The management roles that are easily observed in organizations include: directing navigating and interpreting. The directing and navigating roles involve the manager imposing the vision upon the members of staff.
This is an authoritative approach whereby the manager controls the operations of the organization since he or she is the final decision maker and interpreter of the vision. The interpreting role involves the CEO being the only party that is relied upon for interpretation of the vision.
This role places the CEO at the heart and central location of the organization given that without this person, operations would not run smoothly.
I am most comfortable with these management roles since they maintain power at the top thereby allowing managers to practice their leadership styles effectively. When the power to impose directives is held by the managers, change management is halfway guaranteed.
The directing role has the benefits of ensuring that organizational activities are controllable. Since the manager directs personnel on what to do and what to avoid it becomes easier to direct organizational activities towards the achievement of the vision.
When this approach is used indiscipline is easily dealt with and the manager can lead to creation of a reputable organizational culture. Directing however does not foster participative leadership which s the best method to influence behavior.
The navigating role also involves the manager controlling organizational activities but being subject to external factors which affect the outcome of change. The benefit of this approach is that there is room for the organization to be dynamic so as to adapt to changing needs of the market.
This however does not provide certainty about achievement of successful change management. The interpreting role had the advantage of avoiding confusion within the organization since all directives come from the CEO who also interprets the vision.
If many parties are allowed to interpret the vision, this will lead to confusion and lack of a common purpose. However this approach is dictatorial in nature and it leads to overdependence on the CEO or centralization of power.
The nurturing, coaching and caretaking approaches have several shortcomings. These roles involve the manager consulting with employees before decisions involving the organization are made.
This creates a barrier towards organizational effectiveness since employees do not always require to be consulted. Where the manager seeks to shape the change process by influencing behavior of individuals, a strong stand should still be maintained so that there is no deviation from the vision.
It becomes difficult for the manager to work towards a vision when consultations always have to be made with the personnel who are being coached or taken care of.
I have been in an organization that concentrates on the nurturing and coaching approach. In this organization employees were always consulted whenever there was something to be done.
The end result was that the decision making process was too long. At times the consultations ended in stalemates and there was no mutual decision that was arrived at. The lack of consensus during consultations made the manager unable to direct the organizational activities since he could not impose decisions upon the employees.
A strategy that can be used to overcome these shortcomings would be to allow the leader to be the final decision maker even after consultations have taken place since this would allow for exercising of effective leadership skills.