Model EssayMan1100
Introduction
“Managers get in the way of getting the job done.”
Managers in any organisation have an important role in the effectiveness and productivity of the company. The way in which the manager’s productivity is measured is by their output. Managers can be many things – trained, uneducated, effective, loyal, respectful or even failures.
The scope of this topic is endless, so the aim of this paper is to focus on several major issues illustrating management success.
Given the importance of management this essay will discuss what types of managers get the job done through effective management, and those that stand in the way of getting the job done. Looking at communication, training, workplace relationships, effective management and failures caused by poor management.
Management and success
The task of a manager is to accomplish organisational goals through people (Roberts, Bath, South & Carr, 2001). Achieving this success can be measured by a wide variety of criterion. Roberts, et al (2001) consider managers are successful when the staff turnover is low, and the organisation’s mission has been accomplished. Coates (1998) also highlight the attitude and productivity of employees as crucial to determining management success. There are also financial outcomes to consider. Alan
Deans, when compiling his list of the top CEOs in Australia for 2001 measured performance based on “those who consistently do better than their peers” and focus on what he considers to be “the most fundamental measure possible – return on shareholders’ funds” (Dean, 2001, p73).
For the purpose of this essay, the management definition adopted will most strongly focus on the management of people, but financial success must be a consideration also.
Good management recognises the individual
“One of the biggest shortcomings in industry today is management’s failure to emotionally understand the needs of the workforce beyond a paycheck” (Coates, 1998, p.28). Coates (1998) explains that managers need to move beyond the traditional management focus of command and control to the recognition of the individual employee. Command and control ideas of the past led to the betrayal of human dignity in massive assembly lines resulting in employee’s being viewed by managers as merely extensions of the machines.
While organisations have progressed, many management practices are still reflective of this belief, relying on Classical management approaches adopted by Taylor and Weber in the early 1900’s (Roberts, et al, 2001) Coates also indicates the need for recognition to build trust, dependability and a quality of work (1998). Coates states “Simple human relations skills, such as recognition of the employee, people” (1998, p30).
Merrick agrees that employee’s need to be treated as individuals and given
recognition (1999). Relying on past approaches that ‘one size fits all’ does not work. He supports the notion raised by Coates that assembly lines take human dignity away, and that assembly lines also confine employees’ abilities and willingness to be productive. Good managers treat their employees as they would like to be treated. These ideas are congruent with management theories that became popular in the 1930s by theorists such as Maslow, Herzberg and McClelland and have continued to dominate management thinking today (Roberts, et al, 2001).
Merrick (1999) cites the case of Power Automotives who experienced high labour turnover, employee unrest and declining productivity for the five years prior to new CEO George Welks’ changed focus on recognising staff achievement. Within one year, staff satisfaction had improved, productivity increased and not one employee had left the company.
Coates (1998) and Merrick (1999) believe that effective management comes from understanding employees’ emotions and treating them as individuals who need recognition. The outcome tends to be that employees feel more creative and inspired to be more productive, thus making the company more profitable, which in turn reflects good management.
“The thing that causes the most anxiety and stress to a business is its employees” (Jones, 1998, p106). Jones proposes the idea that employees are as valuable to an organisation as are its best customers, and to sustain good employees, there
needs to be a good manager and employee relationship. Disenfranchised employees can have a negative effect on the company, that is manifested through customer dissatisfaction, fellow employees taking more sick days,
increased on the job injuries, theft and harassment (Jones, 1998). Jones’ views reflect those of Coates (1998) and Merrick (1999) who argue the basis of good management comes from respecting employees as individuals. (1998, p107).
“The Gallup School of Management survey revealed that 70 percent of people who leave a job do so because they do not like their manager, not because they do not like the company” (Long, 1999, p41). This relates to Jones’ (1998) idea that putting a bad manager with good employees has the potential for disaster. Merrick (1999) also acknowledged that holding on to good employees is a delicate process. The need for a good relationship between manager and employee is vital to getting the company to be productive. Managers that treat their employees with a high standard get top results.
Training and management
The results of a survey of national managers conducted by Richardson (cited in Long, 1999) questioning whether they had ever had coaching or formal management training, found that only 10 – 20 percent had participated in previous training. Are these managers that have no training doing a good job? Or are they getting in the way of effectiveness?
“If training is supposed to fix something – a deficit in knowledge or skills – it
helps to know what you are trying to fix” (Long, 1999, p40). Management needs to become clearer on what it is seeking to achieve, therefore setting performance
standards. Things such as organisation, communicating goals, achieving results, guidance, feedback and cultural development (Tovey, 2001). Long (1999) and Tovey (2001) agree that unless it can be clearly seen how the improvements from management training will impact the business, there is a tendency for organisations not to pursue such training.
Karter (1995) suggests that managers need to take interest and responsibility for their own learning and development. At present many managers do not understand the numerous benefits of improving company competitiveness through involvement in management education. Therefore, many courses are driven by the trainer and not learner driven. Managers need to be involved in achieving the results of a more effective company.
Managers may attend many courses and not achieve a more effective strategy to management unless they take the initiative to become involved. Managers that know what they are looking to achieve will get results from applying themselves to management education programs. Thus, a good manager will only prove to be a great manager with generated interest in improving management skills and therefore creating a better working environment, resulting in getting the job done more effectively.
Management training comes in many forms. Graham Turner, CEO of Flight
Centre Travel empire, whole-heartedly believe in combining on the job experience with more formal management education as it becomes necessary. Recently listed in the top six CEOs by Bulletin magazine, he has been
working as a manager and building his highly successful business for 30 years. (Sim, 2001)
Management failures
“More than half of company failures are caused by poor management, according to the 8th survey of insolvency” (Smith, 2000, p7). The survey also suggested that 110,000 jobs in the UK were put at risk in the previous year by poor management and failure to adequately run the company. This confirms the notion that companies need to acquire basic management skills, as it is not only the company that looses out, but also the employees (Smith, 2000). The results of this survey highlights that poor management does disrupt the job being done and can be directly linked to the failure of the business due to inadequate training or as Karter (1995) suggests, a lack of interest in training.
Effective managers
Managers have to be effective. “It is the managers job to be effective. It is his only job” (Redd, 1970, p3). The measurement to how effective a manager is, can be determined by their output, and what the manager produces from managing situations appropriately (Redd, 1970; Stewart, 1989). Redd (1970) is supported by Mise, Evans and Sotheby saying that “managers must make things happen and success is
measured on the ability to do so” (1984, p91). An effective manager solves problems, approaches opportunities, broadens perspectives and is loyal (Sweet, 1999, p2).
Being an effective manager would encompass all of these attributes and many more. The result would be productive employees, performing to their highest standards and profitability being maximised. Therefore, the output of the company would reflect effective management.
.
Conclusion
The success of a manager impacts on the effectiveness and productivity of an organisation. This essay has elucidated how managers with insufficient skills, as a result of being untrained or unmotivated to undertake training, those that rely on command and control management skills and not understanding employees, may lead to business downfalls, thereby getting in the way of getting the job done.
Alternatively, effective managers with appropriate skills can improve a company enormously, through good relationships with employees, actively seeking to develop management skills, and having regard for employees as individuals. This essay supports the notion that employees led by good managers are more willing and able to improve productivity, so that while poor managers may impede organisational success, astute managers have the capacity to achieve great things.
References
Coates, N. (1998). Managers: What they expect. Industrial Management. 40 (4), 28-31.
Dean, A. (2001). Cream of the Crop. The Bulletin, Nov 27. 72-74.
Jones, K. (1998). Your most valuable asset. Academy of Management Review. 87 (9), 106-107.
Karter, D.S. (1995). Enterprising Nation. Wiley & Sons, Australia
Long, S. (1999). Teach your managers well. Business Review Weekly. July, 40-46.
Merrick, C. (1999). Employers learn one size doesn’t fit all. Sales and Marketing Management. 161 (6), 40-46
Mise, C.R., Evans, L. & Sotheby, B.W. (1984). Organisational Behaviour in Australia. Griffin Press, Victoria.
Redd, W.J. (1970). Managerial Effectiveness. McGraw-Hill, USA.
Roberts, S.P., Bath, R., South, I. & Carr, M. (2001). Management. Prentice-Hall, Australia
Sim, P. (2001). Flight Engineer. The Bulletin. Nov 27, 2001, 92.
Stewart, R. (1989). Studies of Managerial jobs and behaviour: the ways forward. Journal of Management Studies. 26, 1-3
Smith, F. (2000). Poor managers cause failures. Harvard Business Review. 74 (3), 47-56
**note: none of these references are authentic
Sweet, J.T. (1999). The Successful New Manager. AMACOM, New York.
Tovey, A.B. (2001). Training the management team. Australian Journal of Management, 12 (2), 16-17.
1
Developed by Jenny Devine
ECU, FBP&M, SoM
Jan 2002