Management and Leadership
Yüklə 0,93 Mb.
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- Taylor – Scientific Management
- Henri Fayol – Management Tasks
- Max Weber – Bureaucratic Theory
- Elton Mayo – Human Relations Theory
- Douglas McGregor – Theory X and Theory Y
- Peter Drucker – Management by Objectives
- William Ouchi – Theory Z
- W. Edwards Deming – Total Quality Management
- Daniel Katz and Robert Kahn – Systems Theory
- Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard – Situational Leadership Theory
- Various Authors - Contingency Theory
- James McGregor Burns and Bernard Bass – Transformational Leadership
- Edgar Schein – Organizational Culture
- Chris Argyris and Donald Schoen
- Peter Senge – The Learning Organization
- Karl-Erik Sveiby – Knowledge Management
- Robert K. Greenleaf – Servant Leadership
|
SW645 – Week 1 Management and Leadership What is the difference, if any, between management and leadership? Warren Bennis said, “Managers are people who do things right, while leaders are people who do the right thing.” What’s the difference? Ideas about management and leadership are interwoven with each other. Is leadership required? (Do groups require leaders?) What are the biological roots of leadership? The best available evidence suggests that leadership has been around since before we were human, and organizational divisions with identified leaders have been documented for thousands of years. Leadership and management are evident throughout recorded history. Think about the twelve tribes of Israel, the Pharaohs of Egypt, the various Chinese dynasties, and ancient Mezzo-American civilizations, and you’ll realize that leadership and management have been around for much longer than there has been body of literature on the subject. Traditionally, there have been several ideas about what makes leaders or how individuals become leaders. Some of those are summarized here: Great Person Theory – Some individuals are born with the qualities necessary to become leaders. Charismatic Theory – Some individuals are leaders because the possess charisma, which influences people to follow them. Trait Theory – Some individuals possess traits that equip them for leadership. Some of these include energy, drive, ambition, decisiveness, self-assurance, friendliness, fairness, and dependability. Situational Theory – The traits needed to be an effective leader vary from one situation to another, so someone may be a leader in some situations and a follower in others. The management literature begins about 1900, and Frederick Taylor is often cited as one of the first to write on the subject. Taylor – Scientific Management
Henri Fayol – Management Tasks Fayol is one of the first to study management. He identified five things that managers do:
Max Weber – Bureaucratic Theory Weber’s work was an attempt to bring organization and structure to a field that was chaotic. For example, leadership was often inherited, and policies were often made on a whim.
Elton Mayo – Human Relations Theory Mayo is associated with the famous Hawthorne effect, which found that social factors are more important predictors of productivity than factors related to the physical environment.
Douglas McGregor – Theory X and Theory Y McGregor criticized a traditional management approach, which he summarized as Theory X, and proposed what he considered a more realistic approach: Theory Y. Theory X
He said that these ideas are consistent with certain assumptions about the nature of employees, which are wrong.
Theory Y
Peter Drucker – Management by Objectives McGregor acknowledged that his Theory Y was consistent with Drucker’s Management by Objectives in contrast to Management by Control. Management by Objectives focuses on identifying desired outcomes and working together with employees to devise strategies in contrast to focusing on strategies, assuming that they will lead to desired outcomes. Management by Objectives requires clear specification of goals, objectives, activities, and measurement systems. (The logic model is a tool that fits well with MBO.) MBO was revolutionary in that it put goals and objectives on the table for discussion rather than assuming that they were obvious. Drucker has written about “mission,” and his thinking on that topic can be revolutionary. For example, a company that intends “To sell high-quality watches while providing a high return to investors,” has a significantly different mission than a company that intends “To provide customers with premier status symbols.” This is similar to the difference between “providing a full spectrum of quality healthcare services,” and “giving comfort to the afflicted.” A mission statement has to be operational, otherwise it's just good intentions. A mission statement has to focus on what the institution really tries to do and then do it so that everybody in the organization can say, This is my contribution to the goal. According to Drucker, a good mission statement
Drucker likes these:
William Ouchi – Theory Z Theory Z is often associated with McGregor, but it is not part of McGregor’s work, nor is it really conceptually consistent with or an extension of his work. It is actually more consistent with Deming’s work, which developed in America, was exported to Japan, where it worked well enough for Japanese companies to scare American companies, and it came back to America as “Japanese management.” But that gets ahead of the story. Theory Z believes that people are innately self motivated to do their work, are loyal toward the company, and want to make the company succeed. The manager's effectiveness comes from the worker's trusting management to take care of them and allowing them to do their jobs. The workers have a great deal of input and weight in the decision-making process. W. Edwards Deming – Total Quality Management Deming saw variation as the disease that threatened US manufacturing. The more variation - in the length of parts supposed to be uniform, in delivery times, in prices, in work practices - the more waste, he reasoned. From this premise, he set out his 14 points for management: 1. Create constancy of purpose towards improvement. 2. Adopt the new philosophy. 3. Cease dependence on inspection: build in quality. 4. End lowest-tender contracts: Require quality and price. 5. Improve constantly and forever. 6. Institute training on the job for everybody, including management. 7. Institute leadership aimed at helping people do a better job. 8. Drive out fear, and encourage two-way communication. 9. Break down barriers between departments. 10. Eliminate exhortations. 11. Eliminate quotas and numerical targets. Substitute aid and helpful leadership. 12. Remove barriers to pride of workmanship, including annual appraisals and Management by Objectives. 13. Institute education and self-improvement for everyone. 14. Define top management’s permanent commitment to ever-improving quality and productivity and their obligation to implement all these principles. Daniel Katz and Robert Kahn – Systems Theory Katz and Kahn applied systems theory to organizations. The following ideas from systems theory are relevant:
The logic model fits with systems theory. Systems Theory also leads organizations to look at the environments in which they operate – clients, community, funders, competitors, regulatory bodies. Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard – Situational Leadership Theory The appropriate leadership style depends on the maturity of the followers. Two dimensions influence leader effectiveness, attention to task and attention to relationship. These can be plotted in a two-by to matrix to identify four leadership styles. One who gives low attention to task and to relationship uses what Hersey and Blanchard call a delegating style or what others call a laissez-faire style. One who gives high attention to task and low attention to relationship uses a directing style or what others call an autocratic style. Someone who gives high attention to relationship and low attention to task uses a supporting style, and someone who gives attention to both task and relationship uses a coaching style. One might make the argument that over time, a leader can change styles, moving from directing to coaching to supporting to delegating. Various Authors - Contingency Theory (Which means different things to different people)
Organizations tend to be “organistic” or “mechanistic,” which correlates loosely with a focus on outcomes or a focus on processes. Manufacturing companies tend to perform better if they are mechanistic, while service companies tend to perform better when they are organistic. James McGregor Burns and Bernard Bass – Transformational Leadership The idea of transformational leadership was first developed by James McGregor Burns in 1978 and later extended by Bernard Bass as well as others. The transformational leader does three things: raises the level of awareness, and the level of consciousness about the significance and value of designated outcomes and ways of reaching them; gets employees to transcend their own self-interests for the sake of the group; and alters the need level (after Maslow) to expand the range of wants and needs. Edgar Schein – Organizational Culture Each organization has a set of assumptions that has come to be accepted as valid and that is therefore taught to newcomers. The manifestations of these assumptions produce the organization’s culture. The culture can change only as the assumptions change, and the assumptions are likely to change only in response to new experience. Good managers recognize the culture of their organizations. Chris Argyris and Donald Schoen – Theories in Action and Double Loop Learning Argyris and Schoen argue that people have mental maps that guide their actions and that those mental maps are not the same as the explanations or theories that they would give to explain their actions. The former are called “theories in use,” and the latter are called “espoused theories.” They argue that effectiveness results from developing congruence between theory-in-use and espoused theory. Reflection is required to reveal the theory-in-use and to explore the congruence between the two. To illustrate a use of this idea, let’s look at a model. We have assumptions that lead to interventions that lead to outcomes.
I
 f the outcomes are what we predict, then our assumptions tend to be confirmed. In the terms that Argyris and Schoen use, our theory-in-use is confirmed. This brings us to the idea of single-loop learning and double-loop learning. Learning involves the detection and correction of errors. When interventions don’t lead to desired outcomes, people often change their interventions. Unfortunately, the change of interventions may not lead to changed outcomes. This is single-loop learning. The alternative is to question the assumptions, which is likely to lead to changes in the interventions, which is then likely to lead to improved outcomes. Here’s an illustration with the technical jargon replacing the simple language used above.
These ideas are then expanded to what Argyris and Schoen call Model I and Model II, but what have been revised by Roger Schwarz and called the Unilateral Control Model and the Mutual Learning Model. 
Peter Senge – The Learning Organization Peter Senge was influenced by and built upon the work of Argyris and Schoen. His big-selling book is The Fifth Discipline. Learning organizations are organizations where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning to see the whole together. Five disciplines distinguish learning organizations from more traditional organizations: Systems thinking Personal mastery Mental models Building shared vision Team learning These ideas are consistent with the mutual learning model outline above.
[Discuss which of these ideas fit best with social work values.] Does any of this matter? [Discuss] Barbara Kellerman has written a book called Bad Leadership: How it Happens, Why it Matters. She identifies two categories of bad leaders: ineffective and unethical. She identifies three types that fit the first category—incompetent, rigid, and intemperate—and she identifies three that fit the second—callous, corrupt, insular, and evil. She uses examples to illustrate her contentions. Here are some of them. Incompetent – Juan Antonio Samaranch, head of the International Olympic Committee during the era that led to the infamous Salt Lake City scandals involving blatant corruption. Kellerman says that this happened because Samaranch turned “a blind eye and a deaf ear” to what was going on. Rigid – Mary Meeker, a financial analyst on Wall Street, whose rigid adherence to a model that fit with the tech stock bubble led to the tech stock burst and losses of millions for many of her clients. Intemperate – Marion Barry, Jr., mayor of Washington, D.C., whose addiction to drugs likely contributed to his inability to avoid the financial crises and corruption scandals that marred his city during his tenure. Callous – Al Dunlap, CEO of Sunbeam, who laid off 40% of the workforce without improving shareholder value. Corrupt – William Aramony, head of the United Way of America, who was forced to resign after evidence of gross corruption and who was eventually convicted on twenty-five counts of charges such as conspiracy to defraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud. Insular – Bill Clinton, President of the USA, whose disregard for the well-being of the Tutsi minority in Rwanda, contributed to the killing of hundreds of thousands. Evil – Radovan Karadzic, President of the Bosnian Serb administration, whose policies promoted systematic rape as a weapon of war and who promoted killing thousands of Muslim civilians. Kellerman wisely points out that bad leadership occurs in a context, and that part of that context includes people who are willing to follow. She advises us to take responsibility for our followship. [Discuss implications for followship.] Kellerman also offers advice to leaders to help prevent bad leadership:
I think that’s good advice. Yüklə 0,93 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|
