This essay critically discusses the question, what is management? It will be based on the critical analysis of the author about management using literatures and articles that have been written by scholars who specializes on the management field. Thus, it will help the reader to have a wider view about what management really is and how it really functions. It will also critically demonstrate the links between theory and practice of management. The first paragraph of this essay will be a brief discussion regarding the definition of management as how the world knows it. The succeeding paragraphs will be a review of the related literatures regarding the topic, which includes the theories and practices in management, followed by the conclusion of this essay, which will then define management through critical evaluations of the available literatures and the personal knowledge of the author about the topic.
There are many kinds of ways that management has been defined. One can definitely say that management is all about handling people, making sure that somebody is doing his job well. Then again, another one might also say that management is all about handling businesses or money. Some may also define it as a means of business dealing, negotiation or arrangement. A judicious use of means to accomplish an end; conduct directed by art or address; skillful treatment; cunning practice; — often in a bad sense; and the collective body of those who manage or direct any enterprise or interest; the board of managers. With all the interpretations above, here is a more refined definition of management. It came from The Management Assistant Program for Nonprofits and Mr. Carter McNamara (1999) wrote it like this: Traditionally, the term “management” refers to the activities (and often the group of people) involved in the four general functions: planning, organizing, leading and coordinating of resources. Note that the four functions recur throughout the organization and are highly integrated. Emerging trends in management include assertions that leading is different than managing, and that the nature of how the four functions are carried out must change to accommodate a “new paradigm” in management. All of these definitions are true, and if we sum it all up, as McNamara points it out, management would simply refer to activities involved in its four general functions: planning, which means identifying goals, objectives, methods, resources needed to carry out methods, responsibilities and dates for completion of tasks; organizing, which determines to achieve the goals in an optimum fashion; leading, including to set direction for the organization, groups and individuals and also influence people to follow that direction; and controlling, which means the organization’s systems, processes and structures to reach effectively and efficiently reach goals and objectives. This includes ongoing collection of feedback, and monitoring and adjustment of systems, processes and structures accordingly and coordinating of resources. The previous interpretation is what is known as the traditional interpretation of management. Another interpretation has been asserted by some writers, teachers, and practitioners – that the above view is rather outmoded and that management needs to focus more on leadership skills, e.g., establishing vision and goals, communicating the vision and goals, and guiding others to accomplish them. They also assert that leadership must be more facilitative, participative and empowering in how visions and goals are established and carried out (Carter McNamara, PhD, 1999). The author will discuss more about leadership later on this essay. Next, we will tackle all about the different contemporary theories in management.
There are three contemporary theories in management that are currently available. They are the contingency theory, systems theory, and chaos theory. “The contingency theory is a management theory, which asserts that when managers make a decision, they must take into account all aspects of the current situation and act on those aspects that are key to the situation at hand. Basically, it’s the approach that ‘it depends.’ For example, the continuing effort to identify the best leadership or management style might now conclude that the best style depends on the situation. If one is leading troops in the Persian Gulf, an autocratic style is probably best. Next is the systems theory that has had a significant effect on management science and understanding organizations. First, let’s look at “what is a system?” A system is a collection of part unified to accomplish an overall goal. If one part of the system is removed, the nature of the system is changed as well. For example, a pile of sand is not a system. If one removes a sand particle, you’ve still got a pile of sand. However, a functioning car is a system. Remove the carburetor and you’ve no longer got a working car. A system can be looked at as having inputs, processes, outputs and outcomes. Systems share feedback amongst each of these four aspects of the systems. Lastly, we have the chaotic theory. As chaotic and random as world events seem today, they seem as chaotic in organizations, too. Yet for decades, managers have acted on the basis that organizational events can always be controlled. A new theory (or some say “science”), chaos theory, recognizes that events indeed are rarely controlled. Many chaos theorists (as do systems theorists) refer to biological systems when explaining their theory. They suggest that systems naturally go to more complexity, and as they do so, these systems become more volatile (or susceptible to cataclysmic events) and must expend more energy to maintain that complexity. As they expend more energy, they seek more structure to maintain stability. This trend continues until the system splits, combines with another complex system or falls apart entirely. Sound familiar? This trend is what many see as the trend in life, in organizations and the world in general (Carter McNamara, PhD, 1999).”
According to Jason Tanz (2003) of Fortune Small Business Magazine, management is more of an art, than a science because he claims that theorist have not discovered yet the most efficient way to run a company. While it’s true that the theories mentioned above would be effective when applied, it is also true that some people are not satisfied with these theories, like Mr. Tanz for example. It also depends on many factors like the psychological aspects, or the way we deal with people. Because management involves people, whether it is the manager or the ones that is being managed, it means that management also involves emotions. According to Gerard M. Blair (2003), a Senior Lecturer in Project Management in the Department of Electrical Engineering, in The University of Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom, management of a small team, human factor is crucial to success. A best example of a management mistake that leads to emotional distress would be the common mistakes committed on sexual harassment charges. Lee Ligget, a former General Counsel to the University of Houston System, Virginia Polytechnic and State University, and the University of Vermont, has written a list of common mistakes of management regarding sexually oriented issues. The mistakes included in the list are: Management does not consult with the Assistant to the President for Social Equity before taking action and/or when it is aware of actual or potential sexual harassment situations; Management dissuades the complainant from complaining about her/his sexual harassment situation; Management overacts by taking action before the investigation is completed; Management does not tell the alleged offender the specific allegations; Management does not provide the alleged offender an opportunity to respond to each allegation; Management interferes with the investigation; Management doesn’t take it seriously; etc. Another example but a rather minor one, was published in the web by a Dr. Bob Kizlik (2003), regarding the mistakes most new teachers commit on managing students. Some of the mistakes included in Mr. Kizlik’s list are: over praising students for doing what is expected; talk too fast, and are sometimes shrill; overemphasize the negative; are way too serious and not much fun; are way too much fun and not serious; and many more management errors that are hazardous to the human emotions and development. Furthermore, these are just some of the examples of management errors committed on the psychological aspect. We must always remember that the most complex part of management is managing individuals who, obviously, have individual thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and interests. Blair (2003) states that a manager must consider his own behavior, on how he relates with his people. A manager must also manage to make a sustainable approach to maintain enthusiasm and commitment from his team as a form of motivation. He should also have a sense of achievement for himself and to know how to recognize those who deserve recognition, at the same time, giving his team a sense of responsibility. He must also provide advancement for his people, whether it is the long-term issues of promotion, salary rises, job prospects; and the short-term issues (which you control) of increased responsibility, the acquisition of new skills, or broader experiences. A manager must also know how to troubleshoot individual problems of his team as it arises. An article on an internet advertisement by Management Center Europe stresses that the art of people management is one of the most crucial skill a manager can possess. These are just some of the proofs on how important managing an individual really is.
Another factor that should be considered in management is time management. Although this is not the main topic of the essay, it is important to look into it as to clearly define what management is all about since it is used in all kinds or forms of management. A managerial task would be less successful without time management because, as inhabitants of a civilized world, we use time as a tool to balance our daily activity in life. Without time, there is no balance of activity: without balance of activity, there would be less chance of success. Let us now go to the personal time management. What is personal time management? Blair (2003) has written the meaning of personal time management as “about controlling the use of your most valuable (and undervalued) resource.” There are many tools in time management, and it includes the following: Finding out how much your time is worth; Making sure you concentrate on the right things; Checking how you really spend your time; Planning to solve a problem; Tackling the right tasks first; and deciding what your personal priorities should be (Mind Tools Unlimited). Personal time management also allows one to be prepared with meetings, plan every hour and each day efficiently, secures long-term projects from being neglected, and many other that is advantageous to ones self.
Traditional views state that managing is as the same as leadership because management is associated with the four major functions: planning, organizing, leading and controlling/coordinating. “However, many educators, practitioners and writers disagree with this traditional view” (Carter McNamara, PhD, 1999). To know the difference between leadership and management, we must first define what leadership is. “Many people believe that leadership is simply being the first, biggest or most powerful. Leadership in organizations has a different and more meaningful definition. Very simply put, a leader is interpreted as someone who sets direction in an effort and influences people to follow that direction. How they set that direction and influence people depends on a variety of factors that we’ll consider later on below. To really comprehend the “territory” of leadership, you should briefly scan some of the major theories, notice various styles of leadership and review some of the suggested traits and characteristics that leaders should have.” (Carter, McNamara, PhD, 1999). It sounds pretty similar to the definition of management, but it is not. Let’s take a look on how a bestselling author defines the difference between leadership and management. According to Jim Clemmer, a bestselling author and internationally acclaimed keynote speaker, workshop/retreat leader, and management team developer on leadership, change, customer focus, culture, teams, and personal growth, “to manage is to control, handle, or manipulate. To lead is to guide, influence, or persuade. You manage things — systems, processes, and technology. You lead people.” With the informations mentioned, we can clearly say that management and leadership are two different concepts. We can say that managers lead by the book, while leaders lead by the heart. But are there any possibilities that leadership and management combine together? There are views that separating leading from managing can be destructive. Drawing information from Carter and McNamara (1999) once again, we will find out that leading is different than planning, organizing and coordinating because “leading is focused on influencing people, while the other functions are focused on “resources” in addition to people. But that difference is not enough to claim that “leading is different than managing” any more than one can claim that “planning is different than managing” or “organizing is different than managing”. The assertion that “leading is different than managing” — and the ways that these assertions are made — can cultivate the view that the activities of planning, organizing and coordinating are somehow less important than leading. The assertion can also convince others that they are grand and gifted leaders who can ignore the mere activities of planning, organizing and coordinating — they can leave these lesser activities to others with less important things to do in the organization. This view can leave carnage in organizations.” It is clear now that management and leadership have a relationship, but not that strong. Undoubtedly, both skills are needed to make an organization successful. It also looks almost impossible for a single individual to possess both qualities. Here are more differences of a leader from a manager as was written by Jim Clemmer: “Management is about systems, processes, and technology; leadership is about people, culture and context. Management is about goals, standards, and measurements; leadership is preferred future, principal, and purpose. Management is all about control; leadership is about commitment. Management is about strategic planning; leadership is about strategic opportunism. Management is a way of doing; leadership is a way of being. Management is about directing; leadership is about serving. Management is about responding and reacting; leadership is about initiating and originating. Management is a continuous improvement of what is; and leadership is an innovative breakthrough of what could be.” (Aburdene Naisbitt 1992). With what Clemmel wrote, it would be very, very hard for someone to say that management is as the same as leadership. Thus, we can conclude that management is definitely not leadership.
What is management development planning? It is also one of the most important aspects of management for it is “an effort (hopefully, planned in nature) that enhances the learner’s capacity to manage organizations (or oneself). Very simply put, managing includes activities of planning, organizing, leading and coordinating resources. A critical skill for anyone is the ability to manage their own learning.” (Carter, McNamara, PhD, 1999). The history of management development planning started in the turn of the century. In the past, organizations developed managers, first by recognizing an individual’s strong occupational knowledge about the organization’s products or services. These individuals were promoted to first-level positions that included work direction. One cannot say they supervised in the current sense of the word, that is, they usually didn’t delegate, support career counseling, conduct performance reviews, etc. Rather, they told workers what to do and workers did it. These work directors had little training about supervision, e.g., about delegating, interpersonal skills, stress management, career developments, etc. Management training in the 50’s and 80’s focused on covering certain standard topics or types of activities in the organization, e.g., planning, organizing, finances, sales, accounting, etc. Students would immerse themselves in the current course, then leave that course to immerse in the next. However, reality is that a manager in the workplace seldom solves a problem by applying his or her knowledge of one specific topic (then goes on to solve the next problem by applying his or her knowledge of another specific topic). A highly effective manager integrates expertise across various management topics. Yet few management schools provided opportunity for management students to integrate and apply information from their various courses. With the Human Relations movement, training programs recognized the need to cultivate supervisory skills, e.g., delegating, career development, motivating, coaching, mentoring, etc. Progressive management schools now have students review a wide body of management topics and learn those topics by applying that knowledge in the workplace and reflecting on that application. Learning activities incorporate learners’ real-world activities in the workplaces or their lives. Assignment includes reflection and analysis on real-world experience. Learning is enhanced through continuing dialogue and feedback among learners. Very good schools manage to include forms of self-development, too, recognizing that the basis for effective management is effective self-management. Effective management development programs help students (learners) take a system’s view of their organizations, including review of how major functions effect each other. Assignments include recognizing and addressing effects of one actions on their entire organization.” (Carter, McNamara, PhD, 1999)
Based on the previous paragraphs, we can conclude that management means supervision, managing, handling or control. We can also conclude that regardless of the theories that management has, managing something or someone would only be effective depending on the person who does the task. Management is limited in a sense that it cannot be effective without leadership, as leadership cannot be effective without it. But these two different concepts must not be merged into a single individual. Two different individuals as to make an organization successful should possess them. Therefore, when one practices management, one must remember that management is different from leadership. Leadership is much more based on principles, while management dwells more on rules. We must also remember that in management, human emotions is always present and is a factor not to be taken for granted. It is one of the most complex parts of management. Another thing that we can conclude about this essay is that management is always open to errors and mistakes. It is often made when a manager disregard the feelings or individuality of his team. We have learned that in management, we also deal with human emotions and it would be an enormous mistake to set this factor aside. Finally, we can conclude that, with all of the definition that has been given to management, management can simply be defined as making sure that everything is right on schedule, or on the right track.
References:
Aburdene, P and Naisbitt J. (1992). Megatrends for Women. Villard Books, New York
Clemmer, Jim (1996-2003). Practical Leadership: Inspiring Actions, Achieving Results. The Clemmer Group, Ontario N2P 2A4 Canada
Kizlik, Bob (2003, December 8). Ideas For Avoiding Classroom Management Mistakes And How To Deal With Parents
Liggett, Lee (no date). Common Mistakes by Management. University of Vermont, Canada
Management Center Europe (2002). Managing People: Achieving the Best Results with Your Team and Colleague. Brussels, Belgium
McNamara, Carter PhD, (1999). Introduction to Management. St. Paul, Minnesota: Management Assistant Program For Nonprofits.
McNamara, Carter PhD, (1999). Overview of Leadership in Organization. St. Paul, Minnesota: Management Assistant Program For Nonprofits.
McNamara, Carter PhD, (1999).Management Development Planning. St. Paul, Minnesota: Management Assistant Program For Nonprofits
Mind Tools (1995-2003), Time Management Skills: Making the Most of your Time. Mind Tools Unlimited, West Sussex, RH15 8DY, United Kingdom
Tanz, Jason (2003). A Brief History Of Management. Fortune Small Business Magazine, Sept. 4, 2003 Issue.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment