting classical management theory the problem can be solved because it focuses on organizational structure and system rather than individual’s performance. The advice of Mr Hemming (Head of Engineering Department) is really good because he raised a point to improve organizational structure to solve this issue but there are limitations when applying this idea into practice because it is not easy to change a strong organizational culture and structure. From the arguments and facts presented by heads of each division it has been revealed that the problem of poor performance and accident of bridge collapsed is due to the lack of coordination and trust between departments. Each department works individually for the sake of their own interest rather than for the betterment of whole organization. There is lack of discipline in employees and they are not committed towards organizational goals. Moreover, the organization needs better coordination, a good coordination across departments. The departments should work together; there should be synchronization between finance, engineering, planning, road safety, and all other departments. Management & Leadership Style within Organisation From the case study, it becomes evident that members of different teams are just working towards fulfilment of their personal career goals rather than towards corporate goals. Clear conflict situation is also visible in the team as shifting of responsibilities is common trait and one team cannot stand achievements of the other. Management style implemented in given organisation is more of a mixture of Bureaucratic Approach, as Bureaucratic feature clearly reflects in working of organisation. This form of approach is focusing more on authority in accordance to designation and also reflecting that managers are some form of legal control over the employees. Managers are being followed just because of their position and not because of their qualification or experience. Different heads of departments, when expressing their views clearly reflected the sort of management style they want to function. Some are focused more on being System Based Approach in which roles of each department is required to be defined. Some are more tilted towards Human Relations Approach i.e. building personal relationships between top and middle level management and putting more importance on having appropriate human interaction in teams. Whereas some focus more on Scientific Approach; in which more power is to be rested with management rather than members of the team. As for Leadership Style is concerned the case depicted that Director General has the power of authority and he was the person who is responsible to make all the decisions. All the heads of the departments were allowed to give their opinions but the final decision has to be taken by the DG. Open disagreement in heads of different departments in front of DG also shows level of respect which they have for the head of organisation. Arguments if presented in proper manner could also have served the purpose. The leadership style that DG showed in the case is Democratic leadership style, because instead of using his authority to make decision the DG allowed all the heads of the departments to present their views and discuss how the accident problem can be resolved. Director General’s behaviour towards his subordinates shows that he believes in Affiliative leadership style. This style is very suitable because it focuses on team work and creates harmony between groups and DG knows well how to run such a large organization by creating harmony between different departments. Issues Being Faced Following are list of issues which currently whole organisation is facing. If not resolved in time, organisation will be in troubling waters. Lack of Vision - Currently from given situation it clearly reflects that all heads of different group lack clear vision as to what needs to be achieved. They don’t know the organizational vision and work only for their department. Their negligence shows that they least concerned about organizational vision and pay more attention on their personal status and role. Internal Conflicts – Every now and then discussion between group heads shows that some sort of internal conflict exists between all group heads. None is ready to accept the achievements of the other. Nobody is ready to take responsibility of poor performance and busy in pointing out others’ mistakes. There is poor coordination between departments and this poor coordination results in internal conflicts. Claiming Responsibility – When it comes to claiming who is responsible for wrong doings or failure of not achieving specific goals, nobody is ready to raise hand and accept their part in failure. Instead of accepting their fault heads of each department started arguments with each other. Lack of Check & Balance – Mechanism which could check progress on assignments of different departments doesn’t exist. The major cause which has created the serious issues for the organization is lack of check and balance. There was no proper audit system to check the performance of each department periodically. Succession Planning – Whole framework which should work towards goals of the organisation requires appropriate succession planning from top to bottom. In given case, succession planning is also a key issue. Due to no proper succession planning departments failed to achieve their designated targets and it has raised many critics towards their morality. Incentives and Motivational Factors – a proper framework regarding how to motivate an employee and incentive that can be provided to sub ordinates is lacking. Without this mechanism it is difficult to keep existing team in one shape as employment turnover could sharply rise. Decentralized Process – Having a decentralized system in place it is becoming difficult to track down activities and resources. Due to successive levels of management, activities tend to get delayed. Every department of ministry of transport works individually, due to decentralization their coordination suffers and this lead the organization towards serious trouble. The Director General is the head of the ministry but he focuses more on internal relations and due to his lenience the problem has occurred. Outlook of New Organisation In order to have appropriate outlook as to how will the organisation look, views of Aramis (Planning) and Hemming (Head of Engineering) need to be analysed and then a mixture of both should be provided. Hemming stated and firmly believed that by pin pointing blame on each other, organisation will achieve nothing. He also believed that focus should be towards minute details which weren’t part of the performance chart presented. He emphasized more on organizational structure and efficiency and proposed that the organization needs to focus on improving efficiency by improving coordination between departments. On other hand if views of Aramis as analysed it states that company didn’t have a clear cut vision. Hence clearance in vision and objectives is required. Clarity from top to bottom should be regarding what is being done and why it is being done. This will help in strategic planning regarding resources as to how much and when is required. He mentioned to identify the answers of what, why, and where. He emphasized on what the organization is doing, why it is doing, and where it want to go in the future. By identifying the answers of these three simple questions a strategic road map can be made, and by following that road map the organization can solve its issues and can achieve success. Hemming also believed that existing processes and controls need to be strengthening in order to, gain effective and efficient working. According to him change with all aspects should start from head office and then gradually should move down. After analysing both factors it has been revealed that a better and well-structured organization should have the following features: Having clear vision, which explains what the company is and where it wants to go in the future. Each and every individual should clearly understand the organizational vision. Implementation of unique and applicable culture and norms. Which would be implemented in Head Office first and then on regional level. Strengthening of existing processes and controls. Every employee working under the company’s brand name will know their worth and will own the company’s vision. Strong coordination and good relation between department so they can face any challenge together. Latest technology and innovative way to share information organization wide. Motivated employees who are committed towards the success of organization. Recommendations Setting up a team for designing clear cut vision of the company. There is a need to redefine the organizational vision so that each and every individual will understand the organizational vision and culture. Responsibility fixation matrix needs to be created in order to have fair idea as to who will be responsible for what. There is a need to develop specific responsibility matrix so that every individual will understand his/her responsibility and work accordingly. With the help of proper responsibility matrix the problem of blame game can be resolved. Internal control manual should be updated and there should be proper audit system so nobody will try to escape from their wrongdoings. By having strong internal control manual organizational performance can be increased because it reduces the chances of errors. Incentive program should be announced and communicated to every level. Incentive programs motivate employees to work better. In today’s world people want more incentives and by adopting proper incentive program the organization can effect motivates its employees. Director General should form a special committee which could highlight from within the organisation list of candidates who could be his successor. As the director is near to his retirement so he should make a list of those candidates who could effectively run the ministry after him and can lead the organization towards success. The Director General should take serious actions by eliminating the black sheeps from the organization. In order to improve overall organizational effectiveness it is very important for the DG to kick out those employees who are not sincere towards organization. The organization should select professional reliable external contractors for road construction of those regions where there is shortage of human resources and there should be a proper control mechanism for contract department so that no fraudulent contractor can hurt the organization’s reputation. REFERENCES Anbuvelan, K. Management Concepts for Civil Engineers. reprint. Mumbai: Firewall Media, 2005. Carpenter, Mason. Principles of Management. Portland State University, 2010. Charles Hill, Gareth Jones. Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach. 2012. 12 April 2015 . GUPTA, MEENAKSHI. Principles of MANAGEMENT. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd, 2009. Kelly, Phil. Management Theory and Practice. 7th Revised edition. Cengage Learning EMEA, 2011. King, Daniel. Organizational Behaviour. OUP Oxford, 2013. M. Govindarajan, S. Natarajan. Principles of Management. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd, 2005. Mitchell, Alan. Business success stories are masterpieces of fiction. Marketing Week (Centaur Publishing)., 2007. Mullins, Laurie J. Management and Organisational Behaviour. 10 Edition. FT Publishing International, 2013. Murugesan, G. Principles of Management. Delhi: Laxmi Publications, 2014. Northouse, Peter G. Leadership: Theory and Practice. Fifth. London: SAGE Publication INC, 2010. Rosenzweig, Phil. The halo effect, and other managerial delusions. McKinsey Quarterly (McKinsey & Company), 2007. Sadler, Philip. strategic management. 2003. 12 April 2015 . Tripathi. Principles Of Management. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, 2008. Wetherly, Paul. The Business Environment: Themes and Issues in a Globalizing World. 3rd. OUP Oxford, 2014. Read More