Ways to Prevent Dead Zones
Management theory and practice Assignment 1 How the managers differ from non-managerial employees ? In larger organizations, management is often broken down into three levels that is upper management, middle management and lower management. Upper management includes top executives who are highest on the management hierarchy. Middle management includes department managers and division managers, who are the communication link between upper and lower management. Lower management includes first-line managers and supervisors, who are on the bottom of the management hierarchy.
In smaller organizations, there is often only one level of management between the non-managerial employees and the organization’s leaders. Smaller organizations also generally have fewer managers than larger organizations. Non-managerial employees are placed into categories according to their job functions. In an office environment, non-managerial job titles may range from administrative assistant to payroll specialist to computer technician. For the first question, a manager is different from a non-managerial employee in that they carry a wider range of responsibilities.
Ways to Prevent Dead Zones Essay Example
For example, while a normal employee may only have to serve on a shop floor say, their manager may have to ensure that they are doing their job correctly and make sure that the shop remains fully stocked, perhaps as well as doing the tasks that their employee is required to do. It is for this reason that managers are often paid a higher wage than non-managerial employees, especially so as they often have more experience in the retail area. For the different in the span of control, this is a term that is often used in business, and refers to the number of people that a manager is responsible for.
The wider somebody’s span of control is, the more employees they are in charge of, and who are accountable to them. This idea also works in the other direction that if somebody has a narrow span of control, then they are not responsible for many employees. This is often the case for bosses who are higher up the hierarchy means that the further up the hierarchy of a business you are, the more responsibility you will have, and so to be in charge of many employees too would be too much to take on. On the other hand, there are also have a different by Organizational structures.
For the example, there are many different types of organizational structures, all of which have their different strengths and weaknesses, and choosing the right one for your business can be stressful at first, but will be ultimately worthwhile in the end. By having an organizational structure implemented within your business, you can be extremely confident that things will run smoothly and effectively. This is particularly useful when things do not go the way you expected, as it allows you to get back on track quickly, with less hassle. Besides that the most important things are Managers are the decision makers or delegators.
This means that they set the goals and objectives of an organisation and are responsible for the success or failure of a business, therefore regardless of the fact that managers delegate, they take the credit of the achievements and suffer the consequences of the failure all by themselves. For the Non-managerial employees are the delegatees skilled and unskilled labour. They are assigned to perform various tasks and duties and are accountable to their corresponding managers, they do not participate in decisions making and are not liable for the organisation other than their part of the job.
In simpler words, the managers make the non-managerial staff do work for them in return of the incentives provided by them, and enjoy the success or suffer the failure on their own account. As a conclusion, we can see that a few different between managers and non-managerial employees in many factor included their responsibilities, position in organisation and many others. So, that is why the explanation about this different is going to be very complicated to ensure all fact can be shown smoothly and easy to understand.
Explain the universality of management concept. Does it still hold true in today’s world? Why or why not? Management principles are needed for the efficient and effective operation of organizations, regardless of the level of the manager or the industry in which they operate. In my opinion this is true for today’s organizations now more than ever. The global environment of today ensures that organizations will face staunch competition. Failure and weakness on the part of management ultimately lead to loss of market share and organizational closure.
Also, gone are the days when managers could ‘bluff’ their way through their dealings with employees who have become more demanding and aware of their legal rights. 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. 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 incompetency 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. As a conclusion, 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. In today environment which is more important to organization – efficiency or effectiveness ? explain your choice In my opinion, I believe that both are equally important for organization success so that i can’t say that efficiency is more of important than effectiveness and vice versa.
Efficiency is attainment of goals at minimum possible resources where as effectiveness is achievement defined goals regardless of amount resource employed. What the trouble here is that both can’t be attained at the same time because the ways we follow to achieve efficiency might affect our effectiveness as long as we follow different strategies to attain them. My opinion is true that effectiveness is more important than efficiency rather, I believe that the secret to a successful organization lies in the blending of efficiency and effectiveness when planning and executing internal and client facing meetings and events.
In other words, I believe that both of these components are vital to an organization’s success and that they are best used in tandem. Let me first explain what happens when an organization places disproportionate importance on a solely numerical metric known as efficiency. When efficiency is an organization’s number one priority, the main focus is immediately placed on the and the how of planning an event instead of first addressing the integral why an event is being held. The central functionality gets bypassed altogether, as the event portfolio is immediately labelled as a cost and not as the investment it is.
Once an event portfolio is framed within this context, those in charge of planning the meetings and events get bogged down with the responsibility of planning all of the tactics involved tactics which are not necessarily preceded by a strategy. The problem here is that a strategy must always be in place before any tactics can be addressed that is similar to how an electrician would not wire a house before the builder spent the time necessary to physically build it. The beauty of using meetings and events as a business and leadership tool is that they provide a platform for c-level executives to disseminate, collaborate and gather information with and from their valuable stakeholders. This focus on content-effectiveness facilitates the continued development of an organization and its most valuable resource. Meetings and events are all about effectively unleashing people potential and building intellectual capital. This, in turn, leads to increased levels of innovation, participation and collaboration, as well as improved organizational performance, productivity and profitability.
The concepts of efficiency and effectiveness are important for every organisation because they go right to the heart of output and quality. An organisation that is efficient is able to achieve its goals, but there is not necessarily a relationship to quality. Efficiency and effectiveness are applicable to all organisational functions including management or leadership, team building and employee performance, sales, production, innovation, and all internal processes including those in the business office. For example, an efficient accounts payable department pays company bills on time.
An effective accounts payable department has a system in place which enables the company to take advantage of discounts for early payment and is able to integrate payment information with purchasing data in order to insure the least cost is incurred at all times. It is accounts payable that often becomes the information source for trending prices. There is another way to look at efficiency and effectiveness. An efficient organisation or process will perform as expected and operates in the short term. An effective organisation asks if the performance meets the mission of the organisation and contributes to long term success and sustainability.
An efficient organisation spends the expected amount of money to produce results. An effective organisation measures whether the money spent improved its ability to meet future goals. An efficient organisation can produce immediate results by relying on “safety” in the words of Maslow. The facts and figures supporting the efficient production of output are safe. The effective organisation looks beyond the facts and figures and builds a quality organisation that is prepared for future growth. An organisation should be both efficient.