business theorists more than a hundred and fifty years past management can be used to discuss the issue in depth theoretical as well as practical knowledge for many management techniques, including both positive and negative traits Of which. It is also important to look at the "structure" of different organizations to look at how it affects and is affected governance of that organization. The organizational structure is concerned primarily with the allocation of power and influence. Managers need to make decisions and need the authority to do so. A "hierarchy" is the greatest force at the top of the organization, will be the command structure in the downward direction. In power "flat organization" are distributed more evenly, but there will still be significant differences in the level of power and authority among the various members of the company. Some organizations, such as the armed forces or the police have many levels (or levels) and tall in their hierarchy. Universities, but will have a few levels between those at the bottom and those at the top, will be considered 'hierarchy is flat. "Associated" span of control "(the number of people an individual manages or supervises directly) closely related to the type of organizational hierarchy based. Many of 'buzzwords "and the new" flavor of the month theories "that reminds Mr. Whitehead is no more than the current valuation of the theories of yesteryear. And re-visit these theories will provide conclusive evidence that centralized management theory of modern education and the director.
and the work of Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856-1915)
Frederick Taylor, while a gang leader in the Department of lathe works in in Midvale, United States of America became determined to eliminate the "systematic recruitment; they unnecessary attempt by workers to do no more. put Taylor strategy where the study of certain functions, and then broken down into individual tasks, which had to be completely finished, he said. have been allocated for each task time, based on the work the timing of the fastest worker. then allocating specific tasks workers were not allowed to deviate from that task at all. as Taylor believed that money was the main motivation, it was paid for each unit completed output (freelancer)
many organizations and working methods are still the concept of Taylor affected "scientific management methods," this can be seen on factory assembly lines, and even in a commercial kitchen, where allocated to each employee small task, but specific in what makes them the meal is finished. it may not be a freelancer prevalent, but customizable, tasks repetitive dull is common . an article in the Sunday Times newspaper, 3RD April 1983 tells the plight of one worker, assembling the car Maestro in Cowley factory. He said only one hundred seconds to screw the two rubber buffers and fit three small plates to the rear wheel arch. He had received training for one night, he completed his mission on exactly 246 vehicles a day, and it was 46 minutes in the transformation of the "relaxation time."
some of the followers of Taylor's early achieved amazing results in increased production. However, the strict and repressive tactics that were employed in many cases led to industrial unrest. After they were working "scientific management methods" in the Watertown Arsenal, and was followed by a direct hit. The US Congress banned the ultimate time and motion studies in Taylor's defense industry.
The use of such methods in the modern workplace can lead to beneficial results in the short term, but for rewards in the long term must be balanced against the impact on the morale of the workforce. Let's assume that everyone can work at the same faster rate factor, and that money is the only real motive may not bear them out. Workers today want to be empowered, and take an active role in their organizations, not to be treated like machines, but if the final product is important.
Henry Laurence Gantt
Henry Gantt Taylor worked at the Steel Works of Bethlehem. His ideas were widely supportive of the ideas of Taylor, but added more humanizing approach. He expressed his belief that scientific management and repressive manner used by the unscrupulous. Gantt moved away from the price of a piece of a strict wage system, rather than the provision of fixed salary in addition to the 20% - 50% bonuses. If workers have set specific goals during the day will be paid a bonus. Introduced supervisors who also received bonuses if targets were achieved by his team.
can be oppressive regime is seen as less Gantt today in many organizations. In factories all over the world get the rewards workers for a day, weekly or monthly goals.
and the work of Henri Fayol (1841-1925)
Henry Fayol, the "father of modern management theory" is interested in how the administration, and can be applied on a global basis. His theories focus on the rules, roles and procedures.
Fayol in the "five elements of management 'are:
* planning objectives preparation, strategies, policies and procedures to achieve them.
* organization identify tasks to achieve goals. Allocation of tasks to groups or individuals, enabling those responsible for this task.
* commander assigned to carry out a specific task.
* coordinate ensure a common approach by the groups to achieve the organization's goals.
control to ensure the performance of individuals and groups commensurate with the plans, and correct if necessary.
Fayol theories are relevant today as it was ever, and most, if not all managers use his "management elements.
and the work of Peter Drucker
work Drucker in 1950 and came on that of Fayol. He has five categories of "Operations Management"
* setting targets senior managers organize goals into goals. The cascade this more new directors.
* divided organize the workload of the activities can be controlled, and provide job opportunities.
* stimulate this involves communication and create the right conditions for the goals to be achieved.
* performance measurement compared against objectives.
* stimulate the development of people to use their talents.
wasFayol and Drucker views are very different views on the role of workers in their theories. Fayol work has a clear tendency towards the worker need to be told what to do, checking their work and correct, with the delegation of tasks and supervision of high-level managers (the hierarchy of the hill?). On the contrary, the spirit of Drucker is about empowering workers, giving them the opportunity to take advantage of their talents, with managers occupies a role that is more about helping and training workers.
ideas Fayol to not take into account people in the workplace, while Drucker takes the approach is somewhat more humane.
Elton Mayo - human relations approach
By 1930, there was emerging evidence that production can be raised through the application of motivational methods within the workforce. These ideas were very different techniques FW Taylor, although concerned with profit, and "human relations approach" to management is also concerned with social relations in the organization. This approach assumes that the workers were really committed to their companies, and that they had a desire to work in order to achieve their goals.
Elton Mayo Hawthorne experiments carried out in the factory, these sought to find ways to improve production by changing the conditions of workers and the wage structures. Worsened the conditions of workers in May, then returned to what it was. It was due to more workers to communicate and work as a unit to tighten rise in the production team. It also shows that the effect of taking an interest in the workers make them feel important and valued their opinions.
Volvo and Honda have seen the evolution of the team in recent years, with the differences between workers and managers that it is far from clear. People wear the same uniforms, and the emphasis on high communication. Develop a coherent teams who work well together and share the same goals ensures a high level of motivation to carry out the tasks required. Can be seen in the structure of this kind of organization 'hierarchy flat "with a wide period of control of the managers working on a skilled workforce and competent. The subordinates well trained and a good level of trust between managers and workers exists.
" The relations humanitarian approach "is definitely a positive way of managing the 21st century, where it should not be personal empowerment and self-esteem in question.
Mr. Whitehead that" the pain of generations of his managers well by learning to work and apply a bit of common sense proper "can not be accurately quantified. within the circle of fire, and is based on an upgrade to management positions on the inner qualifications and interview alone. the almost all management style managers on exactly what Mr. Whitehead advised in his letter. some very good and respected as such; however, there are a number large who can not manage people or their responsibilities within the organization. respect for leadership in the fire service is necessary, but in many of the rare times in the modern era. managers who have in-depth knowledge of the management strategy may well pay of the workforce to new heights. this type of organization "long tall pyramid" has many levels of leadership with spans of control for senior managers are relatively small, with wider spans of control are at the management level novices.
"an endless supply of teachers of a new spin-off of new batches of the buzz words that will help successive generations of kids whiz to get promoted on the basis of slogans "It is not an accurate description of the modern manager. It's certainly true that there are managers who, even with a backdrop of Education concerning the management is effective in their roles. This is not thinking in management theory. Management methods studies allow one to make informed decisions, and we have a wide range of options at your fingertips, and adapt to the changing pressures down the organization, the internal and external levels.
"real managers at the same time doing what they have done always, maintain discipline and tell people what to do," the idea of "one style fits all" unrealistic manager, and one that has a proven track record leading to unrest. Even within a single organization the manager or managers need to be flexible in their roles. Leadership is vital, but the leader who is flexible, approachable, and have interests and aspirations of the workers and the organization at the forefront of their strategy will thrive. On the contrary, the manager who is the only interest is the level of production and profit will not be supported by those that produce this product. Respect is definitely a two-way avenue.
My review of the theories of "gurus management 'of the past was designed to show that these ideas are not new. One can look at any organization, and we see a lot of these ideas are working in parallel. With regard to the organizational structure, one can not make stereotypical assumptions based entirely on the size of the organization or the number of employees. management style and work systems working all help to determine the structure. most organizations employ many of the properties discussed above, in different ways, at different times based on the dynamics of the situation. most companies are constantly evolving and redefining themselves to meet the modern requirements of the market. There is no correct answer, or one pattern which is superior to the other. each of the positive points and negative, but without the basic ones knowledge of all, how can one manage effectively?
0 Komentar