Four functions of management
Planning
Neither should it be supposed that any science of management can embrace all the factors entering into the practice of management. Into every branch of industry the human factor enters, and where that factor exists, there must always remain a field outside the province of science (Sheldon & Thompson, 2003). No amount of scientifically determined facts and principles can materially affect the problem of labor, except by indirect means. In so far as management deals with things, its methods can be reduced to terms of scientific principle; but in so far as it deals with men and women, it can only use scientific principles to the extent that the men and women are willing to subject themselves to them. Planning is not control; it rather draws up the necessary regulations which control puts into practice. Planning determines that a certain volume of products shall be manufactured according to a certain schedule by a certain time. It bases such a plan upon the information provided by the function of Comparison. Administration then ensures that all the functions combine effectively for the execution of that plan. Planning is also distinct from Design. Design lays down the character of the product, and makes the necessary specifications. Planning makes the scheme for its production; Administration controls the carrying out of the scheme (Sheldon & Thompson, 2003). Planning is known as the procedure of creating and maintaining a plan. Planning focuses on the process of determining and implementing the activities that will be needed to create the desired goal of the company. Planning helps the company IBM to create a blue print. This blue print helps the firm achieve business growth and it serves as the company's road map to development. Planning gives IBM an idea of the objectives it might want to achieve.
Organizing
Organizing consists of a set of processes aimed at institutionalizing human interaction and, as such, it is intimately related to quasi-formal cognition. Actors attribute motives to each other and, seeing actions recur, they typify the motives as recurrent. Institutionalized human interaction gives rise to patterns and regularities which are, in principle, amenable to algorithmic compressibility. Knowledge of regularities is cast in a prepositional mould so that the right type of action can be initiated in the right type of circumstance. Thus, prepositional knowledge is closely linked with the institutional dimension of organizing: organized contexts tend to be, by design, institutionalized systems, replete with regularities which can be represented via prepositional knowledge (Chia, 1998). The meanings of system and organization resemble each other. Organizing means establishing procedures, whether by a group for themselves or by one group on behalf of another. Before the organization’s appearance, what exists is an emergent social structure, exchanges and competitions, forces, attempts to exercise power, and so on. The task of research consists in describing organizations, and explaining observed variations of organizational characteristics. That would be the basis for a genuine theory of organizations, strategy as the only way of producing such a theory (Chia, 1998). Organizing involves the assignment of tasks to individuals after planning has been done. Organizing helps IBM to group tasks into departments. Organizing helps IBM in determining the best individual that will be given some authority. It makes sure that IBM has a chain of command that must be followed, and those who lead have a certain authority and responsibility. Organizing also determines the allocation of resources across the company.
Leading
In order to be successful, individuals within organizations must be equipped to cope with an unpredictable marketplace and chaotic change. This requires leadership capabilities focused on leading and managing organizations that are in constant flux, facing new challenges that require new solutions virtually every day (Mannix & Peterson, 2003). Leading is not just about the rational and the factual. Instinct, experience, and intuition all have a part to play. But in the increasingly open, transparent world, observers of leaders demand reasons and rationale (Chien, Wu, S & Wu, J 2009). Leading focuses on making sure that the personnel given goals will be on the right path. Being on the right path means that the firm is achieving growth and it has gained new clients. Leading makes sure that the personnel who were involved in the planning and organizing process would on the right path to achieving the goals set. Leading means that the firm would only choose strategies that will bring more benefits than problems. IBM uses leading to make sure that those given authority and responsibility would have the assistance they need to achieve goals. IBM uses leading to make sure that those who have authority in the company will not find it difficult to run the firm. IBM uses leading to restrict some actions they believe would not help the firm. IBM uses leading to criticize activities or strategies that do not help the firm achieve a good image IBM uses leading to help employees to act accordingly and be assets rather than liabilities. IBM uses leading to instruct the employees on what they should do on certain situations and what characteristics/attitudes they should improve. IBM uses leading to make sure that the employees will be motivated to perform according to standards.
Controlling
Privatization entails a shift in the objectives of the principal, since the ownership changes now link rewards to the share price. Thus, like the market for corporate control, the new ownership arrangements must consider the type of managerial governance structures which will induce performance in a new regulatory and competitive environment. This provides a perspective on the policy issues debated in key areas such as communications and utilities (Merchant, 1988). Disciplining of inefficient management is best handled by an outside take-over by shareholders; hence, the stock-market operates as an external monitor of management, in that the share value of the firm reflects the relative efficiency of the management. Thus, the market for corporate control operates to discipline managements which fail to act in the interests of shareholders (McCahery, Picciotto & Scott, 1994). Controlling is done after a firm has already created a plan, organized the actions that will be used and made sure that the actions will be properly guided. Controlling a firm would require its own strategies to ensure that the result would benefit the firm. Controlling a firm would require the use of control mechanism to organize the whole process and make sure that the firm would maintain its goals as it is being controlled. Controlling is done in the end of the implementation of a new strategy. Controlling is done in the end because it is where problems come out. IBM uses control to check the errors it makes. IBM uses control to determine if any new action has errors. IBM determines if new strategies and actions should continue implementation or should be thought over. It uses control methods to take needed action so that changing of standards will be minimized and the company's goals will be achieved.
References
Chia, C.H. (1998). In the realm of organization: Essays for Robert Cooper. London.
Chien, Y.C., Wu, S.C. & Wu, J.T. (2009). Identification of
physical parameters controlling the dominance of algal
species in a subtropical reservoir. Water Science &
Technology, 60(7), 1779-1786.
Dixon, J. (2003). Responses to governance: Governing
corporations, societies, and the world. Westport, CT:
Praeger.
Mannix, E.A. & Peterson, R.S. (Eds.). (2003). Leading and
managing people in the dynamic organization. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McCahery, J., Picciotto, S. & Scott, C. (Eds.). (1994).
Corporate control and accountability: Changing structures and the dynamics of regulation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Merchant, K.A. (1988). Progressing toward a theory of marketing
control: A Comment. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 40.
Sheldon, O. & Thompson, K. (Eds.). (2003). The philosophy of
management. New York: Routledge.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment