Background
Most management theories and literature tend to present managing as if it is a technical and rational activity. For example, management is presented as a discipline that involves the calm, careful and well considered tasks of planning, organizing, leading and controlling. Such a view certainly helps us to understand some of the tasks managers do.
However, others have questioned whether such technical and rational sounding descriptions actually tell us what being a manager and performing in a managerial role is like in reality. Therefore, this paper reviews literature that depicts the role of managing by comparing and contrasting technical and rational realities of being a manager.
Literature Review
Management is perceived in different ways. Several literature hold that management work involves the technical and rational realities of management functions (planning, organizing, leading and controlling).For instance, according to Watson (2006), the practice of management involves managing power and politics where by one has to exert power to others or being subjected to it.
However, it is always challenging to managers to balance power and politics since according to Watson, the most taunting task for managers is managing how to manage. In this respect, one is said to be a manager when he or she is able to use and balance power and politics in the best manner of his or her management functions.
Nonetheless, Watson (2006) continues to note that power exists at three level in the technical and rational reality; the first level is at interpersonal level where some people exert power by making others perform tasks that they would not do, the second level is at organizational structure level where certain individuals are in positions that make them determines what others do in the organization, lastly, it is at societal level where some individuals have the capacity of influencing what others do.
In respect to all these levels of exercising power, management functions are said to be used to achieve the desired results. Therefore, it can be affirmed that power is a subset of management rational reality since one uses this power to bring the desired effects in planning, organizing, leading and controlling which are major management functions.
Besides, managers in the organizations are perceived to have priorities, goals and ambitions where they organize employees and carry out other management roles such as planning, leading and controlling in order to achieve management effectiveness.
According to Watson (2006), Departmental or organizational priorities are only present in the organization to further personal interests of managers. Nonetheless, micro politics are always presented in the organization in the same priorities, goals and ambitions of people in the management role since they conflicts with those of others in the organization.
For example, micro politics usually take a center stage in management roles such as budgeting, motivational issues such as salary increments, allocation of ergonomic factors such as floor space in the organization. As a result, it is imperative for managers to have good planning, organizing, leading and controlling traits to be able to deal with micro politics in the organization to avoid negative effects relates with it.
Nevertheless, Knights and Roberts (1982) acknowledge the role of politics in the rational reality of management since both managers and the employees act on false understanding of power. Knights and Roberts continue to allude that managers usually underestimate the importance of employees in the organization and instead depend on the coercive strategies of which the employees counter-react.
As a result, all management functions such as planning, controlling, leading and organizing which demand inputs from both sides are affected hence these managers fail because of poor use of power associated with their positions in the organization.
Moreover, Roberts (1984) concurs with other theorists and managers who believe that power is the ultimate determinant of rational management. Roberts holds that effectiveness in management is depended on the manager’s ability of manipulating other people particularly employees to the desired behavior.
Nonetheless, Jackall (1988) also acknowledges the need of power in management functions since he postulates that authority and advancement always come together in the decision making process which is an element in all functions of management.
For instance, planning as a function entails several decision making process to be able to arrive at effective plans for organizational growth and advancement. On the other hand, Parker (2002) holds that management is a way in which people are controlled. In this respect, Parker believes that people are potential source of disorders in the organizing function of management. Therefore, it is imperative that managers posses both power and politics to be able to practice these management functions effectively.
Nonetheless, the rational and realities of being a manager is postulated by Watson (1996) to revolve around thinking since this concept shapes managers actions as they are informed by beliefs and generalizations that have mixtures of pragmatic and moral principles.
In relation to this, it should be noted that most individual patterns of practices of management are influenced by value orientation from the environment which managers evolve where their personality are shaped. As a result, these managers learn to handle the ever changing demands of their management work.
Moreover, Watson continues to hold that managers just like any other employees in the organization usually shape and reshape their identities in a continuous process since these traits are continually picked throughout their entire lives. Nevertheless, other managers in their rational and reality operation of their managerial duties are in some cases constrained with what is sought to be the desired principles of their organizations.
Therefore, they have to discharge their management functions according to these preserved principles of their organizations. In this respect, their personal values and personalities are not prioritized in these managerial functions. Consequently, managers who operate under strict organizational principles do not operate in a free environment and thus they are not free agents since they are bound to operate in a predetermined environment of management.
Moreover, according to Watson (2001), rationalities and realities of being a manager is not always in the normal formal sense of performing managerial functions of a manager but it also involves other informal tasks of managing to survive and coping in the real management environment of the organization.
In relation to this, it is evident that management capacity is not only acquired through formal training but it is a continuous process that is acquired by an individual throughout his or her life process through learning and adapting to new and different situations all the time. However, this can be attributed to dynamism in organizations since apparatus in the organizations keep on changing hence managers must change with new trends in real management functions.
Notably, it is imperative to acknowledge that management and managers’ work in rational reality involves more than just management functions. According to Watson (2006), it is opined that managerial work is inevitably concerned with politics and power since organizations exists in a social set up.
Therefore, it is evident that managerial work entails managing power since one has to be subjected to it or exercise it to bring forth the management effects required the organizational effectiveness. For this reason, it is important to note that management and work of managers in reality entail several aspects that contribute to the achievement of managerial functions. For instance, power and politics are inseparable with management. However, one has to find a balancing point of these aspects to achieve the desired results.
References
Jackall, R. (1988) Moral Mazes: The World of Corporate Managers. Oxford. Oxford University Press.
Parker, M. (2002) Against Management. Cambridge. Polity Press.
Roberts, J. (1984) The moral character of management practice. Journal of Management Studies, 21(3), pp.287-302.
Watson, T. (2006) Organizing and Managing Work. 2nd ed. London. Penguin.
Watson, T. (2001) In Search of Management. revised ed. London. Thompson Publishers.
Watson, T. (1996) How do managers think?. Management Learning, 27(3), pp. 323-341.
Knights, D. & Roberts, J. (1982) The power of organization or the organization of power?. Organization Studies, 3(1), pp. 47-63.