Archive for November, 2008
November 29, 2008 at 12:27 pm
· Filed under Businesss Management, Management, Organizational Design, Organizations, Software ·Tagged Businesss Management, General Systems Theory, HRM, Management, Modern View Point, Organizational Design, Organizations
Each level is more complex than the one that precedes it. However, no stage is as yet fully developed and knowledge about different levels is of varying degrees. Beyond the second level none of the theories are comprehensive or fully meaningful. Over the last three decades further developments in research into organizations may have added to the existing knowledge, but human organizations continue to be extremely complex.
The systems approach points to the interdependent nature of everything that forms part of or concerns an organisation. A system is composed of elements which are related to and dependent upon one another and which, when in interaction, form a unitary whole.
Systems framework covers both general an specialised system and closed and open analysis. A general systems approach to the management processes deals with formal organisation and concepts relating to different disciplines such as technical, social, psychological and philosophical. Specific management systems deals with aspects relating to organisation structure, job design, specific functions of management, etc.
A closed system operates in a closed loop, devoid of external inputs. An open system, in contrast, is a dynamic input-output system “in continual interaction with environment to achieve a steady state of dynamic equilibrium while still retaining the capacity for work or energy transformation”.
guaranteedblinds, premierinns, term life insurance
Permalink
November 28, 2008 at 1:14 pm
· Filed under Businesss Management, General Systems Theory, Management, Modern View Point, Organizational Design, Organizations ·Tagged General Systems Theory, GST Level System, Management, Modern Theory, Modern View Point, Organizational Design, Organizations
Since 1940s, researches and information theorists also looked at organizations in a Systems viewpoint. In 1956 Kenneth Bounding propounded General Systems Theory (GST).
The GST approach suggests the following nine levels of systems complexity:
- The most basic level is the static structure. It could be termed the level of frameworks. As example would be the anatomy of the universe.
- The second level is the simple dynamic system. It incorporates necessary predetermined motions. This could be termed the level of clockworks.
- The next level is a cybernetic system characterized by automatic feedback control mechanisms. This could be thought of as the level of the thermostat.
- The forth level is called “open-systems” level. It is a self-maintaining structure and is the level where life begins to differentiate from nonlife. This is the level of the cell.
- The fifth level can be termed the “genetic-societal” level. It is typified by the plant and occupies the empirical world of the botanist.
- The next is the animal level, which is characterized by increased mobility, teleological behavior, and self-awareness.
- The seventh level is the human level. The major difference between the human level and the animal level is the human’s possession of self-consciousness.
- The next level is that of social organizations. The important unit in a social organization is not the human per se but rather the organizational role that the person assumes.
- The ninth and last level is reserved for transcendental systems. This allows for ultimate, absolutes, and the inescapable unknowable.
Permalink
November 27, 2008 at 5:42 am
· Filed under Management, Modern Theory, Modern View Point, Organizational Design, Organizations ·Tagged General System, Modern Theory, Modern View Point, Organization, Organizational Design, System View Point
As a part of our talk on organizational design, development and change, we discussed on different topic like Classical Viewpoint, Dysfunctional Aspects, Administrative Theory, Scientific Management, Neoclassical View Point, and many aspects which are related to Organizations. Today we will discuss on Modern means System Viewpoint here.
Modern theories of organization and management have been developed largely since the 1930s. The perspective here is to provide a systems viewpoint. Among the several persons who contributed to the modern theory, it was perhaps Chester I. Bernard, who in 1938, provide a comprehensive explanation of the modern view of management and organization. He considered the individual, organization, suppliers and consumers as part of the environment. Ten years later, Weiner’s pioneering work on cybernetic developed concepts of systems control by information feedback. He described an adaptive system (including an organization) as mainly dependent upon measurement and correction through feedback. An organization is viewed as a system consisting of five parts: inputs, process, output, feedback and environment.
Since 1940s, researches and information theorists also looked at organizations in a Systems viewpoint. In 1956 Kenneth Bounding propounded General Systems Theory (GST).
guaranteedblinds, ez8 motel, insurance software
Permalink
November 24, 2008 at 5:16 am
· Filed under Businesss Management, Finance, Management, Organizational Design, Organizations, classical school ·Tagged Businesss Management, Finance, Management, Neoclassical theory, Neoclassical viewpoint, Organizational Design, Organizations
The test group achieved higher morale due to special attention given to the employees as individuals and also the social structure of the work group. The Hawthorne experiments further revealed that a worker’s feeling about himself and in work group matter most. The third set of experiments which began in 1931 attempted to understand how group norms affect group effort and output. It was noted that the informal organization of workers controlled the norms established by the groups in respect of each member’s output.
These and subsequent findings concerning human behaviour at work focused on worker as an individual and considered the importance of caring for his feelings and understanding the dynamics of the informal organization of workers-which affect the formal organization structure, its activities, processes and output. The neoclassical viewpoint thus gave birth to human relations movement and provided the thrust toward democratization of organizational power structures and participative management. The emerging changes in social, economic, political and technical environment of organizations also seems to have provided the rationale for such shift in emphasis.
The neoclassical viewpoint does not replace classical concepts. The need for order, rationality, structure, etc. have been modified to highlight the importance of relaxing the rigid and impersonal structures and consider each person as an individual with feeling and social influences that effect performance on the job.
Permalink
November 19, 2008 at 4:54 am
· Filed under Businesss Management, Finance, Management, Neoclassical theory, Neoclassical viewpoint, Organizational Design, Organizations, classical school ·Tagged human relations, Management, Neoclassical theory, Neoclassical viewpoint, Organizations
The neoclassical theory, also referred to as the human relations school of thought reflects a modification to and improvement over the classical theories. While classical theories focused more on structure and physical aspects of work (notwithstanding Taylor’s concern for mental revolution), the neoclassical theory recognizes the primacy of psychological and social aspects of the worker as an individual and his relations within and among groups and the organisation. Though neoclassical philosophy could be traced to ancient times, it gained currency only after the World War I, particularly in the wake of the “Hawthrone experiments” at Western Electric Company by Elton Mayo during 1924 to 1932.
The initial experiments carried out cover a period of three years sought to determine the effects of different levels of illumination on workers’ productivity in the test groups, productivity raised irrespective of variations in illumination at indifferent experiments. In the second set of experiments which began in 1927 a smaller group of six female telephone operators was put under close observation and controls. Frequent changes were made in working conditions such as hours of work, lunches, rest periods, etc. Still, over a period of time as the experiments continued with such changes, productivity continued to rise. It was concluded that the social or human relationships among the operators, researchers, and supervisors influenced productivity more decisively than changes in working conditions.
guaranteedblinds, premierinns, leadorganizer
Permalink
November 17, 2008 at 5:04 am
· Filed under Businesss Management, General Principles, Management, Philosophy, scientific management ·Tagged General Principles, Management, Philosophy, scientific management
We continue our discussion on Scientific Management today. For Taylor, scientific management fundamentally consists of certain broad principles, a certain philosophy, which can be applied in many ways, and a description of what any one man or men may believe to be the best mechanism for applying these general principles should in no way be confused with the principles themselves.
Taylor described the following four principles of scientific management:
1. Develop a science for each element of a man’s work, which replaces the old rule-of-thumb method.
2. Scientifically select and then train, teach, and develop the workman, whereas in the past he chose his own work and trained himself as best he could.
3. Management should heartily cooperate with the workers so as to ensure all the work being done in accordance with the principles of the science which has been developed.
4. There is an almost equal division of the work and the responsibility between the management and the workmen. The management should take over all work for which they are better fitted than the workmen, while on the past all of the work and the greater part of the responsibility were thrown on the workers.
Permalink
November 15, 2008 at 4:55 am
· Filed under Administrative theory, Businesss Management, Finance, Management, Organizational Design, Organizations, classical school, scientific management ·Tagged Administrative theory, classical school, decision-making, Management, management theory, scientific management, Taylor’s principles
The third stream of classic school of thought is the scientific management. The principles of scientific management were first developed around 1900. Among the pioneering proponents of the principles of scientific management, particular mention should be made of Frederick Winston Taylor, an engineer by profession. Whereas bureaucracy and administrative theory focused on macro aspects of the structure and process of human organizations, scientific management concerned itself with micro aspects such as physical activities of work thorough time-and-motion study and examination of men-machine relationships.
Unlike in the other two, the scientific management laid emphasis on activities at shop floor or work unit level than management and based its inductive reasoning on detailed study and empirical evidence. In juxtaposition the principles of bureaucracy and administrative theory were formed by synthesizing experience and observation with abstract reasoning.
Taylor’s principles of scientific management could be considered as an improvement over the contributions in the other two streams of thought in as much as he tried to use the engineer’s discipline to reduce personal factors, randomness and rule of thumb decision-making. Though Taylor too had his share of critics and criticism, his contribution to modern management and use of scientific methodology for decision-making and management practices are profound.
Permalink
November 13, 2008 at 12:13 pm
· Filed under Administrative theory, Businesss Management, Finance, Management, Organizational Design, Organizations ·Tagged Administrative theory, Uniforms, unity of command, unity of directions
We are talking administrative theory here. Today we talk The 14 principles that capture the essence of the administrative theory.
Division of work.
Divisions of work or specialization give higher productivity because one can work at activities in which one is comparatively highly skilled.
Authority and responsibility.
Authority is the right to give orders. An organizational member has responsibility to accomplish the organizational objectives of his position. Appropriate sanction is required to encourage good and to discourage poor performance.
Discipline.
There must be respect for and obedience to the rules and objectives of the organization. Uniforms help to maintain discipline
Unity of command.
The reduce confusion and conflicts each member should receive orders from and be responsible to only one superior.
Unity of direction.
An organization is effective when members work together toward the same objectives. Uniform objectives work with unity of direction.
Subordination of individual interest to general interest.
The interests of one employee or group of employees should not prevail over that of the organization.
Remuneration of personnel.
Pay should be fair and should reward good performance.
Centralization.
A good balance should be found between centralization and decentralization.
Scalar chain.
There is scalar chain or hierarchy dictated by the principles of unity of command linking all members of the organization from the top to the bottom.
Order.
There is a place for everything and everyone which ought to be so occupied.
Equity.
Justice, largely based on predetermined conventions, should prevail in the organization.
Stability of tenure of personnel.
Time is required for an employee to get used to new work and succeed in doing it well.
Initiative.
The freedom to think out and execute plans at all levels.
Espirit de corps.
“Union is strength”
Permalink
November 12, 2008 at 1:40 pm
· Filed under Administrative theory, Businesss Management, Management, Organizational Design, Organizations ·Tagged Administrative theory, Business Management, concept of bureaucracy, sociologist
Administrative theory is another stream of thought in the classical mould. While the concept of bureaucracy was developed by sociologist in a detached, scholarly way administrative theory has been developed since 1900 by practical managers. Though both the schools of thought developed independently, they have many things in common.
Both tend to be prescriptive about organizations and normally emphasise the need for order and orderly procedures, and point to hierarchy, specialization, structure. Order and certainty among others as essential features of organization.
Among the several proponents of the Administrative theory, the earliest and significant contribution came from Henri F Fayol, a French industrialist, in 1916. The 14 principles that capture the essence of the administrative theory could be summarized as follows:
- Division of work
- Authority and responsibility
- Discipline
- Unity of command
- Unity of direction
- Subordination of individual interest to general interest
- Remuneration of personnel
- Centralization
- Scalar chain
- Order
- Equity
- Stability of tenure of personnel
- Initiative
- Espirit de corps
We will talk on each theory in next post.
Permalink
November 4, 2008 at 4:31 pm
· Filed under Businesss Management, Finance, Insurance, Management, Organizational Design, Organizations ·Tagged finance management, Home Loan, Mortgage, Organization
We are a family of five. Me, my wife and my three children. My eldest son was in 2nd year of college when we decide to buy our own house. I and my wife are both working. That time we have our savings. So we decided to buy our own house. That house was payable within 10 years. And we have already on our third year of payment. My next son will be graduating in high school and will take up medicine. At first we still can afford to pay our monthly amortization. The time comes when we have a hard time to pay that amortization. With our past mistake we are having bad credit ratings. We are not prompt anymore in paying our amortization because we are concentrating for the tuition fees and other needs of my two sons in their college.
As we are failing to pay our monthly amortization, they charged us a high interest for the delay of payment. What I did is I asked my friend about a Mortgage Lending. Because I know that he is also applied for that. He recommended me that I should apply for the Home Mortgage Lending Agency they applied for. He told me that I will not have a hard time to pay for my monthly dues with them. He told me that they offer two kinds of mortgage. He chooses to have the adjustable rate mortgage. The first year of payment, the interest remains the same. Some problem with the adjustable rate mortgage is that the buyer becomes used to that low mortgage payment. When the rate changes the prime rate plus a certain extra percentage, payments can double or even triple making it hard for homeowners to afford the rise. The second type is the fixed rate mortgage. With this type of mortgage, since it is the most common type of loan the interest rate when applied for a loan was lock-in. This will be the charged interest rate thought out the length of the mortgage usually fifteen years, twenty years. It covers the portion of the interest and a small portion of the principal for your mortgage payment. Some time low down payment are key part of this option.
I prefer to choose the fixed rate mortgage, because I think it would be easy for me and my wife to pay for that. I asked my friend to go with me and I will apply for Home Mortgage Loan soon. Now we will have no problem anymore and we will still have our own house.
Permalink
Older Posts »
