The Future of Management
Summary
Today’s Manager has to make lightening fast decisions based on intuition, he must be able to think like a Social Scientist to modify the behavior of individuals and assign tasks, he needs to be able to “jump ahead in time”, that is, see into the future of his organization, and he must have the skill of a surgeon to skillfully modify the structure of his business. Abraham Maslow defined the hierarchy of Needs Theory with the following factors: Physiological, Safety, Social, Esteem, and Self-Actualization. Management has been defined a million ways, but a good final definition of management is: “The process of planning, organizing, leading, and controlling the efforts of organization members and of using all organizational resources to achieve the stated organizational goals.” (Mescon, Albert and Khedouri, 1985)
Management vs. Leadership
During the rise of the industrial revolution several different people notably Henri Fayol and Max Weber described management. Fayol’s view was the classical approach to management and work behavior. Weber predicted that the growth of the large-scale organization would require a more formal set of procedures and how to administer them. Weber’s view was managers had few principles they could apply in managing organizations. He therefore created the idea of an ideal or "pure form" of organization, which he called bureaucracy. This term did not refer to red tape and inefficiency—bureaucracy, for Weber, was the most efficient form of organization. Weber described bureaucracy as having certain characteristics:
1. A well-defined hierarchy of authority.
2. A clear division of work.
3. A system of rules covering the rights and duties of position incumbents.
4. A system of procedures for dealing with the work situation.
5. Impersonality of interpersonal relationships.
6. Selection for employment, and promotion based on technical competence. (Hall, 1962)
From these descriptions one can realize a slight difference between a management and a leadership style of managing.
Another, and more recent example of the difference between leadership and management is the Washington Redskins professional football program. Over the past several years this football team has been managed by the best coach money can by but the team has ended up near the bottom of the league in wins. Winning is a form of self-actualization that is the pinnacle of the hierarchy of needs and the owner of the Washington Redskins wants to win again. Joe Gibbs is once again the coach of the team. He had one two or three Vince Lombardi Trophies for the owner and the team in the past and also has proven his leadership abilities in the NASCAR circuit by wining two of the last three NASCAR championships. Joe Gibbs displays some very simple characteristics on and off the field: honesty, integrity, self-esteem, and a belief system that he can rely upon. One will notice that these characteristics are in the category of social science rather than sports.
Emerging Managing Concepts and Trends
“Wal-Mart is always a discriminating company.” This is a lapel button that I recently saw being worn by some college seniors. One can read or listen to the news to follow the lawsuits being filed against Wal-Mart. Everyone who writes or speaks about business has some comparison to Wal-Mart. It is a fact the Walton family are the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth richest people in the world. The Wal-Mart Corporation must be doing a lot of things to make money. They may not be right but their management and leadership make enormous profits for their shareholders. The Wal-Mart Company has the characteristics of The Standard Oil Company monopoly held by John D. Rockefeller. Wal-Mart does not hold the shipping or manufacturing companies that Standard Oil did, but with their massive purchasing power and their demand for on time, on-demand delivery, Wal-Mart can dictate the cost of manufacturing and delivery. Recently Wal-Mart has directed its suppliers to include a “tracking chip” in all of the products it sells. Those chips allow computerized tracking of every product that comes in and goes out of the store and further a Ground Positioning Satellite (GPS) can track the product after the sale. This chip will cost suppliers about one million dollars to implement and they must bear the cost if they want to continue to sell to Wal-Mart. The trend in supply and demand that Wal-Mart has developed is a result of the dominant purchasing power of Wal-Mart. Other trends that are prevalent are the reduction of benefits. Not only at Wal-Mart but many other companies there is a non-union stance, an undefined retirement benefit, and little or no health. For a low paid worker these benefits are needed for a secure lifestyle. “You can’t appeal to someone’s need to achieve until you’ve filled his or her belly and made the person secure.” Abraham Maslow. Unless management implements changes in the posture of the owners, Wal-Mart will be doomed to failure or relegated to the fate of K-Mart.
The trend of the team style of management and the team leader is dominant at Microsoft Corporation. Microsoft is a company that works around teams and their success shows that it is the future of management. Microsoft always attempts to hire employees that are smarter than Bill Gates. The average IQ of Microsoft is always rising along with their profits. The new manager thinks of himself as a sponsor, a team leader, or an internal consultant. The new manager shares information to help subordinates get the job done.
Future Change in the Four Functions of Management
Planning: Choosing your objectives and the courses of action that will get you there. (Dessler, p. 190. Online Version) Planning, Organizing, Leading and Controlling a company’s future market standing will be a direct result of the culture that the company actually has. The dissemination of knowledge is prolific in its entirety as a result of the Internet a company cannot hide its real culture any more.
Innovative management solutions result in some type of change. Dynamic planning and innovation will be ongoing so that change won’t really be change but a maturing of a business.
Productivity will be enhanced by computer-monitored production lines. A manager will have to know new knowledge to work in the future.
The physical structure of a business will grow to wherever a computer can connect to the Internet. With the leaps in data transmission available a manager will be holding real time videoconferences with any and all of the people who are on his team.
Financial resources are already available on the Internet. In the future financial establishments will be bidding for a chance to invest in properly run companies.
The notion of the quarterly profit report is just about over. Soon a company’s profitability will be an hourly or nearly instantaneous fact.
Managerial performance and development will be measured by the value of the company, it’s adherence to the public perception of ethics and the steadiness of the company’s performance.
Internal and external environmental factors will be adjusted so worker performance and attitude will be structured to result in exceptional in both of these attributes.
Summary
The future of management is exciting. Today we are in the age where the industrial revolution was in the 1900’s. Managers then as now will have to restructure their way of planning, organizing, leading, and controlling every facet of their business.
The ethics of the corporation and its responsibility to the public sector will be the linchpin that maintains the growth and success for the company of the future. Dynamic, fluid planning and change that provides a responsive and corrective action offers the business of the future the best way to reach its goals without interrupting the profit, production and internal environment so common in today’s business structure.
References
Dessler, Gary. Management: Leading People and Organizations in the 21st Century, Second Edition Copyright © 2001 by Prentice Hall, Inc. A Pearson Education Company Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458. Compilation copyright © 2003 by Pearson Custom Publishing.
Mescon, Albert and Khedouri, 1985. Management: Individual and Organization Effectiveness. Based on Richard Hall, “Intra-Organizational Structural Variation:
Application of the Bureaucratic Model, Administrative Science Quarterly, December 1962, p. 295-308.
12:21:03 PM 
|
