MANAGEMENT ASSIGNMENT QUESTIONS

Posted: August 25th, 2021

MANAGEMENT ASSIGNMENT QUESTIONS

By (Name)

Name of Class

Professor’s Name

Name of School

City/State

Date

                                                 Management Assignment Questions                                                

Q 1: Scientific Management Approach in Modern Organizations

Towards the beginning of the 20th century, most industrial organisations faced the challenge of an increase in size and complexity. As a result, it became hard to organise human efforts more efficiently and effectively. Due to the increasing need by different business entities to respond to the contemporary trends in management, an urgent solution would be necessary to fast-track production using analytical and managerial methods and skills. However, it was not possible to achieve efficient production management unless companies adopted scientific management. Through Frederick Winslow Taylor’s work, various organisations have gained a coherent ideological foundation to facilitate job design and analysis, an aspect that has proven to be instrumental in human resource operations among leading companies across the world. The effect of this approach is apparent in the performance of specific duties including selection, training, and provision of incentives as well as the support of workers.

Scientific Management in Contemporary World

In a modern organisation, adoption of scientific management will not only minimise time wastage during the production process but will also serve as a growth factor of the labour force productivity. Given Taylorism, business process management is a determinant of how successful an organisation becomes by creating working avenues which are scalable, cheap, and efficient (Palla & Billy 2018). The concept of scientific management, therefore, adds value to any business unit that implements it by saving on hard work due to better use of available resources (Mulder 2017). Whether in restaurants or factories, there is an upsurge of managers influenced by Taylorism who are keen to enforce processes that reduce human error and, by extension, the human choice (Palla & Billy 2018). In the absence of scientific management approach, problems like workers’ soldiering and disorder could be rampant (Palla & Billy 2018). In addition, the management could as well extend the acts of arbitrariness and greed to its workforce resulting in wastage of resources and unruliness.

Scientific management has fostered cooperation among different departments in an organisation and has also facilitated the division of labour. This attribution is both important in addressing challenges encountered towards production efficiency and realisation of quality products (Mulder 2017). Practically, investment in scientific management by any organisation presents a range of benefits including rationalisation of various techniques needed to achieve efficient methods of work (Palla & Billy 2018). More importantly, scientific management has advantages in preparing and training of the workforce, improving their working conditions, and making sure they strengthen their level of discipline to the labour requirements (Cingolani, Thomsson & de Crombrugghe 2015). At organisations such as Toyota, the integration of simple ideas by workers have yielded significant success rates to the company. Studies have shown that by encouraging knowledge-based contribution, scientific management directly serves as a competitive advantage among firms in the modern times (Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson 2011). Overall, Taylorism provides an insight to the managers on how to understand the nature of motivation in the contemporary knowledge-driven economy,which is a good strategy towards sustainable growth and development.

Implications on Modern Workforce

Taylor’s principle postulates the use of the scientific approach to streamline the most efficient techniques of doing work. By advocating for the replacement of the rule of thumb, Taylor intended to minimise errors during production through labour specialisation, standardisation, and improvement of processes (Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson 2011). The same knowledge has extended among big companies known to operate several departments through sub-division of significant tasks into smaller units (Palla & Billy 2018). Interestingly though, this method is only applicable among smaller companies that do not have to adapt to immediate changes. For instance, organisations that still operate under Fordism model are inflexible; hence, face constant challenges with their operations to date (Palla & Billy 2018). Thus, modern industries are evidently on the verge to adopt rationalist ideas like standardisation and specialisation.

Q 2: Conflict of Leadership Derived through Hierarchical Position and Technical Expertise

The bureaucratic theory came to force late in the 19th century following the work of Max Weber. He believed that large organisations have an essential structure characterised by many rules as well as standardised obligations. Due to the size of such business outlets, they tend to focus on hierarchies and professionals, a division of labour and responsibility, and impersonal interaction between employees and their leaders. Firstly, successful implementation of bureaucratic management means that the administration has the mandate to impose rules which are respected by workers. Secondly, the workforce regard routine activities within the bureaucratic system as official. The most prominent stipulations of this theory include career orientation, task specialisation, and hierarchical authority. Since Max Weber’s postulation on bureaucracy, the relationship linking professionalisation and bureaucracy has been at the centre of focus due to the emerging conflict.

Bureaucratic-professional conflict emerges from social control based on internalised norms and formal rules. There are notable variations in value consistency between the professional managers and the bureaucratic ones (Cingolani, Thomsson & de Crombrugghe 2015). For instance, the professionals believe in knowledge, autonomy, and service. However, for the bureaucrats, the underlying tenets include discipline and compliance with the underlying organisational policies (Mulder 2017). In essence, the professional is committed to client satisfaction in line with the professional norms set outside the employing agency. For the bureaucrat, the process of service delivery depends entirely on the company regulations which, to some extent, overrule the prevailing professional norms (Cingolani, Thomsson & de Crombrugghe 2015). Also, the professional acquires specialised training leading to the acquisition of exclusive knowledge responsible for specific role behaviours. Conversely, the bureaucrats believe that organisational authority and rules are the sole determinants of their course of action (Cingolani, Thomsson & de Crombrugghe 2015). The disparities between the two opposing sides could threaten the performance of industry should they be integrated into a single platform.

The power struggle is a primary concern involving professionalised employees and the bureaucratic counterparts. Although it is not an inherent characteristic of firms hiring professionals, the professional will certainly demand inclusion in the institutionalised strategic decision-making process (Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson 2011). The bureaucratic managers, however, will oppose any attempt seeking to infringe their prerogative duties and responsibilities, especially in the alteration of rules guiding program development and policy formation (Mulder 2017). Consequently, the emerging discord, if not resolved on time, will result in reduced work morale and alienation of some segments of employees (Cingolani, Thomsson & de Crombrugghe 2015). Lastly, the situation can also affect the overall service delivery which is supposed to be valid and reliable.

Finally, professional-bureaucratic conflict can result in job dissatisfaction due to the repeated powerlessness. In most cases, studies have shown that those who pursue their fields of specialisation are less likely to face power vacuum as compared to the unprofessional colleagues, in this case, the bureaucratic individuals (Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson 2011). The professionals tend to fall into some structural assimilation in which they showcase their expertise. Continued professional-bureaucratic disagreement undermines the services that could be offered by the professionals (Mulder 2017). For instance, upward communication involving expert staff members could be unavoidable in some cases when the conflict level escalates (Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson 2011). Nevertheless, some firms have resolved to direct their focus on one of the attainable principles of Max Weber rather than combine the two concepts for the sake of effectiveness and efficiency in service delivery.

Reference List

Cingolani, L, Thomsson, K & de Crombrugghe, D 2015,‘Minding Weber more than ever? The impacts of state capacity and bureaucratic autonomy on development goals’, World Development, vol. 72, pp.191-207. Available from:<https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2fff/59d03dcc46c54d7c7f307f64225000c3d24e.pdf> [2 April 2019].

Giannantonio, CM & Hurley-Hanson, AE 2011. ‘Frederick Winslow Taylor: Reflections on the relevance of the principles of scientific management 100 years later’,Journal of Business and Management, vol. 17, pp.7-10. Available from: <https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1037&context=business_articles> [2 April 2019].

Mulder, P 2017, Bureaucratic theory definition by Max Weber, ToolsHero. Available from: <https://www.toolshero.com/management/bureaucratic-theory-weber/> [Accessed 28 March 2019].

Palla, A & Billy, I 2018, ‘Scientific management: its inapplicability to contemporary management challenges’, The Business and Management Review, vol. 9, no.3. Available from: <www.abrmr.com/myfile/conference_proceedings/Con_Pro_89747/2018icbedcp78.pdf> [Accessed 28 March 2019].