Source Care Management

Measurement And Quantification of Alternatives

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 5 Aug 2013 07:34:00 -0700

If alternatives are to provide the best payoff in a given situation, they should be quantifiable and measurable. Also, if several objectives are being sought, measurement is vitally important in establishing priorities among them. Realistically, when objectives cannot be stated in quantifiable terms, alternatives courses of action cannot be measured as effectively. Even if alternatives are quantifiable, of course, each one has a different degree of utility or desirability associated with it. This explains why there managers may arrive at different conclusions to the same problem. The perceived utility of each alternative differs among them.

Since subjective utility values cannot be compared, some type of natural measure is needed for evaluating various outcomes. For cash transactions, one such measure utilizes monetary values. For example, in deciding how you will return from work in the evening, the cost of each method of transportation can be considered. Money, however, cannot provide an exact measurement for comparing alternatives since more dollars do not always imply greater utility. Time, convenience, peace of mind, and other considerations may be involved and cannot always be converted to a monetary scale. Consequently, it is best to treat the amount of money as a substitute for utility in a particular decision only when the amount of funds is relatively small compared to the total assets of an organization or individual.

In the general, overcoming difficulties in measurement requires the manager to state problems so that progress toward their solution can be observed, measured, and evaluated. Here, again, the importance of quantification cannot be overemphasized. This is not to imply that all decisional problems can be quantified, but managers often make better decisions when quantitative measures can be applied in the evaluation of alternatives.

The Decision Making Process - Environmental Constraints

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 4 Feb 2013 13:49:00 -0800

Environmental Constraints

Significant contributions to decision theory were made by Chester I Barnard, a successful business executive in the telephone industry. Barnard introduced the concept of the concept of the social environment as a constraint influencing the final outcome of a decision. He stated that nature, legal regulations, social responsiveness, competitors, and customer needs are all environmental constraints that affect the final outcome of a decision. To Barnard, the decision maker must have an understanding of the environment so that the effects of alternative solutions can be predicted. Environmental factors, he felt, become more distinct and exacting as objectives are redefined and made more explicit. He noted, as well, that objectives have no meaning except in an environment with a set of restrictions or limitations.

Behavioral Considerations

The previous two sections of this chapter should dispel the belief that managers rationally proceed step by step to define a problem, identify a wide range of alternatives with their consequences and risk, collect and analyze all data thoroughly, and select a specific alternative that is totally acceptable to all persons involved. With the problems of rationality and environmental constraints, the role of human behavior also restricts the decision - making process. This is particularly significant when we recognize that actions by dominant individuals or coalitions influence organizational decisions through negotiation and compromise.

Seldom does a manager make a decision that is supported by all organizational units. Some decisions will be bitterly opposed, some well supported, while others will fall within a zone of comparative indifference. Thus, form a behavioral viewpoint, managers must be sensitive to the power structures within an organization in order to predict which decision will gain the greatest support in the pursuit of goals. Moreover, goal achievement depends upon how well managers influence the decisions of those personnel who are involved in performing task and implementing programs at lower levels of authority.

Some of the behavioral elements that influence the decision process are given below:

Group (peer) pressures, both supportive and non supportive, that are exerted on the decision maker.

The decision maker's stated position within various groups (managerial and non managerial)

Personal attitudes about what and how others will think if a particular decision is made.

Feelings about the expectations of others and the weight of public opinion.

Ability to use the reactions of key individuals and groups to access the impact of a decision on the organization.

The stress to which the decision maker is exposed.

Personal knowledge and skill can also affect a decision, especially the amount of knowledge one has about a problem and its alternatives. Clearly, the manager must have the ability and resources if a decisional problem is to meaningful. For instance, if a manager knows very little about production but is very knowledge about computers, a decision concerning capital expenditures might be to purchase a new computer. A decision is also influenced by the personal values of the decision maker at the time each alternative action is being considered. Thus, the motivation to develop a strong work force may be sufficience the manager to see the importance of creating a personnel department. However, this would not be likely unless it was felt that the department would better fulfill the company's overall objectives than some other available alternative. Unfortunately, in many organizations, managers perceive that problems of this type exist but are not sufficiently motivated to try to solve them.

Minimizing The Complexity of the Decision Process

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:11:00 -0800

One way of simplifying the decision process is to establish objectives, policies, and procedures that will provide guidelines for managers to follow when making routine and repetitive decisions. Professional codes, rules, and policy manuals are steps in this direction, since they guide decision making by outlining acceptable behavior. Thus, problems that are well structured and not complex can be solved with programmed decisions. For example, consider the supervisor who needs to specify the wage rate for a new employee. Basically, this is a routine and repetitive decision that allows the supervisor to use the company's job specification to classify and determine the wage rate for the employee. If the job was new and ill-defined, then the decisional problem would be unprogrammed, requiring greater innovative responses. As will be noted later in this chapter, mathematical models along with the use of computers have made programmed decisions more available for routine problem-solving situations. Also, it is fortunate that the capacity to make better decisions can be developed through training, experience, and an expanded knowledge of the total decision-making process.

Although the decisional process implies a rational way of thinking about making a choice. Herbert A. Simon states that human beings are not always rational in making decisions. He suggests that it is impossible for the behavior of an individual, regarding personal or organizational decisions, to reach a high degree of rationality. Four basic reasons for such a lack of rationality are listed below:

Individuals have incomplete knowledge of the facts surrounding a problem and are limited in their ability to foresee future events. At any given time, limited human and material resources restrict the amount of information that can be obtained about a given situation. Thus, for any situation, knowledge is fragmented, particularly that related to the possible consequences of various course of action. As a result, it may be useless to search for the optimum (best possible) decision.
Identifying all alternative solutions for a problem is normally impossible. As noted earlier, time and cost constraints require that only the most viable alternatives be considered. By eliminating alternatives that are not feasible, the list of possible course of action can be narrowed. Since the number of alternatives must be limited, it is extremely important that the true problem be identified. The more accurate the statement of the problem, the more likely the selected alternative will produce a satisfactory solution.
The anticipated consequences of various alternatives often differ from those that are actually realized. Such differences result from changes in factors beyond a manager's sphere of influence. Assume that the loan officer of a bank is considering a $7,500 loan to a costumer who wants to purchase a new sailboat with complete rigging. Since the banker is not certain about changing conditions, it is impossible to determine the actual consequences that may occur if the loan is made. Some perceived consequences might include (a) the loan could overextended the costumer's financial status and possibly result in a repossession of the boat; (b) a repossession could be viewed by top management as an exercise of poor judgment by the officer who granted the loan; or (c) loan payments might be late and, therefore, require additional time and money to collect them. In any event, the banker is not certain that the loan will be repaid. Yet, regardless of the difficulty associated with determining possible outcomes, predictions must be made and evaluated according to some scale of desirability. In terms of evaluating the effects of each alternative, there is no simple approach that is acceptable in all situations. In some cases, the alternatives could be evaluated in terms of profit. In others where there are multiple evaluation criteria, the process is much more complicated. This is particularly true when the problem involves uncertain or risky elements.
A decision by one manager may have an adverse effect on objectives in another area of the organization. Specifically, organizations have multiple goals, and decisions that optimize results in one department can cause lower levels of achievement (sub optimization) in other departments. For example, a production efficiency objective to mass produce high-volume goods would conflict with a marketing goal to sell distinctive quality products with high profit margins. As a result, an optimization of both goals may not be realistically possible. Also, since knowledge of the future is limited, a decision that produces optimal results in the short run may be sub optimal at a later date. Remember that the automobile was first viewed as preserving the environment since horses would not have to be on city streets. Air pollution today, however, is a major concern surrounding automobile emissions.

The effects of sub optimization can be lessened by following a systems approach for every decision. This allows each alternative to be evaluated in conjunction with decision on every phase of the organization, however, is complicated and time consuming. Regardless of this difficulty, the decision maker must make an attempt to specify how various alternatives will actually affect the system. Possibly, future advancements in computerized decision making will allow managers to evaluate systematically the impact of each alternative on the entire organization. Even then, the degree of rationality found in the decision making process will still be influenced by the quantity of information available, the number of alternatives that can be examined, and the pressures exerted by internal and external environments. An organization must, therefore, be concerned with the limits of rationality, how the limits can be overcome, and the impact of organizational structure on the decision maker.

Analyzing Alternatives

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 02:56:00 -0800

The third step in decision making is that of analyzing and evaluating each alternative in terms of its possible consequences and impact on goal attainment. Generally, managers can never be sure of the actual outcome of each alternative. Consequently, evaluating alternatives requires managers to call on present knowledge, past experience, foresight, and scientific acumen. A discussion of the probability decision model that considers the three relationships of certainty, risk, and uncertainty between alternatives and outcomes is presented in Appendix.

Seeking strategic factors

The astute decision maker must recognize the strategic or limiting factors creating a problem. Strategic factors refer to those that are most important in determining the action to be taken in solving a given problem. Identifying such factors in the right form, place, and time is, therefore, crucial in decision making.

In situations where a sequence of sub decisions is required to reach an overall goal, a determination of new strategic factors is necessary for each decision. Thus, several strategic factors may be present present in making complex decisions, and the role of the manager is to recognize such limiting factors. When they are not considered, the chances of selecting an optimum course of action diminish rapidly.

To illustrate the role of strategic factors, we can consider the case of a computer that suddenly fails to operate. Several alternative courses of action could be followed to get the equipment working. These might include checking various electronic systems, reevaluating the program, or checking the sequence of inputs. Only when the decision makers discover that a circuit breaker is open (the strategic factor) will they be able to determine the course of action to be taken-reactivating the breaker to restore power. Thus, if strategic factors cannot be properly isolated, an analysis of alternatives will be faulty and may result in the delection of an inappropriate course of action.

Organizing strategic factors is also important in analyzing alternative course of action. For example, a problem may lend itself to an organization of strategic factors under the classification of quality, quantity, time, and cost. Or, the who, what , why, where, when, and how approach might be appropriate. Regardless of how the factors are organized, a systematic approach must be followed in the analysis of alternatives. In this way, the probability of making a more rational selection from among alternative courses of action increased.

Irrelevance of past decisions

Without a consideration of present and future conditions, past decisions are quite irrelevant in the decision-making process. For example, the original cost an asset may have little significance on present or future decisions. Consider the manager who plans to sell an old truck for its current market value of $5.000. Since the truck is no longer needed, the fact that it originally cost $25,000 may be interesting but not relevant to the present decision. Picture an investor who purchased XYZ Corporation stock for $100 a share and now holds it at $25 a share due to a general decline in the stock market, it may be logical to sell and invest the funds in a more active issue. Under these conditions, the fact that XYZ stock cost $100 is only one of several factors to consider in deciding to sell the stock.

The concept of utilizing past decisions appropriately is referred to as the principle of sunk cost which emphasizes that the past is only an uncertain approximation of the present. Therefore, managers should not rely on past decisions except as they can be of value in estimating the future. For any organization, the important costs are those that have not been incurred since decision making is concerned with the future, rather than with the past.

Identifying Alternative Solution

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:11:00 -0800

The second step of the decision making process involves the preparation of a detailed listing of alternative courses of action that could be used to solve the problem at hand. To be most meaningful, only viable and realistic alternatives should be included in the listing. For example, consider the manager who has the problem of determining how additional deliveries are to be met due to a large, temporary increase in sales. It would be meaningless to consider the alternative of purchasing a new truck if it would not be utilized after sales returned to normal. Obviously, the potential benefits and consequences of each alternative must be considered.

There are also time and cost constraints that will restrict the number of reasonable alternatives to be selected. Since these constrains are finite, the search for alternatives must eventually terminate. Time constraints can be exemplified by the student who did not include all available persons in a list of possible partners for a school dance. By the time such a list could have been completed, the date of the dance would surely have passed.

Psychological barriers may also restrict the number of alternatives that will be developed by a given manager. This is illustrated by the store manager who felt that a particular brand of cosmetics could not be handled because of certain unethical practices of the manufacturer.

Finally, various laws and regulations, as well as corporate objectives and policies, act as additional constraints on the number of alternatives applicable to any given problem. If, for example, the manufacturer of welding equipment holds down cost increases by introducing new technology, then in increase in prices would not be a viable alternative under present policy guidelines.

Creativity and the search for alternatives Good managers are innovators who depend heavily on ingenuity and on the ability to think creatively. Innovation is referred to here as an idea, practice, or object perceived as new by the decision maker. New ideas and ways of doing things often have to take precedence over more traditional alternatives that have proven successful in the past, and solutions to some problems may have to go beyond alternatives that are readily identifiable. A situation that illustrates this point is that a relatively young man who went into the apple-growing and packing business. The man knew almost nothing about growing apples, but he was willing to learn. Solution to some of the problems he encountered were considered radical. In fact, many apple growers in the area felt that it would be just a matter of time before this "youngster" with his new ideas would learn a lesson and be out of business. Yet, due to a creative and innovative spirit, the operation prospered and grew to one of the largest in the state.

One point cited by many writers on creativity and innovation is that these skills can be developed. Individual company programs, such as those at General Electric and Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, operate on this premise. Thus, all present and potential managers should delve into the mental and procedural aspects of creativity. This is especially true for supervisors and middle-management personnel since creativity is often one of the most important elements in promotion and advancement at these levels within an organization.

Without question, the application of creative ideas to managerial operations is often difficult. There seem to be three reasons for this difficulty:

The formal organization with its multiple levels of administrative authority may act as a barrier.
The desire for security on the part of some managers may hinder the approval and implementation of new ideas.
When it appears that an organization is operating successfully, managers may not be willing to rock the boat.

While the first of these reasons refers to structural barriers, the other two roadblocks are caused by resistance to change. As might be expected, this resistance is greatest when new ideas are not understood by those managers who will be affected by a change in operations.

Brainstorming alternatives One creative technique used in identifying alternative courses of action is referred to as brainstorming. There are many examples depicting successful applications of brainstorming, such as the development of the GL-70 slogan for Gleem toothpaste. Basically, the approach seeks to elicit ideas by pooling the efforts of several people who either meet as a cohesive group or work on a problem by themselves.

In group participation, criticisms and an analysis of suggestions are postponed so as neither to stifle nor to restrict creative thinking. Without such interruptions, participants are encouraged to come up with new ideas by building on previous comments or suggestions. Possibly the key to the success of group brainstorming may be the length of the work period. With an extended period, a greater number of ideas tend to be produced. Finally, before utilizing brainstorming, the technique should be researched thoroughly. Potential problems exist and should be understood by those who may wish to apply the technique.

Determining the Problem

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 8 Jan 2013 21:29:00 -0800

Determining the precise problem to be solved is the first and possibly most important step can be seen in the fact that problems are subjective and relative to the decision maker. For example, managers may view differently the problem (gap) between the goal to be attained (terminal state) and the current situation (existing state). One manager may be aware that a gap or problem exists, while another manager may feel that current activities are right on target.

* Different alternatives will lead to different possible outcomes or consequences. This can be expressed symbolically as Y₁A₁

: thus, the outcome, Y₁ if alternative A₁ is followed

At this stage, time and effort should be expended only in gathering data and information that are relevant to identification of the real problem. The problem should be defined precisely and its magnitude understood. Otherwise, managers may concentrate on symptoms related to the problem rather than on the actual problem itself.

Of course, if only symptoms are considered, the basic problem will continue to come up over and over again. One way of zeroing in on the correct problem is to ask, "What is to be achieved?" For example, analyzing the gap between the objective of achieving $5 million sales this year while current sales are only $1 million is a good way of determining the true problem to be solved.

Meaning of Decisiion Making

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 7 Jan 2013 20:47:00 -0800

Decision making implies a choice from among two or more alternative course of action. If a choice does not have to be made to solve a problem, an individual is not actually involved in a decision-making situation. For example, consider the manager who wants to determine when the office secretary left for lunch. This would not necessarily be a decision making situation since a choice may not be involved. Instead, the problem might be only a matter of obtaining the correct information. Decision making, however, could appear if the manager had to decide how to obtain the desired information. Basically, then, decision making and problem solving are not necessarily identical. As difined here, decision making is the process of choosing a course of action from among two or more possible alternatives in order to arrive at a solution for a given problem. As implied, decision making involves an evaluation of alternatives prior to the act of choosing the one to be implemented in response to a certain problem situation.

Decision making is so basic that no management function can be performed without it. For management purpose, decisions are obviously required in planning, organizing, actuating, and controlling. As shown in diagram, the decision making process is considered to be an activity inherent in all management functions.

For this reason, the process is not regarded as a function by itself nor is it synonymous with the process of managing.

As already noted, managers at all organizational levels make decisions, although they differ in type and scope. At the top levels of an organization, decisions establishing overall objectives and strategies are included among the most important to be made. Decisions of this type are not choices do not exist within a programmed format. Middle managers are generally more involved with decision making constrained by overall operating policies and plans. First-line supervisors, in turn, are concerned with short-range decisions that relate to specific activities to be carried out within the framework of policies and procedures established at middle management levels. Due to this integration of authority levels, the decision making process involves all managers in an organization and must be viewed as a total system of utmost importance to organization success.

Objectives and Decision Making

Objectives are the targets managers seek to achieve over various time periods. Generally, they are broad statements that serve as guides for action in determining the direction organizations will go and the activities they will follow. For example, the primary objective of Ralston Purina Company is to optimize the use of its resources and to produce short- and long-term profit growth consistent with balanced interest of customers, shareholders, employees, suppliers, and society at large.

To this extent, objectives themselves imply that a choice ha been made and future decisions will be required that contribute to the achievement of those objectives. Obviously, decisions cannot be made until it is determined where the organization is going and what is to be accomplished. To reiterate, objectives provide the focal point on which all decisions are based. They are the guides to the selection of alternatives that help assure their fulfillment. Thus, decision making is not an end in itself nor an isolated event but the means to the achievement of established goals.

Arriving at a decision implies that a manager has gone through a series of systematically related steps. basically, the steps. Basically, the steps of the decision-making process include (1) determining the problem as related to objectives being sought, (2) identifying alternative solutions, (3) analyzing the possible outcomes of each alternative, and (4) selecting an alternative for subsequent implementation. Pictorially, this process is shown in the next diagram. The Process is, however, more complex than the steps suggest since each step itself involves the decision making process. In essence, then, the decision maker does not go through the steps so systematically that decision making becomes a clearly defined, logical procedure. Managers are involved in a continuous flow of problems, many of which cannot be classified. At the same time, their attitudes toward risk may lead to choices that will be safe but not accomplish objectives as effectively as others. Thus, the importance of understanding, the decision process is not to justify result, but to be aware of the steps involved while recognizing the need to develop a healthy way of thinking about the numerous decisions that must be made in the day-to-day life of an organization.

Planning For Performance and Results

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 6 Jan 2013 09:28:00 -0800

All Individuals are forced to make choices, such as selecting a collage to attend, choosing an occupation, or deciding upon a specific employer. Unfortunately, it is not obvious which decision in each situation will provide the greatest pleasure, avoid the most pain, or lead to a better world in the future. Goals to be achieved, environmental factors, and personal values must all be considered before a final choice can be made. For many decisions facing managers, therefore, specific solutions are not well defined.

Decision making is also a continuous process that pervades all organizational activity. To this extent, understanding what makes an organization successful defends upon our knowledge of how people make effective decisions. Within any organization, virtually every person is a decision maker. The worker who shuts down the lathe to smoke a cigarette is as much a part of an organization's decision making system as the CEO who decides to build a new plant costing millions of dollars. The consequences of these decisions vary in their influence on the achievement of objectives, and the perceived risks of decision making cause many people to view it as a difficult and unrewarding task.

Some of the difficulties associated with decision making stem from the biological makeup of decision makers. People are usually dependent on others for the education and experience required in making meaningful choices. For example, members of primitive social groups (cultures) received advice on possible actions to take in a variety of situations from their leaders. To some degree this led to programmed decisions since the same choice could be used in basically similar situations. In our complex society, however, it is impossible to specify the most appropriate course of action for every problem. In fact, the critical issue may not be the particular choice selected, but how the manager goes about identifying the true problem requiring decision.

Government Regulation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 4 Jan 2013 22:33:00 -0800

Like it or not, we live in a regulated society. Our homes, apartments, and condominiums are built according to code. Automobiles, airplanes, and boats must conform to a variety of governmental standards. The production and sale of food, cosmetics, likewise, subjected to numerous regulations.

At first glance, one might argue that regulations established by local, state, or national governments exist to provide an orderly society that protects the rights and well-being of all citizens. Regulations, however, are not self-enforcing but defend on regulatory agencies created for this purpose. Unfortunately, these agencies tend to increase in number and scope while perpetuating themselves through time. The result is a bureaucratic maze whose disadvantages now seem to outweigh its benefits.

During 1978, the accounting firm of Arthur Andersen & Company was hired to study the incremental costs incurred by 48 Business Round table member member companies to comply with the regulations of just six federal government agencies and programs. This study found that the 48 participating companies experiences incremental costs of $2.6 billion in 1977 to comply with regulations of just the six agencies involved. Beyond the costs of compliance with government regulations, other impacts must also be noted. For example, innovation and technology can be slowed down by too much regulation. Productivity declines are partially the result of numerous and often conflicting regulations. With productivity declines and increased cost, prices increase and the inflation spiral continues.

This discussion serves to point out some results of the continuing trend of more involvement of government in practically all organizations. Although the objectives of many regulations may be worthy, we seem to be approaching a situation of regulatory overkill. To reverse this trend, attitudes toward regulation will have to change significantly, both in the private and public sectors. This will require much time and effort, and managers of the future must provide the leadership to accomplish the task.

T5B688VPNYU6

Multinational Corporations

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 3 Jan 2013 05:12:00 -0800

The future of management will be influenced greatly by the continued growth of transnational, transideological, or multinational corporations. For some time, managers in international organizations have been faced with the problems of learning to work with people in foreign countries. These problems include training, motivation, communication, and leadership as they relate to workers and managers from different cultures. Studies of management in various countries also show that changes in an organization's external environment have a direct influence on the way managers carry out the functions of management. It is obvious, therefore, that managers in one country will always have to manage somewhat differently from those in another.

Regardless of the countries where multinational corporations will be operating in the future, two factors will continue to affect the success of their managers. One will be the ability to adjust rapidly to the new problems and challenges produced by different cultures. An important requirement here will be that of developing the human resources of host countries, especially the development of qualified managers at the local level.

A second factor concerns the ability of managers to recognize the most important environmental constraints existing in different cultures. By knowing these constraints, managers will be better prepared to identify those practices which seem to have the greatest chance of success. An understanding of a given culture, for example, can assist managers in recognizing leadership styles that best fit the needs of employees within that culture. As a result, these managers are less likely to be resented as "outsiders" who are trying to force their own cultural values on others.

Management Science

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 3 Jan 2013 02:02:00 -0800

The field of management science use various quantitative techniques and mathematical models to provide a more scientific approach to decision making. In many respects, however, the application of such techniques is not new. During World War II, mathematical models were used by decision makers in business, government, and the military. Other uses of such models date back as far as the 18th century.

Today, changes throughout our society and the world have made decision making a much more complex task in even the smallest of organizations. As a result, many problems facing managers are too vast to be solved through mental models alone. The human mind is remarkable but can keep track of only a limited number of relationships among the numerous variables involved in many decisions. Consequently, managers must often rely on mathematical models when analyzing the tremendous amount of information required in identifying and evaluating alternative solutions to complex problems.

Managers who fail to acquire an understanding of management science techniques will probably hurt their organizations as well as themselves. Competitors, for example, can often move into new market position before managers who rely on non quantitative techniques are fully aware of the opportunities they are missing. An alternative is to know the value of management science techniques, how they can be used, and how to interpret their results. Such knowledge is increasingly important not only in business but also among managers is government, education, the military, and health care delivery systems.

Computers

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 2 Jan 2013 02:07:00 -0800

Looking into the future of management certainly requires an examination of the role of computers. Their usefulness in classifying, storing and speeding up the flow of information in an organization has been apparent for many years. For example, a daily classification and summary of sales, information is helpful in maintaining desired inventory levels and in assigning sales personnel. Other common computer applications are found in the implementation of automatic control system; the manipulation of mathematical models; and the processing of accounts receivables, payroll data, and other accounting information.

A accounting question facing managers is how the computer will affect the number of people required to staff management positions in the years to come. One view holds that some middle and lower level managers may be replaced by new computers that can "think" on their own. We normally consider computers as doing only what they are programmed to do, such as calculate salaries and payroll deductions. However, new hardware being developed may soon enable computers to solve problems far more complex than those for which they are now used. If these possibilities become realities, computer programs may include such a high degree of artificial intelligence that there will be less need for some middle managers, particularly in larger organizations.

While one can forecast that computers will replace some managers in the future, an increase in the number of managers can also be projected. For example, an early study of a large utility company showed an overall growth of management employees, although fewer managers were found in clerical departments after computerization. Thus, the future impact of computers on the number of managers or their jobs is not certain. It is very likely, however, that computers will continue to influence authority relationships within the organizations that house them will certainly differ according to whether computer personnel are seen as expensive "number crunchers," or important members of the management team.

Technology and Productivity

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:57:00 -0800

The state of technology is an important factor in the environment of management. Overall, the United States has been very successful in pushing back limits to economic growth through continued technological advancements. We can observe the results in new attitudes toward leisure and recreation, improved communications, the development of a broad-based educational system, improved health care, and many other areas. At the same time, technological advancements have caused various problems; for example, technology has contributed to the development of more complex, technology has contributed to the development of more rapid managerial obsolescence, uncertainty in decision making, overcrowding of highways and cities, and less clean air and water. Thus, technology has both positive and negative results.

Technological advancements come from many sources, and it is impossible to group them into one single category. The Wankel engine, birth control pills, computers, high-yield grains, television, and off-shore oil drilling rigs are all technological developments; but each plays a distinct role and has its own impact on the environment of management. In a broader sense, the question facing management of the future is whether modern technology can continue to provide economic growth for all nations. The answer depends clearly upon management's ability to advance technology in the areas of (1) additional food production, (2) new energy sources, (3) recyclable resources, (4) reduced pollution, (5) population control, and (6) medical advancements.

Casual observation should make it clear that technological advancement requires good management. Above all, this means that future managers must be flexible and adaptive to change. With each new technological development, managers must determine the physical and social effects of the development as well as the managerial changes that will be necessary before it can be implemented properly. More research will have to be conducted to find out what turns employees on to their jobs and how to get the most out of their efforts. A greater investment in equipment will also be required, and thus, a closer coordination between human and material resources. In general, then, challenges of the future will require that managers improve their skills in perceiving, analyzing, and adapting to the barriers and opportunities produced by technological changes.

Productivity has various meanings. It can be used as a measure of a system's total output of goods and services. More often, however, it refers to the relationship between the output of a system and its inputs. Here, productivity is the ratio of wanted output to scarce input. In this ratio, output represents the products and services of a system, while inputs are measured in terms of labor-hours worked and materials used.

As a ratio of output to input, productivity provides an indication of a system's efficiency. Productivity gains reflect increased output per unit of input. In technologically advanced nations, productivity is usually high, while the reverse is true in less-developed countries.

The United States has always been known for its high levels of productivity, but smaller increases and declines have been of concern for the last several years. As recently as 1980, for example, productivity growth in the United States was the lowest among all major industrial nations of the world. If this trend is not reversed, we can expect continued periods of stagflation where conditions of inflation and recession exist simultaneously in the economy.

When declines in productivity are discussed, it should also be noted that fingers of blame are pointed in several directions. The government is blamed for failing to provide a tax structure that stimulates capital formation and investment. Various laws and regulation are attacked as being only costly masses of red tape. Unions are seen as culprits tat push labor costs too high while providing workers with so much security that they are no longer motivated to increase their productivity. Employees are blamed for poor attitudes toward the quantity and quality of their work. Finally, management groups are blamed for a number of things ranging from failure to replace obsolete industrial equipment soon enough to that of passing on too many costs to customers.

The task for future managers is that of moving beyond discussions of who is to blame for declines in productivity to viable programs of advancing productivity. Action, not blame, will be required to meet this challenge. While such action will require the cooperation of various groups, managers must provide the leadership that will pull these groups together.

Underutilization of Human Resources

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 31 Dec 2012 17:00:00 -0800

Although the United States is faced with a rapid depletion of some resources, others are not being used to their full potential. Of these, an under utilization of certain human resources is most apparent. Statistics show that the unemployment rates for women, blacks, and youths are above the national average. While some of these persons may be jobless due to employment discrimination, other reasons can be found in the changing composition of the work force.

Current data indicate that there will continue to be a youth boom in the labor. While the 15-29 age group will decline during the next 20 years, it is still expected to include 20 percent of the U.S. population in the year 2000. At the same time, this statistic show dramatic increases in the 30-39 age group until 1985.

1976 Age Group	1976 population (in millions)	Percent Increase or decrease
1976 Age Group	1976 population (in millions)	To 1980	To 1985
30-34	13.8	+26	+42
35-39	11.6	+20	+49
40-44	11.1	+4	+23
45-49	11.8	-8	-3
50-54	11.8	-3	-10
55-59	10.6	+6	+3

The challenge to provide jobs in this age group will be great. Never before has the U.S. economy been asked to provide new jobs for 42 percent more people in the 30-34 age group in a 10-year period, or for job opportunities existed after World War II. However, there was also a growing economy with organizations seeking employees to assist them in meeting the demand for goods and services that existed at the time. Quite the opposite economic conditions exist today, thus presenting an even greater challenge to provide jobs for these persons.

Although unemployment among all blacks is high, the rate for black teenagers is even greater, with a range between 24 and 34 percent during the past few years. Of course, the unemployment rate among all young people is high. In fact, being young increases the chances of remaining jobless for more than being black or female. Thus, teenagers seeking a steady job find many difficulties, especially if they are high school dropouts.

Women now make up over 40 percent of the U.S. labor force. However, males in all management positions outnumber females by more than 5 to 1. In addition, most women are still found at, or below, the lower levels of middle management. Among presidents, executive vice presidents, and corporate chairpersons, males exceed females by a ratio of some 50 to 1. As might be expected, salary data also show wide differences between men and women were in jobs paying over $30.000, while more than 190.000 males received such salaries.

Beyond a changing composition of the labor force, management groups of the future will also ave to deal with employees who are more highly educated. Consequently, new approaches to leadership, communication, and motivation will be required. Only when such approaches are combined with an elimination of employment practices that have discriminated on the basis of race, sex, and age, will we move closer to a maximum utilization of our nation's human resources.

Social Responsibility and Ethics

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 31 Dec 2012 00:05:00 -0800

If organizations are to survive, they must make meaningful contributions to the societies in which they operate. In the United States, organizations are generally free to satisfy the needs of society by producing goods and services of their own choosing. Yet, social values and norms still serve to limit the alternatives available to all organizations.

Accepting changes in social and ethical values is a slow process Managers are now, however, recognizing the importance of adapting to dynamic, changing social requirements. They are beginning to develop a more complete understanding to their role in society and what society expects from its organizational partners. To a considerable degree, this expectation is becoming more clearly defined as that of over coming values and attitudes that disregard human rights. As such, the expectation is also close to Dr. Albert Schweitzer's definition that states, "Ethics is the name we give to our concern for good behavior. We feel an obligation to consider not only our own personal well-being, but also that of others and of human society as a whole."

To understand the present level of socially and ethically responsible actions of managers, it is necessary to examine two major points.First, many organizations see their role as that of being an efficient supplier of goods and services demanded by the public. In the sense, they feel that the best way to solve social problems is to continue their contributions to economic growth.

A second point is that some organizations feel they lack both the wealth and skill to accept a heavy social responsibility. This belief implies that a major social burden might result in lower profits. Deciding where profits end and social responsibility begins, however, maybe impossible. In fact, it can be argued that profit, ethical behavior, and social responsibility must go together. By providing a proper balance among goals in each area, one is reached through an achievement of the others.

Just a managers consider themselves to be ethical, they also view their organizations as socially responsible entities. Consequently, it is not unusual to find them actively supporting educational programs or working to expand employment opportunities for minority groups. In so doing, these managers have found that people who are given a chance to succeed often make better neighbors, employees, and customers than these who are poor, ignorant, and neglected. Thus, their actions can have a favorable long-run impact on both the organizations and communities involved.

As concerns ecological problems, the future demands of stockholders are more likely to be met by organizations that work to eliminate pollution. Where ways to control air, water, and noise pollution are not at hand, new technology must be developed. Companies that are able to meet such challenges may find that future profits will increase as long-run social needs are balanced with short-run economic considerations. Perhaps the social audit that attempts to measure the impact of an organization's actions on society will be of value in seeking to maintain this difficult balance.

CHALLENGES OF THE FUTURE

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 1 Oct 2012 19:30:00 -0700

Prior to the growth of industrialization, environmental forces were less numerous and complex than they are today. Changes in wealth, power, and prestige were basically determined by those who had the best-trained and the-equipped armies to wage war and plunder the countryside. Other leadership positions were filled by priests who often used various religious myths to gain power. With the introduction of mechanization, however, leadership positions were to be filled by the risk takers, engineers, and professional managers who created and directed a growing industrial complex.
Current interest in the challenging future of management is based on many of the same problems and issues that concern the average citizen. The energy crisis has touched all of our lives and will continue to do so for years to come. Technology, productivity, and the economy present new challenges almost daily. At the same time, government bureaucracy continues to control many of the actions of organizations and individuals throughout society. For managers to meet these and other challenges, they must realize that the future has already arrived. Time, as stated by Saint Augustine, is a threefold present: the present as we experience it, the past as a present memory, and the future begins with the present and is influenced by decisions that managers make today.
Gazing into the future is important because it provides managers with some information about the possible results of their present actions. By anticipating the future, problems are not as likely to appear as surprises. With some advance notice, managers can begin looking for contingent solutions to future problems, thus providing their organizations with more options to consider in adapting to changing environmental conditions.
The following sections will not attempt to make precise predictions concerning management's future since there is no forecasting method that can be so exact. Therefore, the "world tomorrow" will be left to the philosophers, theologians, and futurologists. Our discussion will be limited to a brief review of current trends that appear likely to influence the future.

MANAGEMENT'S CHANGING ROLE AND SCOPE

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 22:17:00 -0700

Due to various environmental changes, management theory and practice have also changed during the past 100 years. The first part of this period saw mechanization and automation advance with industrial growth. Growth in industry, however, created problem between management and labor. As noted on Chapter 1, management practice was little more than a day to day, fire fighting operation at the beginning of this century. Managers saw their duties as those of getting the most output from workers with as little labor cost as possible. Only passing attention was given to any systematic planning, organizing, or controlling of operations. Manufacturing activities, for example, were usually not based on standards were often established subjectively with little or no though given to matching the demands of a job with employee skills. Guesses, hunches, and past experiences provided the bases for most management decisions and employee alienation was quite common.

The practice of management changed dramatically when scientific management emerged during the first quarter of the 20th century. Initially, the term referred to the systematic study and measurement of work in order to achieve maximum efficiency in production. Although these early efforts to improve productivity were carried out in factory settings, the results contributed to an overall expansion of management knowledge. New insights were provided into the analysis of work methods, authority relationships, production planning, and the elimination of wasteful efforts. Unfortunately, scientific management often gave major attention to the creation of the ideal organization, and if performance failed to meet standards, it was assumed to be the fault of either unqualified workers or improper engineering methods. In either case, employee social needs were considered to be far less important than organizational goals.

By the early 1930s, more attention was given to the role of both individuals and groups within organizations. This changed the focus of management thought from an impersonal view of employees to one that considered their feelings, attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and ideas. The latter view was based on a belief that employees could be motivated to work more productively when provided with opportunities to satisfy certain social and psychological needs. Consequently, the human element was given major consideration while other environmental factors were pushed out of the mainstream of management theorists have been concerned with both external and internal environments as they influence, and are influenced by, the human element.

The need to view management in a broader context will be increasingly important in years to come. Managers will soon be affected by even more pressures from different groups within our society. Decision making techniques will need to be improved, and current research must be used to provide a better understanding of the total management process. In this respects, a knowledge of how environmental changes affect managers as they seek to balance employee needs and organizational goals will be especially critical.

Managers of the future will also find that they cannot respond to a changing world by merely following procedures or techniques that have worked in the past. Responding to a greater number of pressures and needs will require an understanding of relationships within and among organizations, the complex nature of organizational life, and the critical factors in an organization's external environment. Thus, the demands on all managers will continue to increase as more individuals and groups turn to organization

THE CHANGING U.S ENVIRONMENT

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 29 May 2011 09:45:00 -0700

The United States has changed significantly during this century. In 1990, about 60 percent of the nation's population lived in rural areas, with some 38 percent of the labor force employed in agriculture. By 1970, just over 26 percent of the population lived in rural areas, with less than 4 percent of the work force employed in agriculture; and even today, the rapid decline in farm population continues.

Service industries and government now make up our largest employment categories with one out of every five employed persons receiving a paycheck from some government body. It is also interesting to note that increased employee mobility contributes to frequent shifts among employment categories. Between 1965 and 1970, one employee in three moved from a job in one occupational category to a different job in the same category, or to a job in another occupational category. Such attitudes toward job mobility continue at the present time.

Other changes are also having a deep-felt impact on both management and its environments. Specifically, national interests have caused private institutions to work at meeting our needs to control pollution, develop new energy sources, improve health care, support disadvantaged groups, and protect consumers. Similarly, federal and local governments have played major roles in advancing these areas. Of course, government actions also affect management decisions in such areas as employment, working conditions, prices, wages, ecology, collective bargaining, product standards, and advertising.

Figure 2-1

Interrelationships between management and its external environments

What has been called the postindustrial society is producing other dramatic environmental changes. These changes can be seen in the mass production of standardized products as well as in the technological advancements being made in computerization, communication, and other areas. As this postindustrial era continues, society becomes more concered with services, research, science, and education than with manufacturing. Consequently, more managerial leadership in the sciences, mathematics, and computer technology. It is also important to note that today's students are the stock from which future managers will come. In this sense, the year 2000 is already here in terms of the managers and leaders who are now in offices and classrooms throughout the nation.

MANAGEMENT'S CHALLENGING FUTURE

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 28 May 2011 02:56:00 -0700

Management contributes greatly to any nation's standard of living. As an example, consider the role of management while comparing the wide differences in national income among nations. In the less economically developed countries, few managers have had opportunities to work in large-scale business organizations. Also, these countries have underdeveloped business services, financial institutions, and marketing channels. Due to a lack of skilled workers, engineers, and trained managers, production is often based on obsolete methods. The problem is compounded by a lack of universities, research institutions, and scientists who can adapt new methods to local conditions. In contrast, western Europe and Japan rebuilt rapidly after World War II because of their technical know-how, managerial abilities, and established social institutions.

Obviously, then, management is an important part of the total environment in which we live. It is not only influenced by environmental factors but is also a force in changing them. As shown in figure, social, political, scientific/technological, and economic systems make up these external environments. All of them have major impacts on the growth and development of management. By examining each, it is possible to gain a greater awareness of those variables that interact with management to influence organizational behavior.

THE ART AND SCIENCE OF MANAGEMENT

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 20 May 2011 12:08:00 -0700

To bring about desired result in organizations, R.L. Katz suggests that we give more consideration to those managerial skills and abilities that can be developed and improved in applying management knowledge. He classifies these skills as (1) technical - the vocational skills obtained through a specialization of labor, (2) human - the ability to work with people versus the technical skill of working with things and processes, and (3) conceptual - the ability to recognize the interrelationships between the parts of an organization and overall organizational goals. Basically, then, the successful practice of management goes beyond the scientific method of problem solving. How management knowledge is applied depends on the skills and abilities of individual managers and may be referred to as the art of management. As such, an artful practice of management depends upon the technical, human, and conceptual abilities of managers and is just as essential in the achievement of objectives as the science of management.

Upon reflection, there is no doubt that the science and art of management must go hand in hand. One without the other is certainly of little value to managers of today and tomorrow. Another way to look at this point is to think of the surgeon who performs delicate operations skillfully (the art). This person's skill, however, depends on a vast amount of knowledge provided by the study of chemistry, biology, anatomy, and physics ( the science).

SUMMARY
Management is a process that includes the functions of planning, organizing, actuating, and controlling. These functions must be performed in all organizations if goals are to be achieved satisfactorily through the use of human and material resources. In the performance of these functions, management is normally viewed as both an art and a science. To become more effective in blending the art and science of management, managers can draw upon the vast body of knowledge that has been produced through various approaches to the study od management. At the same time, successful managers must demonstrate technical, human relations, and conceptual skills in the performance of their duties.

APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF MANAGEMENT

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 17 May 2011 16:21:00 -0700

During the past 50 years, major social, political, economic, and technical changes have had a tremendous impact on the practice of management. Simultaneously, this time period produced a growing interest in the study of management. Of course, earlier steps in this direction had been taken by Frederick W. Taylor (1856-1917). Taylor and his associates searched for better ways to cut cost, improve productivity, measure performance, and select and train workers. Through his experimentation and writing, Taylor became known as the father of the movement called scientific management.

In the 1920s and 1930s, the focus of management, study shifted to a more detailed examination of the human element in organizations. The study of interrelationships between people and work environments resulted in a new field of management called human relations. Pioneers, such as Elthon Mayo and F.J Roethlisberger, were among the first to be involved in extensive research directed toward providing a better understanding of human behavior in work situations. Since the 1930s, contributions from the areas of psychology, sociology, and anthropology have added significantly to the behavioral knowledge available to modern managers.

During the 1950s, other approaches to the study of management started to develop. The proliferation of these approaches was quite rapid and continues even today. Writing in 1961, for example, Harold Koontz discussed six schools of management thought and referred to them as the " management theory jungle." Almost 20 years later, Koontz revisited the jungle, and identified 11 approaches to management theory and science, as outlined below:

Empirical or case--seeks to advance the understanding of management through a study of past experience, usually through cases, and a transfer of the lessons of such experience to practitioners and students.
Interpersonal behavior--studies management by concentrating on interpersonal relations in organizations, with a focus on individuals and their motivations.
Group behavior--concentrates on the study of group behavior patterns in organizations rather than on interpersonal relations.
Cooperative social system--modifies the interpersonal and group behavior approaches by studying human relations as cooperative social system that link two or more persons together in the pursuit of common purposes.
Sociotechnical system--emphasizes the need for considering social and technical systems simultaneously in the practice of management since technical system have a great influence on the social system(s) of organizations.
Decision theory--stresses decision making as a major responsibility of all managers and focuses on the development of management thought around the decision-making process.
Systems--studies the interdependent parts of organizations as they interact with, and are influenced by, their environments.
Mathematical or "management science"--considers management as a process that can be studied through mathematical models that express the basic elements of a problem, while providing a means for identifying and evaluating alternative solutions to the problem.
Contingency or situational--examines managerial behavior as a response to a given set of circumstances in order to suggest management practices that appear most suitable for dealing with a particular situation.
Managerial roles--observers what managers do in an attempt to identify ad classify those roles common to all managers.
Operational attempts to tie together the concepts, principles, theory, and techniques that underpin the practice of management by relating them to the functions of managers.

While each of these approaches presents a somewhat different avenue to the study of management, all have the potential to contribute something to the advancement of management knowledge. Similarly, they can contribute to improving the practice of management. Since managers must deal with a variety of environmental influences an organization inputs, they often find that a combination of approaches is useful in the practice of management. For example, the operational approach can be used as a framework for guiding some managerial actions, while an understanding of system and human behavior in the work environment can be benefit in other situations; or, quantitative methods and mathematical models might contribute to improving managerial decision making. In this sense, management theory does not include approaches that represent the "one best way" for dealing with all situations. Instead, it is a body of interrelated concepts, principles, and techniques that providers useful guides to managerial thought and action.

For detail and updates : Management

UNIVERSALITY OF MANAGEMENT

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 13 May 2011 10:29:00 -0700

The universality of management is an important concept to consider in modern management thought. When describing management as universal, we refer to the widespread practice of management in all types of organizations. As noted before, one cannot bring a group of people together, regardless of the nature of the endeavor, and expect them to accomplish objectives unless their efforts are coordinated. Among other things, plans must be outlined, task identified, authority relationship specified, lines of communication established, and leadership exercised. Management, therefore, is required before any organization can expect to be effective.
Although management is universal, we should not assume that all managers are the same; if, for no other reason, differences exist because no two individuals are alike. However, all managers perform broad groups of duties that are similar. These groups of duties are the functions of planning, organizing, actuating, and controlling. Although the responsibilities associated with performing the functions vary among levels of authority, managers at all material resources. Since the management functions must be performed to some degree in order to achieve desired goals, we can say that there is, indeed, a universality of management.

The universal nature of management also implies that managerial skills are transferable from one type of organization to another. If this is the case, a manager should expect to experience few problems in moving from one industry to another, from the military to business, from business to government, from education to business, or from one department to another within the same organization. There are certainly persons who have been successful in making such moves. Other, however, have failed. For example. Laurence J.Peter cites numerous cases that show promotions in an organization often accomplish little beyond pointing out the incompetencies of those persons who have been promoted.

Although proven performance in one management position is no guarantee of success in another, various issues should still be explored. First, managerial success depends on how well managers do their jobs - that is, how well they perform the management functions in meeting their responsibilities. Remember that manager is not a narrow technical specialist, but a person who must plan, organize, actuate, and control. Again, this does not overlook the need for technical information in the decision-making process. Technological, social, political, and economic factors must be considered in most decisions. At the same time, managers must recognize the importance of balancing the needs and goals various organizational members. This, in turn, requires an ability to understand the overall nature of an organization's operations.

A second factor to consider concerns to need for flexibility when adjusting to a new organizational environment. All organizations have unique differences. Thus, for managers to be successful in moving from one organization to another, they must be capable of adapting to change. In addition, initiative, motivation to achieve, and the courage to accept and overcome setbacks are important personal characteristics. When moving from large to smaller organizations, these latter characteristics appear to be especially critical. Perhaps this is due to the fact that smaller organizations do not have the technical specialists and staff support groups found in their large counterparts. In any event, career movements from small organizations to larger ones seem to present fewer problems.

For detail visit Management

SCIENTIFIC NATURE OF MANAGEMENT

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 5 May 2011 06:15:00 -0700

To advance the development of a general theory, fayol suggested that management should be studied from a scientific approach. In this sense, scientific inquiry would follow the guidelines identified by Rene Descartsesin his Discourse on Method (1637) and would be used to determine.
What exist in the real world, as shown by observation and experience.
Why a given phenomenon behaves as it does.
How to classify data related to a real world phenomenom.

Through scientific inquiry, a body of knowledge can be developed that helps explain relationship among various factors in given situations. Thus, the goal scientific inquiry is to provide an understanding of certain events in nature so as to better predict their possible impact on future courses of action.
With some changes, the steps of the scientific method have been employed in managerial problem solving and are generally expressed in the following manner:

Define, outline, and state the problem that is to be solved.
Review the literature on the problem area and discuss it with informed persons so as to investigate thoroughly all facts that have a bearing on the problem.
Develop a statement of hypothesis or a tentative solution to the problem.
Collect, organize, and classify all relevant data.
Analyze the data as related to the problem and hypothesis.
Set forth the findings, conslusions, and recommendations that flow from the analysis of data.
implement recommendations and evaluate results to determine the success of the solution.

Because of the human element in organizations, management practioners and scholars have found it difficult to apply the steps of the scientific method as precisely as researches in the physical and life sciences. It is hoped, however, that this difficulty will not retard the use of a scientific approach to the study and practice of management. As stated by Koontz, O'Donnell, and Weihrich, " A scientific approach to management cannot wait until as exact science of management is developed." These an other scholar note that a considerable body of management knowledge has been derived from experience and observation. It would be unfortunate, therefore, to curtail the advancement and refinement of management theory by waiting until the guidlines included in this body of knowledge could be validated scientific cally.

The evolving applications of science in management Sice history points out many important managerial contributions through the ages, it is strange that serious efforts to study management were so long in coming. For example, major scientific discoveries were made in the life and physical science 100 to 400 years before Fayol's writings. But, it was about the time of Fayol and F.W. Taylor (who was working on a scientific approach to management in the United States) before management was considered more than just good common sense combined witth some degree of technical competence. Apparently, it took a research-oriented manager like Fayol with a background in mining, engineering, and geology to recognice the importance of science in developing a better understanding of management.

Management principles One way to classify portions of current management knowledge is through the use of principles. Regarded as general statement of truth concerning management, principles identify cause and effect relationships that can assist in predicting the result(s) of particular actions. By suggesting possible results of alternative courses of action, principle also provide guides to thought and action. Consequently, through an application of principles, managers can avoid many of the costly mistake associated with management by trial and error.

Many of the principles of management included in Appendix A have been followed by practicing managers in all types of organizations. Yet, groups of both practitioners and scholars still disagree on the validity of principles. Others note that the diverse environments within which management is practiced have become too complex for principles to be used in the development of a general theory of management. As much as anything, these differing opinions may point out the benefits of a contingency approach to management where environmental conditions and managerial judgment are of utmost importance in determining the applicability of principles to given situations.

To summarize, rigorous investigations is required to develop valid principles. We know that a principle in the physical sciences is meaningful only when developed through the steps of conceptualizing, hypothesizing, and theorizing. For an inexact science such as management, however, the starting point may well be that of developing principles based on observation and experience. Through scientific investigation, one can then seek to prove or disprove them. Although such procedures lack the accurate predictability of those in the physical science, the lessons learned from experience, experimentation, and observation are still superior to using only trial-and-error approach to the practice of management.

MANAGEMENT ALMOST DAILY

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 4 May 2011 12:28:00 -0700

Writing to congratulate the Society for the Advancement of Management on its golden anniversary in 1963. Presiden John F. Kennedy stated: "Much of the Free World's success in using its human resources fully and with dignity can be laid to enlightened and progresive management.....It is managers who grow with the needs and resources of their time that we must continue to look for the new ideas and their implementation to meet the challenges of the future."

Today, we see or hear the world management almost daily. Some of our friends are managers, and we read of well-run and poorly managed organizations. When one stop to think about management, however, various questions come to mind. What is management ? Why is it so important today ? Has it always been important ? Is there a body of knowledge about management ?
If so, can the pratice of management be improved through a study of such knowledge ?

Question such as these cannot be answered in a single chapter. As an introduction, therefore, this chapter survey only those fundamental issues that will provide a foundation for an in-depth study of the management concepts and theories presented in all other chapters.

OBJECTIVES

1. To portray management as a dynamic process that essential in coordinating the human and material resources of all organizations.

2. To introduce and discuss the importance of planning, organizing, actuating, and controlling as the function of management.

3. To outline various concepts and issues that are found in current management thought.

4. To present approaches that have been followed in the study and pratice of management.

5. To show that art of management cannot be sparated from the science of management.

MANAGEMENT COMPETENCE VERS TECHNICAL COMPETENCE

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Wed, 4 May 2011 08:39:00 -0700

Fayol sugested that managerial competence should be distinguished from the technical competencies found in engineering, production, marketing, and finance. Without question, managers cannot completely remove themselves from the performance of certain specialzed types of work, such as production or sales. Likewise, the director of nursing in a hospital may work closely with floor nurse. A major difference between managers and nonmanahers stems from the fact that managers plan, organize, actuate, and exercise control over the various technical operations of an organization. Thus, managers must have a working knowledge of certain technical operations, even though they are not directly responsible for performing such duties themselves.

The expand, we see that top-management positions do not normally include the narrow technical responsibilities found in middle - or lower level management jobs. This is especially true in large organizations where decision making at higher management levels is levels likely to focus on a single technical operation. Increasingly, however, managerial advancement will require an ability to deal with a variety of technical and social functions of organizations not as compartmentalized, but as interrelated, portions of the total management process. Efforts to achieve this coordination of specialities in organizations operating within complex and changing environments may lead to renewed interest in the "Office of the president" where two ore more top-level executives operate as a management team to develope and to implement policies at the presidential level.