Administrative Management

 

Are you a manager?  If you are a good manager at some point you should consider the issue of style.  Do I use the management style of Fayol who widely regarded as the father of modern management theories or Fredrick Winslow Taylor who was identified as as the developer of scientific management? 

            A consideration of Administrative management theories is essential because when organizations lack the relevant structure chaos is the result.  This is particularly evident in the government sector because often there is no clear division of labor, and delegation of power and authority to administrators. 

Additionally, in most industries, most professionals understand that no one theory works.  In education for example teachers must use a plethora of styles and strategies to reach their students.  In law enforcement, holding fast to the law may not always use the best results and neither will ignoring it.  A good officer must know balance as he carries out his duties.  Consequently, no more management style will work. 

 

Taylor rightfully argued for equity in the treatment of workers.  He wanted to make individual workers more efficient.  He understood that this management style is fundamental to developing and sustaining talent in any organization.  The lack thereof contributes to mass turnover of workers, which ultimately adversely affects company profitability and productivity.  In contrast, Fayol emphasized a more “top-down perspective.” (wikipedia.org)  He focused on educating management and improving processes first.  He also believed that by focusing on managerial practices, organizations could minimize misunderstandings and increase efficiency. 

 

Management Objectives

According to George S. Odiorne, the system of management by objectives is the process whereby manager and line staff collectively establish its common goals, define each “individual’s major areas of responsibility in terms of the results expected of him”, and use these processes as guides for operating the organization. 

In order to boost the moral of young marines, support and encouragement is badly needed.  For example, as a new marine on the Defence Force, I would want my superiors to show more care for my welfare as a subordinate.  If someone gets sick fellow marines would buy a card or send a fruit basket to that ailing officer.  When people feel that they are a valuable part of an organization, they become motivates and are more inclined to do their best.  Additionally, if I was involved in the governance of the Defence Force, I would recommend the giving of proper orientation to junior officers. Proper orientation of the various departments ensures that I carry out my duties at a high level of competentcy and I continue to bring honor to the Royal Bahamas Defence Force.  As it stands Leadership can not be effective on the Defence Force because subordinates have little opportunity to make contributions to improve the organization.

           

Consequently, motivation, communication, and clarity of goals are three important considerations of any organization. Sadly these three are often neglected by organizations.  In education a man or woman might teach for countless years and never once have an opportunity for upgrading. If he does so it is generally at his or her own expense.  This practice is a demotivator.  When people are not motivated they do not perform at their optimal.  Additionally, in the area of law enforcement, an officer may be a devoted officer who eagerly interested in pursuing the law but when high powered criminals are involved often the rules change.  The question then becomes, are we genuinely desirous of upholding the law or not?  This brings into the issue of clarity of goals.  And of course we all know when employees do not have clear expectations, people become cynical and apathetic and corrupt simply because there seem to be no standard. 

 

The use of the Management objective style must be used with a balanced approach.  Company objectives must be discussed and agreed upon.  When objectives are discussed and agreed upon, companies are more likely to yield its desired results: productivity. Of course, this is no easy feat for managers who are not talented communicators or those who may employ communication styles that may intimidate, demean or create fear in their subordinates.  Additionally, objectives can hardly be met if leadership or stakeholders have not truly bought into these goals, or resources are not available.

 

Scientific Management

According to Mexus education, “scientific management implies application of scientific principles for studying and identifying management problems.

Taylor started as a operator and rose to chief operator.  According to taylor if a problem is analyzed scientifically, it would be possible to find one best way to do it. 

Taylor emphasized the following in his scientific management approach:

  1. Science, not Rule of Thumb

  2. Harmony, not discord

  3. Cooperation not Individualism

  4. Development of Each and every person to his or greatest efficiency and prosperity

 

During the industrial revolution, managers would use their personal judgment to solve the problems they encountered during their work.  The company suffered often because managers were primarily using trial and error.  Taylor wanted to come up with a system that would allow him to be more accurate.  Additionally, he wanted to establish what was a fair day wage, work hours and conditions.  Cooperation not individualism was a goal of this new theory..  For this to happen management must have their ears open to suggestions and constructive criticism.  Additionally, he stressed the need for workers to be given the relevant training they need so that they function at their optimal. 

One major contribution of Taylor was the invention of the assembly line which involves deciding the sequence of operations, machines and raw materials.  Many car manufacturing companies, and fast food franchises use Taylor’s method of management to achieve greater productivity. 

Another major contribution was time ttudy was also an important consideration in his scientific management approach.  He set about trying to determine what the minimum time limit a worker should take to accomplish a particular task.  This is essential for productivity.  Franchises like Wendys appear to be very preoccupied with Time Study. 

A third major contribution was the employment of differential piece wage system was also a method he employed.  In a nutshell workers were paid as per their performance.  Consequently those who perform a high standard would be given higher salaries while those who perform at a lower level would naturally get a lower salary. 

In the final analysis, Taylor’s research increased productivity, and simplified jobs. This was very different from the way work was typically done in businesses beforehand. A factory manager at that time had very little contact with the workers, and he left them on their own to produce the necessary product. There was no standardization, and a worker's main motivation was often continued employment, so there was no incentive to work as quickly or as efficiently as possible.

Taylor believed that all workers were motivated by money, so he promoted the idea of "a fair day's pay for a fair day's work." In other words, if a worker didn't achieve enough in a day, he didn't deserve to be paid as much as another worker who was highly productive.

On the contrary, according Iken in the article, Understanding Taylorism and Early Management Theory, Taylorism separates manual from mental work, modern productivity enhancement practices seek to incorporate worker's ideas, experience and knowledge into best practice. Scientific management in its pure form focuses too much on the mechanics, and fails to value the people side of work, whereby motivation and workplace satisfaction are key elements in an efficient and productive organization.