How Techniques of Rationalisation Aim to Increase Efficiency and Control in Organisations - Coursework Example

Explain how techniques of rationalisation aim to increase efficiency and control in organisations. Affiliation Explain how techniques of rationalisation aim to increase efficiency and control in organisations. Rationalisation is defined as the process of improving the methods and means of social production in the effort of improving production efficiency. In terms of production, rationalisation includes the improvement in product ion processes, equipment and the organization of production, labour and management. In modern times, there has been a tendency to quantify work, knowledge and experience because there is a means end rationality, which is used to calculate what and which goals, could be attained. However, the effectiveness of this tendency varies depending on the enthusiasm of the workers in regards to the changes being made, the skills that are applied by the management in relation to the rules as well as the degree to which the rules set fit the job. It has been established that the main objective of rationalisation is to secure the minimal efficiency of labour with a minimum effort, to also eliminate the waste of raw materials and power. Additionally, this model is aimed at facilitating the reduction in the variety of patterns search in instances where such variety does not offer any obvious advantage and they also search into the use of standardised parts and methods of manufacture. Rationalisation also secures a system of scientific training, selection, promotion and wage payment for workers. Lastly, to bring about techniques of management and cost accounting budgetary control, as well as internal audit in order to allow proper financial management and control. To ensure that the key objectives of rationalisation are achieved there are various key features of rationalisation that should be meet. They include combination where in these case rationalisation being the merger or integration of different forms of inefficient and weak units in order to enjoy the economies where there is large scale distribution and production. Thus, allowing the planned utilization of the available resources in the organization as well as the removal of idle capacity. Secondly, there is standardization which main aim is to remove unnecessary varieties of different types of products; hence, reducing the wasteful expenditure on cross freights and competitive advertisement. Thirdly, the specialisation which is proceeded by standardisation where work in the organization is divided in accordance to the nature of different types of activities ensuring that there is proper and effective utilization of the available resources such as manpower and machinery among others (Taylor, 2011.p. 45). Fourthly, there is simplification after standardisation and specialization, which leads to higher production because there is lesser cost and further ensures that there, is increased sale of each variety of products. Additionally, there is mechanisation that aims at replacing human power a thus leading to automation, which further increased the efficiency and speed of production. Modernisation is also another feature of rationalisation, which requires the replacement of absolute and old machines with new ones. Application of scientific management on industry wide scale in regards to rationalisation deals with replacing traditional and old methods of production with new scientific and modern techniques that are applicable to different organizations operating in a particular industry. This ensures efficiency, saves time and ensures lesser production cost (Hasselbladh & Kallinikos, 2000. p. 700). Lastly, there is social objection where rationalisation also deals with the overall prosperity of all areas of the society. That is it has both humans and social values. On the part of the producers, it lowers the cost of production; hence, increasing profits. The need to improve the organization in terms of production and control the size due its growth is evident. Although rationalisation seems to be all rounded, it is prudent to understand that there are other perspectives that should be considered in order to ensure that an organization works effectively. For example, the psychological perspectives that is motivation and personality. The employees in any organization need to feel that their work is appreciated and these is only achieved by ensuring that the working conditions provided for employees is appropriate and up to the required standards. Secondly, the employees need to be paid their wages or salaries on time and even get bonuses where the organization has made profits. Therefore, besides rationalisation other perspectives have to be put into consideration to ensure that there is proper growth despite the condition of the economy (Jaffee, 2001.P.50). Leadership, power and politics are also a perspective that is very vital to the organization because there is so much power in leadership; thus, allowing the leaders or the manager to make decisions that affect the organization positively and ensure growth. In the sense that without the right leadership in the organization even with the inclusion of all aspects of rationalisation it would be impossible to exhibit growth as there will be no equality or proper decision making in the organization. This essay will compare and contrast the rationalisation perspective with leadership, power and politics and establish how it affects the organization, as well as why it is important for organization to adopt rationalisation as an aspect in their organization not only to increase efficiency, but also to gain control. During the industrial revolution, the rational perspective was a form in which the organizations were used to achieve specific goals. The major characteristics of rational system during this time were formalization and goals specificity. According to Taylor who formulated the scientific management, theory rational organization should focus on using motion and time to optimize the work procedure and increase productivity (Malhotra, 2000.p.10). According the Taylorsim theory rational organizational designs grow depending on the size of the firm they used within. This is to state that the simple design is in many cases used with the organization with few staff as it happens in the small retail stores. The design has one member of the staff as the manager who is in control of all other employees; thus, the hierarchy design resembles a pyramid because it shows that the manger has larger control over the employees. According to Morgan(2006.p.78), the employees in such scenarios have to implement the duties that have been assigned to them by the manager meaning that the span of control shifts all duties and responsibilities of the organization of work to the manager to the employees. To ensure that efficiency is maximized more complex rational organization design is implemented and in this case the more intricate design is bureaucracy. Although the bureaucracy design uses the same principle as the simple design it has a large number of managerial staff, as well as, specific working department thus developing a chain of command. There are more rules and regulations that are imposed in this design due to the increased number of employees creating discipline and also helping the employees understand who is in command. There is the scalar chain as employees are shown the line of authority because of the chain of command. The two designs help managers increase efficiency and control in the sense that people or employees understand the chain of command and for that reason, they understand what they should do as they roles have been laid out. Have a proper chain of command allows proper decision making in the organization; thus, increasing efficiency because people understand where t o begin in case they have any complaints in regard to their work. For example, for the bureaucracy design there are many departments in the organization meaning that the hierarchy of command varies depending on each department, but at the end there are those on top. Fayol on administrative theory viewed productivity from the top down perspective, where the theory emphasized that management functions generate a broad administrative principle that serves as a guideline for rationalization of organization activities. Therefore, the top management makes decision on behalf of the rest of the organization; hence, establishing control (Caust, 2004.p.115). Additionally, under the rational work design the duties are laid out by the manager; hence, giving each employee a duty that is equivalent to their capability. However, there are negative impacts of these designs for example, it becomes difficult to adopt changes in the organization as the same people have the control of decision making in the organization. Rational organizational designs assist in cutting cost and increasing control for any business, and also maximizing efficiency as well as, having a positive influence on the organization. Rationalisation has been used in contemporary organization to improve efficiency and control while at the same time improving such organizations. This has led to the introduction of McDonalization where this process takes a task and breaks it down in to smaller bits. The resulting task are then rationalised to find a single way to make the task efficient for completing the said task. This results in a logical, efficient sequence of methods that can be completed in a similar way each time in order to produce the desired outcome (Coles & Smerek, 2005.p.56). However, the aspects of the processes can be easily controlled and the quantity of the product becomes a measurement of good performance. McDonalization was as a result, of using rationalization in contemporary organization such as Travelodge. The organizations streamlined organizations and processes have maximised efficiency where they have produced a limited number of menu choice; thus, allowing the business to set or assign tasks to specified departments that should be completed at an assigned time; hence routinizing work. The hotel also uses standard recipes, as well as, standard performance standard manuals and trains it housekeeping staff the prescribed layout that is required for each room based on the detailed procedures. By so doing, there is increase efficiency as they bring out the best of the hotel thus increase customer satisfaction (Hunnicutt, 2009.p. 54). Additionally, the supervisors of Travelodge uses observation checklist to supervise the employee performance, which established that a simple task such as serving food could be mechanized. According to Max Webers theory "bureaucratic form routinizes the process of administration exactly can ensure that the departments are doing and completing their duties as the machine routinizes production." Ritzer in McDonalization established four major dimensions. They include efficiency, which is the optimum method that should be used in completing a task. Secondly, calculability that is the assessment of the outcomes based in the quantifiable rather those subjective criteria (Ritzer 2010. P.67). Predictability, which is the production process, is organized in such a way that it guarantees uniformity of standardized and product outcomes. Lastly, there is control, which is the substitution of a more predictable non-human labour for human labour by either automation or deskilling the organizations workforce. Rationalisation has worked in both cotemporary and non-contemporary organizations and they have proved to be effective up to a given length. However, there are some drawback to rationalisation; thus requiring the organization to use other perspectives in increasing efficiency and control in the organization. Entirely relying on rationalization to improve the organization can prove to be ineffective and the organization may lose control of its systems. This is because first, rationalization works hand in hand with bureaucracy or what Max Weber commonly refers to the Iron cage. The iron cage is the social order so rational and organized that it traps people in a prison that is invisible. This is to say there is continued rationalism until people no longer possess individual freedom, expression their views and also establish their potential because they are locked out as a result of the bureaucratic system. Therefore, rationalisation prohibits employees from being who they are in the employment, as they have to work in the ambit of their employer (Schein, 2010. P.89). Therefore, such things should not be encouraged in the organization as they reduce productivity and they make the employees feel less motivated to reach their full potential. A rationalized system is also considered impersonal and inhumane because the employees live under the mercies of their manager. That is if the manager decide that a person is not reaching their optimum potential in the organization then they found a way to do away with them. Therefore, it is important to include other perspectives in the organization in order to create a balance between rationalization, which will increase control and efficiency, but also ensure that the employees of the organization remain fully motivated to carry out their functions. In this essay, the perspective of leadership would be the most appropriate to ensure that although the managers have been given the power to come up with the roles and responsibilities of the employees. The leadership system is defined to include such employees in decision making as most of the time such decisions affect the employees in their place of work. Leadership is a process of social influence where people can enlist the support and aid of others in the accomplishment of a common task. Therefore, a leader is a person who leads and other people follow as he or she directs and guides others by motivating the following to achieve a common goal. Power, on the other hand, is the measure of an individuals ability to control the environment around them by including the behaviour of others. This form of power does not include coercion or the use of force in order to control the ability of other people. Leaders in many organizations have powers but it does not mean that such leaders should use power over other people to do badly (Hales, 2001.p.67). This is to say that power means that an individual has the right to provide leadership as they have influence over other people. The exercise of the use of power is said to be a very complex process although it appears to be mostly dependent on the personality, context and expertise of an individuals. It has been established that power is the third pillar of leadership after trust and knowledge; thus requiring the leaders to be effective in their work, as well as, the power that they have been given. Politics also play a major role in influencing the management of the organization. This is because politics directly affect who has the power and determines whether the overall culture that is found in the workplace encourages productivity (Rodrigues, 2001. P.885). Therefore, in order to have an effective workplace there is a need to have both positive politics and power. Because positive power and politics increases productivity in the organization and also build confidence and motivates the employees as they feel they also have the power to make decisions that affect them in one way or another. Additionally, it increases employee retention rates because the employees are given the right or the power to express any issue they may have of concern in regards to the organization. In addition an environment that is mostly focused on the collaboration and the equal treatment of the employee prevents and reduces conflict; thus, increasing productivity in the organization. According to the situational theory, time produces an individual and not the other way around and for that reasons the more a person is in a leadership position they become better. Additionally, this theory assumes that different situation calls for different characteristics meaning that there is n o single best psychographic contour of one leader exists. This is because what a leader does in one situation is not the same actions he or she would take in another. Functional theory is another theory that plays a major role in any organization if put into practice because as developed by Hackman and Walton it is useful in addressing specific leaders behaviours that are expected to make contributions in the effectiveness of the one or many units in the organization (Chen, 2007.p.34). Therefore, the compared to the rationalisation leadership is complex as there are many aspects to it that are required to be fulfilled by the individual who holds a position of leadership. Leadership, power and politics are related to a rational organization in the sense that, every rational organization requires proper leadership for it to achieve the common objective that have brought both the managers and the employees together (Townley, Cooper & Oakes, 2003.p.90). Where there is proper leader and distribution of power in any rational organization then it is bound to become better because there is no conflict between the employees between who is supposed to have what position. Rationalisation and leadership are similar to some extent because they are all focused in the achievement of efficiency and control in the organization. Additionally, the two have set objectives that are to be received in the organized as the employees come together in order to achieve such objective. Furthermore, the two aspects are similar in the sense that, they both have a chain of command where there is one person who provides leadership and the rest follows. Although the two perspectives present some similarities vary, differences are presented for example, in rationalisation there is bureaucracy in the chain of command where the top management makes decisions for the rest of the employees in the organization. In the case of leadership, power and politics the leader has the power to lead, but also gives the employees a platform to raise any concerns and gives them the opportunity to bring out opinions to help in decision-making. Secondly, rationalisation has been termed as being inhumane because people do not have the opportunity for growth as where the managers indicate they should work is the place they will remain and in most instances until they retire (Senior, 2002.p. 102). However, in the case of leadership there is proper situational leadership allowing employee retention as most of them have confidence in their leaders. Knowledge and trust are important aspects in any organization, but in the case of situational leadership employees lack trust in their leaders as they use the power they have to make rules and regulation that area not mostly to the benefit of the employee, but of the organization. Although the leadership aspect has many benefits it has been criticised where it has been indicated that some of the leaders use their power negatively thus influencing the organization negative (Black, 2003. P.89). Therefore, as much as leadership should be included in the organization other perspective should also be added in order to ensure that it is being used in the right manner. The area or work activity at the Junction Hotel where both rationalization and leadership power and politics would be applied is in the organizational structure of the organization. this is because according to the theories of scientific management Rational factor in the organization of the hotel will have a well-designed bureaucracy meaning that there will be clear definition of duties and responsibilities, as well as, strict execution of the kind of rules and procedures required in the organization structure. Rationalization will be applied by breaking down the responsibilities given to the managers by using McDonalization process where although there is management structure in the organization it should be divided into varies departments to allow efficiency and control. However, in order to reduce bureaucracy the leadership perspective should be added to ensure that the employees working under the leaders are given a platform to air their grievances. By so doing it will increase efficiency because today due to the economic constraints there hotel has not being doing well the more reason to have an effective leadership and rationalised organization (Morgan, 2007, p.90). Administrative theory in this case is appropriate because it allows the incorporation of the two perspectives allowing the organization too work from a top-down management. However, Junction Hotel may choose to use the bottom-top level of management to ensure that they understand the needs of their employees to keep them more motivated, as well as, retain them. The lack of a proper organizational structure results to unclear definition of roles and responsibilities as there is no clear structure to define such roles. The major benefit of using rationalisation in the Junction Hotel is to ensure that there is rational work analysis and design. Taylor in his theory emphasized that there should be standardization and study of working environment, instruments and working methods. By incorporating leadership and rationalization in the Junction Hotel it will be easier to understand the hierarchy of command and ensuring that is professionalism in the organization as each individual will know who they will answer to in the organization. Considering the tough economic times it is always good to have a good leadership team in order to enhance the decision making and to allow the customers or the consumers of the products to see that despite the hard time in the economy the organization is doing its best to embrace such times. For the Junction Hotel their organization structure needs to be made better by having to create defined roles for the managers and also use the right leadership skills to improve the nature of the business. Rationalisation will improve the hotel system of working allowing the employees to attain a common goals and that is to fulfil the needs of their customers. Where power is used appropriately in the organization, it becomes easier for the organization to achieve their optimum goals. Although the leadership perspective improves rationalisation in its application to the Junction Hotel they are areas where it is better for instance in when it comes to dividing the work into smaller bits to allow them to be carried out efficiently. Additionally, rationalization and proper leadership, power and politics will lessen the human errors that are attributed from the lack of defined key roles and obligations. It has been established that although there is no poor management of the organization there is a need to introduce a new charm of elegance in order to cope with the raising economic challenges faced by contemporary organizations in the country. However, this can only be achieved by ensuring that there is proper implementation of rationalization and the perspective of good leadership, power and politics. In conclusion, the Junction Hotel should utilize rational organization in the firm to ensure that the optimum objective is achieved in the organization. However, the most appropriate perspective to employ in the organizational structure of the Hotel is leader, power and politics because it allows retention of employees, confidence and trust, as well as, reduces conflict in the organization as the employees can raise their concerns to the management without any difficulties. The major difference of this technique from rationalisation is that it reduces bureaucracy. References Black, R. J. (2003). Organisational culture: creating the influence needed for strategic success. [United States], Dissertation.com. Bullaro, J. J., & Edginton, C. R. (1986). Commercial leisure services: managing for profit, service, and personal satisfaction. New York, Macmillan. Caust, J. (2004). A Festival in Disarray: The 2002 Adelaide Festival: A Debacle or Another Model of Arts Organization and Leadership?. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 34(2), 103-118. Chen, J. S. (2007). Advances in hospitality and leisure. Volume 3 Volume 3. Amsterdam, JAI. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10172783. Coles, R., & Smerek, R. (2005). Political leadership: stories of power and politics from literature and life. New York, Modern Library. Davis, Evan (2009), Value Engineering, BBC, http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/evandavis/2007/05/value_engineering.html [accessed 19th September 2013] Hales, C. (2001). Managing through organization: the management process, forms of organization and the work of managers. Cengage Learning EMEA. Hasselbladh, H., & Kallinikos, J. (2000). The project of rationalization: a critique and reappraisal of neo-institutionalism in organization studies. Organization studies, 21(4), 697-720. Hunnicutt, S. (2009). Corporate social responsibility. Detroit, MI, Greenhaven Press. Jaffee, D. (2001). Organization theory: tension and change. McGraw Hill New York, NY King and Lawley (2013), Organizational Behaviour, Oxford University Press, Oxford (Chapters 2-4) Malhotra, Y. (2000). Knowledge management and new organization forms: A framework for business model innovation. Knowledge management and virtual organizations, 2-19. Morgan, G (2006) Images of Organization London: Sage (Ch. 2 – ‘Mechanization Takes Command’) MORGAN, G. (2007). Images of organization. Thousand Oaks, Calif. [u.a.], SAGE Publ. Ritzer, G (2010) The McDonaldisation of Society (6th edition) London: Sage. (Ch. 3 – Efficiency) Rodrigues, C (2001) ‘Fayol’s 14 principles of management then and now: a framework for managing today’s organizations effectively.’ Management Decision; Vol. 13, No. 10; pp880-889 Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. Senior, B. (2002). Organisational change. Harlow, Financial Times Prentice Hall. Taylor, F.W. (2011) Principles of Scientific Management Harper: New York. Available athttp://archive.org/download/ThePrinciplesOfScientificManagement/The_Principles_of_Scientific_Management.pdf Townley, B., Cooper, D. J., & Oakes, L. (2003). Performance measures and the rationalization of organizations. Organization Studies, 24(7), 1045-1071. Read More