Script on Management

Introduction

In most organizations, the need to achieve a set objective relies on the coordination and organization of activities of the business. This organization and coordination can be referred to as management. More often than not, management is included as a factor of production in the organizational set up.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Factors Influencing Management

All organizations are founded on some principles that guide its functionality. One of the principles is vision while the other is the mission of the organization. Nearly all organizations seek to gain profit from its endeavors in order to sustain its operations, with few charitable ones. For an organization to achieve its mission and reach its vision, therefore, effective management is required. However, the effectiveness of the kind of management adopted by whichever organization relies strongly on the organizational cultures, power and use of power as well as trust among stakeholders in the organization.

Organizational Cultures

Every organization has a set of beliefs, values and norms shared which influences the mannerism in which members in that particular organization feel, think and behave. The set of beliefs referred to in this context make for what is referred to as the organizational cultures. Values and competencies of workers and managers play a prime role at ensuring the efficiency, relevance and accomplishment of a company in the field that they operate. Therefore, for a better performance of an organization at achieving its goals, the set organizational culture have to work in line and ensure that almost all members in the organization are positive thinkers and are focused to achieving the goals set by the institution (Fred, 2011).

The concept behind organizational cultures was noted initially as early as 1933 but was later popularized in the 1980s, with publications done on the discipline by various researchers and authors. Theorists in organizational disciplines outline that organizational cultures are real and that they, organizations can as well be perceived as people with unique personalities. In elaboration, researchers have depicted organizations as entities that could either be rigid or flexible, friendly or unsupportive, conservative or innovative. This can be said as to be the traits depicted by humans as well. The cultures, therefore, have a significant part to perform in the lives of the members of that particular organization (Fred, 2011).

Despite organizational cultures having varied definitions, from one organizational theorist to another, there is a lot more similarity in the generalized characteristics that will define the cultures depicted in a sample of organizations.

Observed behavioral regularities: in interacting, organizational employees use common language, and terminologies to celebrate their rituals. This is common to any organization as it makes member get involved with the daily operations around the institution. Any outsider, once stepping into that environment, will definitely feel left out because of the rituals, celebrations, terminologies and language used. This is however not unique to only one organization but all.

Norms: behavior standards usually evolve in groups of work. The standards are usually considered acceptable with the amount of evolution they are subjected to. At this point of acceptance, the standard becomes a yardstick by which things like performances can be measured. Norms are, therefore, a trait that does not only refer to a particular organization on the land, but to all since an organization without standard that evolve into norms can surely not stand the test of time (Fred, 2011).

Dominant values: every organization often seeks to be distinct from the other competitors in the market. In each organization, therefore, members are expected to share major values that are somehow different from those of other institutions. The values, often informed by the norms in those organizations, grow into being dominant traits that can, and will definitely distinguish the entire organization from others (Fred, 2011).

Philosophy: in every organization there are policies that guide the beliefs of how its members are expected to be treated. The philosophies, working hand in hand with the norms, ensures that the organization achieves its vision as set (Fred, 2011).

For management to be effective, and for organizations to dominate their markets, there should be synchrony between the beliefs of the management and the cultures set (Fred, 2011). More often than not, a management philosophy that synchronizes with the cultures of the organization they manage, motivates their employees to perform at peak levels. Since management of organizations is often measured with the achievements, which come as a result of employee input, the more motivated the employees get, the higher the performance of the organization. Therefore, organizational cultures lie pivotal on the management of the organization.

Power

Power is often believed by many people to be a dirty word, or alternatively referred to by organizations as the last dirty secret. Arguably, political power, or traditional power as some may refer to it, is an outright mechanism available for aligning the reality faced by an organization. Power is exercised at varied levels, and so is management. From hierarchical setup of organizations, every member manages a docket, which consists of other junior members as well (Gerald R, 1977). This system of planning demonstrates the exercise of power at the different levels. The kinds of powers exercised by managers on their subordinates, dictates the kind of relationships that is generated between the two. More often than not, the relationship determines the amount of output that the said docket will give by the end of the day. Positive relationships often lead to constructive output. The converse of this is true as well. The amount of power that a manager is accorded, however, is what determines the kind of powers that they exercise. Notably, absolute powers are known to corrupt leaders, therefore, an organization that seeks to prosper should ration and optimize in the amount of power they accord managers at their various levels (Gerald R, 1977).

Power can be interpreted as the ability of an individual to get things done the way they please. Managers who wish to give the organization a drive towards its prosperity need to thinks of ways of boosting the production levels of the organization. However, all does not end up at thinking of the ways, but stretch further into the influence that the manager will have in ensuring the ideas are implemented. However much the definition of power indicates the zeal to conduct business in a way that pleases the bearer of authority, exercising it greatly influences the productivity of the organization by the end of the day (Gerald R, 1977). Powerful managers do not only rely on the authority they can stamp but also the amount of employees they can influence to think along the same lines that they think in.

Too much power, corrupts individuals into thinking like gods and their subordinates being reduced to slaves. However much the relationship can offer the organization in terms of profit making, the results may not be optimum at any cost. Subordinates cherish managers that consider their humanism and act in line with those beliefs. A god among men in an organization set up often will reduce the efforts that their employees will give and thus lead to losses instead of profits for the organization (Gerald R, 1977). As earlier noted, the performance of the management team in an organization depends greatly on the output by their subordinates, therefore, power can greatly influence management in an organization.

Trust

For the past few decades, trust has been depicted as a lubricant that greases the right connections and keep the economic wheel turning for the betterment of an organization. Studies show that there are various benefits of trust to organizations, especially when based on valid track records. Psychologists term trust as a human trait that is conceived in the brain. Humans, like any other animal, learn to trust from very early ages. Often it doesn't take much for individuals to tip up towards trust. However, much people might say they don't trust certain individuals or institutions, their character speaks differently. It can be said that trust, for humans, is a default position. Humans often trust reflexively, and other times mindlessly across a broad category of social positions. Moreover, it takes disappointments for trust in the institutions or individuals to depreciate (Roderick M, 2009). Without disappointments, trust is known to always appreciate on a regular basis. For organizational success, therefore, trust, that can build of break, its profitability comes in two levels; internal and external trust.

In internal trust, the organization depends on the relationship between its employees and its managers. Such relationships, as earlier discussed, depends on the cultures within the organization and the levels of absolution in power exercised within the walls of the institution. For organizations to realize profitable endeavor, and count on the outcome of their employees, there needs to be trust between the management teams at different levels and their subordinates. Proper relationships between the two relates to proper working conditions and finally preferable outcomes (Roderick M, 2009). This kind of trust, just like many others, will depend much on the track records of both parties. Managers with reputable track records win much trust from their subordinates and therefore influence proper work environment that will result into profits for the organization.

External trust, on the other hand, depends much on organization-client relationships. Organizations with poor track records often disappoint their clients, thereby leading to depreciation of trust. The converse of this is, however, true too. This kind of trust impacts the profitability of the organization and its relevance in the market. Often at times, the management in the organizations dictate the kind of service delivery to clients. With poor performances, organizations will seek solutions by fortifying the management teams in the organization in order to get desired results (Roderick M, 2009).

In a nutshell, the performance of an organization, which depends on the output by employees is determined by trust both within and outside of the organization in a way that employees trust their managers, resulting into better performance and further resulting into trust by their clients which boosts their revenue in the market, making trust so much of a cycle in organizational performance.

Impact of Leadership in Management

A quick look at what leaders in organizations do entails activities like: setting strategies, motivation, creation of missions and generally creating an organizational culture. All in all, the sole responsibilities of leaders is to get results. An inquiry might, however, be made on the kind of leadership that is likely to bring forth results. A recent research by consulting firm Hay/McBer suggests that good leadership, one that brings forth results rely on six traits namely: coerciveness, authoritativeness, affiliation, democracy, coaching and pacesetting. Coercive leaders usually stipulate urgent compliance, affiliate leaders create emotional attachments and harmony in work places, authoritative leaders mobilize people towards a foresight, democratic leaders develop consensus via contribution, and pacesetting mentors expect superiority and self-direction while coaching mentors mature individuals for the future. Taken individually, these leadership traits look to have a unique and direct impact on the working atmosphere of an organization, further impacting on the financial out...