Signs and Symptoms of Incompetent Management
Management incorporates the act of leading and controlling a group of people with an objective of attaining collective goals. Usually, organizations with perfect and effective management systems achieve marvelous results.
The level of success of such organizations normally depends on the competency of their managers. Managers are integral components of any organization. They should be visionary and competent in their endeavors in order to realize remarkable results.
This requires effective leadership skills (GIRIN, 2011). For example, declining profits within an organization (due to falling revenues and increasing expenses) signifies management’s incompetence. Employees underperform under incompetent managements.
Disregarding the workers’ preferences, poor motivational strategies, and lack of innovation are among other factors that employees’ performance. It is crucial to understand these provisions based on their viability, applicability, and other relevant frameworks.
Reduced morale and weakened motivation within the workforce indicate an incompetent management. Incompetent managers are reluctant to employ highly qualified personnel. It is vital to consider these provisions when analyzing characteristics of incompetent leadership.
Ineffective communication and poor feedback channels also portray managers with deprived competency. Concurrently, secrecy, gossip, and denying realities are other vital signs of incompetence (Jia,You, & Du, 2012).
Because of these, employees lose their trust in the management. Overconfidence is also a sign of management incompetence. Notably, such managers confuse accidental organizational success with their personal strategic radiance.
Incompetent managers are more likely to put the entire organizations into risky ventures. Particularly, these managers are more likely to push employees to effect risky ventures. Insufficient quality control may also be a sign of management’s incompetency.
Defective products, intensive damages on goods, constant service interruptions, and high rates of client complaints are associated with insufficient quality control (GIRIN, 2011). These emerge due to lack of employee motivation and dedication to duty.
Poor client services from employees might also emanate from management incompetence. It is observable that several signs or symptoms of incompetent management remain evident in most organizations.
The Classical Management Style versus Scientific Management
Classical management refers to the management based on the conviction that workers have economic and physical demands. According to this management style, workers’ social requirements and demands for job fulfillment is unimportant.
This management style lobby for increased labor specialization, centralized decision processes, and profit making. Being the oldest management strategy, classical management is specifically interested in the increase of efficiency, both for the employees and the organization (Jia, You, & Du, 2012).
Basically, the style majorly deals with the universal operational guidelines while endeavoring for monetary efficiency. It embodies scientific, administrative, and bureaucratic management. Scientific management concentrates on a particular and modest manner of doing specific jobs.
Scientific management depends on the theory that examines work processes with an aim of improving the general labor productivity (GIRIN, 2011). It involves the organizational management according to the efficiency principles drawn from empirical investigations on the work as well as production methodologies.
As potentiated by Taylor, scientific management suggests that resolutions, which are dependent on dictatorship and tradition, must be replaced with concise processes developed from analysis of specific situations. Thus, it can be noted that classical management is more repressive than scientific management (Paulus & Yang, 2000).
In scientific management, it is believed that basic jobs can be planned adequately to increase productivity. It is critical to understand these provisions in the context of effective management.
Notably, scientific management is extremely effective when considered in diverse contexts. Unlike classical management, scientific management depends largely on the empirical analysis of situations.
The distinction between scientific and behavioral theories is clearly depicted within different organizations. Whilst scientific theory stresses on the importance of empirical analysis of the work processes, behavioral theories examine the actual performance competency of leaders (GIRIN, 2011).
According to behavioral theory, good managers can be molded. There is an assumption that an effective leadership depends on an identifiable and learnable behavior. I have severally experienced behavioral theory in the course of my work.
For instance, presently in my organization, the senior managers started learning in their various departments as trainees through apprenticeship.
In this practice, there is a clear depiction that leadership competencies may be learned. This is unlike the widespread belief that leadership competencies are inherent.
References
GIRIN, J. (2011). Empirical Analysis of Management Situations: Elements of Theory and Method. European Management Review. 8: 197–212.
Jia, L., You, S. and Du, Y. (2012). Chinese Context and Theoretical Contributions to Management and Organization Research: A Three-decade Review. Management and Organization Review. 8: 173–209.
Paulus, P. and Yang, H. (2000). Idea Generation in Groups: A Basis for Creativity in Organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 82:76–87.