The best model which reflects the nature of management and changing environment is the model proposed by Drucker (Mullins 418). This model is selected for analysis because a modern manager should be a flexible and open minded, authoritative and ethical person in order to meet challenges and threats of the environment. The survey results show that a modern management is much more than planning and coordination but an art of leading and directing employees.
The case study portrays that a manager should be able to set objectives and motivate employees, organize and measure their success, communications and develop people. From the expanded list of alternatives developed by the manager and his subordinates, the manager then selects the solution that he regards as most promising. Management represents an extreme degree of group freedom only occasionally encountered in formal organizations, as, for instance, in many research groups. The survey results unveil the problem of how the modern manager can be “democratic” in his relations with subordinates and at the same time maintain the necessary authority and control in the organization for which he is responsible has come into focus increasingly in recent years. The case study vividly portrays that “a manager is someone who performs the tasks of management” (Mullins 418).
The main problem highlighted by the case study is the difficulty to lead and persuade others. Thus, it is one of the crucial dimensions of leadership. The successful manager of men can be primarily characterized neither as a strong leader nor as a permissive one. Rather, he is one who maintains a high batting average in accurately assessing the forces that determine what his most appropriate behavior at any given time should be and in actually being able to behave accordingly.
This model best meets changing economic and social conditions, because the manager’s behavior in any given instance will be influenced greatly by the many forces operating within his own personality. He will, of course, perceive problems in a unique way on the basis of his background, knowledge, and experience. In contrast, the manager who releases control over the decision-making process thereby reduces the predictability of the outcome.
The survey shows that lack of delegation skills and lack of knowledge about change management, lack of leadership and stress management skills reduce effective performance and productivity. Seminars and on-job training will be the best methods for training initiatives. The constant need is to educate managers how to cope with stress and lead others. Some managers have a greater need than others for predictability and stability in their environment. This tolerance for ambiguity is being viewed increasingly by psychologists as a key variable in a person’s manner of dealing with problems. Delegation is one of the main problems faced by managers.
They underline a need to ‘become a leader rather than a ‘’doer’ (Mullins 417). It is important to develop personal competencies of managers and develop their abilities to relocate the tasks. These training methods appear to provide a participant with opportunities to learn more about himself and his impact on others, to understand his own feelings and how they affect his behavior toward others, to become more sensitive to the ways people communicate with each other, to learn “active listening”–for meanings and for feelings, to learn how people affect groups and how groups affect people, to behave more realistically in face-to-face situations with another and in groups, and to learn how to help groups function more effectively.
The proposed training methods reflect Watson’s recommendations and meet his innovative approach to management. Modern management is much more than a set of rule but a mixture of political, artistic and scientific issues. Dealing with people requires more than just understanding. Broadly speaking, training aims to develop both social sensitivity and behavioral flexibility (‘art and science’ of management). This means that this training methods seek to produce both attitudinal and behavioral changes. These changes are not to be made in a specific direction pointed out by the trainer; instead, each trainee is encouraged to get a better look at himself and to experiment with new, perhaps personally more appropriate behaviors (‘political and magic’ dimensions’).
It is more difficult to be a middle manager because this position requires more skills and many years of experience to perform effectively. In this case, the senior manager identifies a problem, but a middle manager finds alternative solutions, chooses one of them, and then reports this decision to his subordinates for implementation. Here the senior manager who has arrived at a decision, by the muddle managers seeks acceptance of these ideas providing an opportunity for his subordinates to get a fuller explanation of thinking and intentions. This ‘give and take’ also enables the manager and the subordinates to explore more fully the implications of the decision.
This kind of behavior permits the subordinates to exert some influence on the decision. The task of the middle managers is to control subordinates, evaluate their performance, motivate and inspire them, report results and make necessary changes. In contrast to the senator managers, the middle managers differ greatly in the amount of trust they have in other people generally, and this carries over to the particular employees they supervise at a given time. In viewing his particular group of subordinates, the manager is likely to consider their knowledge and competence with respect to the problem.
Works Cited
Mullins, L. Management and Organizational Behavior. 8th edition, 2007.