The Roles of Management in an Organization

The success of an organization rests on the ability of managers to program, organize, direct and control. The aim of this rise is to examine to what extent the supra statement is an accurate appraisal of successful charge? To illustrate the arguments put forward this essay will refer to the suit of clothes study The launch of the centaur taken from Paton et al text Organizations, Cases, Issues and Concepts. The case study reports on the problems that occurred when Centaur replaced Paravel car manufacturers.This essay will include a study of Henri Fayols quintuplet dollar bill key managerial elements in order to display whether it is essential to plan, organize, direct and control followed by practical examples drawn from the highlighted case study. Fayols career began as a mining engineer and then moved into research geology and in 1888 joined, Comambault as Director. The company was in difficulty but Fayol turned the operation round.On loneliness he published his work a comp rehensive theory of administration described and classified administrative centering roles and processes then became recognised and referenced by others in the growing discourse about focus. Fayol categorized management into five key elements, which can be seen in appendix one. The startle of the elements is readying Fayol believes that planning means both to access the future and make provision for it1 Fayol views the action plan as the most useful output of the planning process.He notes that this plan must consider the firms resources, work- in-progress, and future trends of the eternal environment. Fayol also believes that a good action plan must consist of continuity, unity, flexibility and precision. Pugh and Hickson state that The problems of planning which management must overcome are making sure the objectives of each part of the organisation are securely welded together (Unity) using both short and spacious term forecasting (continuity) being able to adapt the plan in the light of changing circumstances (flexibility) and attempting to accurately predict courses of action Precision2.The core group of planning is to allow the optimum use of resources. The views of Fayol and Pugh and Hickson illustrate the importance of planning when seeking to be a successful manager. The second of the elements is organizing, Fayol states that personnel is the focus of this parting3 He believes that managerial duties of an organisation must be realised through the use of personnel. He argues that despite the variety of business, every firm of similar employee size of it differs mainly in the nature and relative value of constituent elements4.The task of management is to build up an organisation that allows the activities to be carried out in an best manner. Pugh and Hickson state, Central to this is a structure in which plans are effectively prepared and carried out. There must be unity of domination and direction, clear definition of responsibilities, ti ny decision making backed up by an efficient system for selecting and training managers5. The views of Fayol and Pugh and Hickson illustrate the importance of organizing when seeking to be a successful manager.Fayol has set that there are many key objectives of organising, which can be located on Appendix two The Fayols third element comes logically after the first two, plan and control his third element is to command. In relation to the question command is part of the ability to direct. Fayol states that commanding is the responsibility of every manager6. The designing of this is to achieve the maximum contribution from all personnel to help with the interests of the organization. Pugh and Hickson state that with the ability to command the manager obtains the best possible performance from subordinates7.Organisations have a variety of tasks to perform so co-ordination is needed, which is the fourth of Fayols elements and the other half of the ability to direct. Fayol has created a list of managerial duties/responsibilities, which are highlighted in Appendix 3 Fayol states co-ordinating is the harmonisation of resources in their optimum proportions in order to achieve results8. Pugh and Hickson backup Fayols view essentially this is making sure that one departments efforts are coincident with efforts of other departments, and retentivity all activities in perspective with regard to the overall aims of the rganisation9. Fayol identifies some of the key characteristics of a well co-ordinated organisation. These characteristics are highlighted in Appendix 4. The fifth and final of Fayols five elements is controlling which logically checks the other four elements are performing correctly. Fayol states that controlling consists of the ongoing, routine verification of plan implementation, instructions issued and principles10. Controlling applies to all processes and its purpose is to break out weaknesses and problems that can be rectified and to prevent recurr ences.Fayol believes that organisations should be cautious against infiltration of control11 such(prenominal) as duality of command. Fayol also stresses the need for independent, objective and unbiased inspection. Pugh and Hickson believe that to be effective, control must operate quickly and there must be a system of sanctions. The best way to ensure this is to separate all functions concerned with inspection from operation departments whose work they inspect12. This backs up the view made by Fayol. The above views illustrate the importance of the ability to command when aiming to become a successful manager.Fayols managerial functions have been subject to in-depth analysis, which had led to the highlighting of various weaknesses. The main weakness is that the Fayol system is based upon assumption and all the way lacks consideration of piece behaviour. One of his five elements taken from Pugh and Hickson (1996) To forecast and plan prevoyance illustrates this. It is impossible to forecast every activity within the workplace e. g. arguments amongst staff, staff go away the company and basically any emergencies that arrive.Some might believe that Fayols theoretical thinking placed too much importance on observation, Mintzberg (1989) himself suggests If you ask managers what they do they will almost likely tell you that they plan, organize, co-operate and control. Then watch what they do. Do not be surprised if you cant relate what you see to those four words13. Mintzberg undertook an bulky study of executives at work. He categorized management into three groups that are divided into ten roles which can be seen in AppendixA Roles such as leadership, liaison, monitor, disturbance handler etc, which are not mentioned in Fayols model of management, clearly illustrate that interpersonal skill have been neglected in his management approach. This is seen, as a major weakness because interpersonal skills are essential in the day to day running of a business, as stated above it is impossible to foresee the future. Chris Argyris and David McGregor highlight other weaknesses Argyris (1957) noted that if classical principles of formal rganization are used, employees work in a certain environment (Appendix 6). This approach to organisations and their management has been subject to substantial criticism. It employs close system assumptions in order to reduce uncertainty and maximise control. Many of its principles are based on common horse sense Truism and suffer from generality, in that they lack specific guidelines for applications. It regards the organisation as machine and people as its components, organisation without people. At its best it regards the individuals as moreover motivated by money.It, therefore, disregards the social and more complex needs of individuals in organisations. In the late 1950s, Douglas McGregor stressed the importance of Understanding the relationships between motivation and human nature. He believed that manage rs attempted to motivate employees using one of two basic approaches. The first was a negative theory, labeled theory X. Theory X Followed the conventional view of management based on direction and control. It Suggested that managers were required to coerce, control or threaten employees in order to motivate them.In contrast, the second was a positive theory, labeled Theory Y, and was based on new information about behavior. Theory Y suggested that managers believed that people are capable of being responsible for(p) and mature. Despite the above criticism the classical approach still remains influential even today. Many of its principles have formed the foundation for the development of the advanced management concepts. It is advised that new managers should consider Fayols model of management but also consider other theories from academics such as Mintzberg.