NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
LEARNING FROM PAST MANAGEMENT IDEAS George Santayana (1863 - 1952) was a Spanish-American philosopher, poet and humanist who said: Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. (The Life of Reason). It is said that contemporary theories of management have the tendency to constitute and assist in construing the dynamic macrocosm of current organizational environments. However, employing a detailed view of the history of management for the purpose of mere perspicacity brings to mind Frederick Winslow Taylor (Management Guru) who gave birth to the theory of upholding the conventional functions of providing meritage strategy, organizational tasks, leading, and controlling; where, in order to overcome contention and pro-actively get ahead, it is necessary for an individual to maximize his potential to establish an irrefutable foundation over his contenders. That same individual, fully utilizing the five performance indicators (cost, quality, speed, innovation and service) will, with a high statistical probability, have the opportunity to provide excellent value to a client and, in turn, gain an upper hand. Incorporating such strategies stem from decades worth of evolution of management theories.
A lot of times, as what can be deduced from George Santayana's statement, individuals in managerial positions, corporate leaders, conglomerates, or individuals in decision-making positions who refuses to remember, acknowledge, or even ultimately forgets the past, prior decisions, or precedences with outcome that were considered to be below levels of expectations, are destined for a recurrence. It can, thus, be safe to assume that full comprehension of patterns that may have emerged which comprises a strategy that formulated such processes which failed to garner positive outcomes, will equip an individual with the necessary ideology to move forward from such an experience. Whereas, lack of understanding, insufficient attention to details, inadequate application of skills, and unemployment or mishandling of the performance dimensions mentioned earlier, will have an equally unproductive outcome. The contemporary approaches to management are quantitative management, organizational behavior, systems theory, and the contingency perspective (Brief Overview of Contemporary Theories in Management). The classical approaches are systematic management, scientific management, administrative management, human relations, and bureaucracy (Management History). Management theories can be integrated by the amalgamation of a perspective on contingency and the systems theory.
Pertinent methodologies of managerial application can be employed as per required by environmental conditions. A comprehensive perspective is significant to managers when administering a component or the complete consolidation such units (Management History). By 1890 to 1940, the most illustrious constitutions were sizable and industrialized. Frequently they comprise of ongoing, mundane procedures that manufactured several products. The United States of America held in high regard scientific and technical concerns, including cautious measurement and specification of outcomes and activities.
Management were inclined to be similar. Frederick Taylor developed the scientific management theory which unified this conscientious description and measurement of all structural procedures. Designations were governed more often than not. Workers benefited and faced the consequences. This methodology seem to work well for organizations with assembly lines and other mechanistic, routinized activities (Management History).
James Burnham in his The Managerial Revolution (1941) portrayed the rise of a new and powerful oligarchy of industrial and governmental leaders in management, whose inside knowledge and expertness put them in a position of self-perpetuation and power over ordinary citizens. The enormous growth of government agencies in the 20 th century and the development of large departments manned by a corps of permanent officials has of course given rise to public concern and to scientific research on the problem of keeping such large cadres, often protected by tenure rights, responsive to popular and political changes in policy. But the problem is not a new one. Karl.
A. Wittfogel in Oriental Despotism (1957) gave vivid examples from ancient cultures of the power of officials in absolute states of antiquity. The classic example of entrenched officialdom was the civil service of China, in which an elaborate system of examinations for entrance and promotion in an elite corps dated back before the Christian era. Wittfogel made the interesting contrast between the ruling bureaucracy and a controlled bureaucracy, the former being characteristic of autocratic states and the latter of democratic societies. Strategy formulation is important in the well-being of an organization. Two major types of strategy are encompassing strategy formulation.
These are (1) corporate strategy, in which companies decide which line or lines of business to engage in; and (2) business or competitive strategy, which sets the framework for achieving success in a particular business. Even if the business strategy often receives more attention than corporate strategy, both forms use planning, industry / market analysis, goal setting, commitment of resources, and monitoring. It is important that the strategies are sound because it gives employees a clear vision of the purposes and objectives of the company. It also gives organizations a chance to examine the prospect of change in the future. It also allows companies to plan its capital budgeting.
Organizations have limited funds to invest and thus they must be able to properly allocate capital funds where they will be most effective get the highest returns on their investments. (Strategy Formulation). If this is not present, then the decision makers of the organization will have no direction other than the maintenance of the status quo. Moreover, the firm can become mostly reactive to the pressures that may beset the company and less effective at dealing with changes. Nilakant and Ramnarayan (2006), authors of the book, Change Management, stressed that less than 30 percent of organizations that implement comprehensive change emerge successful.
Many analysts formed a consensus that the one factor that causes this failure despite a well-planned strategy is the people factor. The managers may have fell short in realigning the mindset of the people towards the goals of the organization, or they may have failed in consulting and creating process ownership among its members. As Nilakant and Ramnarayan (2006) expressed, change management is not only about Six Sigma or Total Quality Management, it is about changing the lines of thinking and action of the people in the organization. Innovation, like change, may also be threatening.
It can be remembered that during the industrial revolution era when the assembly line was just newly developed, some workers were against further mechanization and automation, fearing that they would lose their jobs. Yet management of innovation, like change management, must also replace employee resistance with acceptance and participation. It would be helpful to remember the idea developed by George Stalker and Tom Burns (1994) that technical progress underlies every kind of change in the social order and alternatively, technical progress is the outcome of changes in the institution of society. It is safe to assume, perhaps, that all organizations had encountered the need to change and innovate at one point in their existences. Small, medium and large enterprises, as well as service and consumer goods providers, and private and public firms all know that being static amidst the rapidly changing external and internal environment leads to stagnation and eventually, to demise. Because of this knowledge, two new buzzwords caught fire in the organization playing field: Change Management and Management of Innovation.
These two are huge leaps from Taylors efficiency-centered Scientific Management, because an organization that puts primary importance to change and innovation is not only evolving and manifesting dynamism in its cutthroat milieu, but is also recognizing the importance of the people-side of business. Employees, after all, complete and define every organization. Change management and management of innovation are two distinct practices, but they are nevertheless inseparable. Many changes lead to innovation, or are carried out through innovation while all innovation conversely leads to change. There are many linkages between these two management catchphrases, proving that the machinations of running an organization are interrelated and are seldom mutually exclusive principles and practices. The government is in unison with the goals and mission of enterprises and private businesses because of the growing need to globalize economy and compete with the rest of the world.
The challenge among governments worldwide is how they can pull off their human and non-human resources together in order not to lag behind other countries in terms of gross domestic production and gross national production. Mechanisms have to be provided in order to reinforce a workplace and setting that can hasten delivery of services and increase production without anymore dealing with the hassles of bargaining workers and employees. In most developing and developed countries, these mechanisms are usually put into legislation to make the practice legitimate and acceptable. Fully enriched jobs may not be appropriate in all situations, but the evidence indicates that enriched jobs tend to be more satisfying than those without any organizational rewards. Organizational rewards are more than a nice gesture because these are effective methods of reinforcing performance and behaviors from employees that help the company achieve its goals and objectives. (Employee Rewards. ). Every organization has its own strategy in meeting its predetermined goals and in countering the changes and challenges in the path towards sustainability and success.
Strategy is of paramount importance in any organizations today, especially in this time when globalization had increasingly made steep competition and discriminating customers the new norms. As observed among contesting firms, everyone is trying to maximize the opportunities at hand while buffering the limitations caused by inherent weaknesses through the implementation of strategies that are developed through strategic planning. (Gratton, Hailey, Stiles, and Truss, 1999). For employees to be energized by their work, they must have clear understanding of what performing well requires. Too often, managers assume that employees understand how best to direct their efforts, ...
Free research essays on topics related to: systems theory, technical progress, scientific management, change management, corporate strategy
Research essay sample on Corporate Strategy Technical Progress
