Автор работы: Пользователь скрыл имя, 29 Ноября 2012 в 17:49, реферат
Работа содержит описание Классического и современного менеджмента на английском языке.
Эта работа containы некоторые аспекты классической и современной зрения управления. Я постараюсь, чтобы покрыть такие термины, как типа управления, преимущества и недостатки обеих структуры, доказать это слово известных специалистов. В качестве доказательства я покажу моего собственного опыта с использованием классических и современных типов управления. Для того чтобы понять некоторые аспекты управления я использовал произведения следующих авторов:
Фредерик У. Тейлор (1856 - 1915)
Анри Файоль (1841 -1925)
Макс Вебер (1864 - 1920)
Современные / Современные зрения управления
International Information Technology University
Classical and contemporary view of management
Prepared by: Nutgaliyev ALimzhan
Group: ITM - 101
This work containы several aspects of classical and contemporary view of management. I’ll try to cover such terms like types of management, advantages and disadvantages of the both structure, prove it by word of famous specialists. As evidence I’ll show my own experience by using classical and contemporary types of management. To understand several aspects of management I used works of following authors:
Frederick W. Taylor (1856 - 1915)
Henri Fayol (1841 -1925)
Max Weber (1864 – 1920)
2. Classical management
First part of my work will consist of definition and detailed plan classical management. Classical management was used till 21 century, a lot of bright examples of classical management such as USSR, Cuba, North Korea. But nowadays such system is not more actual, because philosophy and ideology is totally changed, and every has each individuality. But let consider this type of management. This structure consist of three main parts:
1. Scientific management
2. Bureaucratic management
3. Administrative management
2.1 Scientific management:
Scientific management is represented as specific method that realized just one way of doing the job.
The founder of the scientific management is Frederick Taylor. Main work of Tyler was directed to the Bethlehem Steel companies where he motivated to improve efficiency.
There several ideas of Tyler teaching:
Taylor’s Four Principles of Scientific management:
2.1 Bureaucratic management
Bureaucracy from French means desk or office, it is division of labor proved by administration. A lot of assessments, written documents, committees, but in facts they do not rule in their own right, like monarchy, aristocracy or another form of ruling.
According to Max Weber, main changes took place in capitalistic period, during technical revolution. Capitalism is a way of rationalization, calculation how fast inputs will turn over to the outputs. Main idea was to maximize output by minimization inputs.
While studying new innovations in Germany in the late 20th, Max Weber selected central elements of such new form of organization. He characterized the idela bureaucracy by impersonality, efficiency and rationality. Key factor were authority of official bodies, all actions, orders and acts were done only after assessment of such body.
Structure of this organizational type is strong and strict hierarchy where each level controlled and supervised by the above one. Each level has own duties and right, responsibilities are clearly identified.
Max Weber believed that it would be the best type of organizational structure, however he considered that bureaucracies structure has a lot of same aspects like all organizational types, and in future it will be the same, which in turn could lead to the development of a new class of worker, the professional bureaucrat.
According Max Weber there are following specific characteristics of bureaucratic type:
2.3 Administrative management
Following writers focused on the whole organization. The founders of the administrative theory are Max Webber and Henri Fayol.
The Administrative Management
It is a term used for those early-day contributors who developed and taught principles to be used by managers, both individually and collectively, to improve the performance of the overall functions of the organization.
Specialization increases output by making employees more efficient.
Managers must be able to give order. Authority gives them this right. Along with authority, however, goes responsibility.
Employees must obey and respect the rules that govern the organization.
An employee should receive orders from one superior only.
The organization should have a single plan of action to guide managers and workers.
The interests of any one employee or group of employees should not take precedence over the interests of the organization as a whole.
Workers must be paid a fair wage for their services.
This term refers to the degree to which subordinates are involved in decision making.
The line term refers to the degree to which subordinates are involved I decision making.
People and materials should be in the right place at the right time.
Managers should be kind and fair to their subordinates.
Management should provide orderly personnel planning and ensure that replacements are available to fill vacancies.
Employees who are allowed to originate and carry out plans will exert high levels of effort.
Specialization increases output by making employees more efficient.
3. Contemporary view of management.
The rationality of modern age is still actual.
Post-modern, post – soviet organizations show relic of the modern age. All issues are solved on the knowledge foundation. Max Weber, father of bureaucracy, predicted that today’s manager trapped himself to iron cage called – rationality. All organizations held bureaucratic style of managing. Goal – oriented, where was efficiency and ranking of results. very strong delegation of duties, controlled by supervision. Without head company couldn't exist.
Previous generation satisfied with this type of living, but for the coming society, new kinds of management and organization are needed. In order to understand the importance of the change, although we tend to become prisoners of the past, we should know both modern and postmodern policies.
If we consider on management today – a big mess.
Cardinally changes in policies and procedures were very fast and complicated. Companies started to invest on innovation, new ideas, on young people, and this process were successful because leadership leads by innovation. New way of management represents a network of experience and staff areresponsible for their own actions and consequences. Such term like brain storm, different viewpoints, open talk are likely to open new ideas and new meetings. Implementation of tacit knowledge and networking of organizations are emphasized.
But new point of thinking was successful, a surrender of the iron cage of rationality of the modern time cannot be considered evident. From time to time, the talk on management has rather returned to the old thinking. Profit management emphasizes today’s straight forward thinking that accentuates measurability but despises differences. Even quality management has occasionally strongly supported these ideas.
Our society is on the edge of new idea thinking and old vision. Old vision mixed new values. In this fight of post-soviet ideology, and new innovative creative thinking we faced with risk of losing all values from both sides.
4. My own experience
To be honest, it is the most difficult to choose what type of management. From one side it is my first experience, from another my level of degree, form another my age. But I have destination, my supervisor set up goals to be achieved, and I have to do it. But the main question that I faced how to make job more efficient?
First step to understand all business process, if I set direction to my subordinates, I have to be an expert in the job that I’m doing. First week before starting business process, I’ve read a lot of guidelines according project Zhasa. Try first experience with meeting, and contract dealing. Make my first mistakes and successes. According these features I can to direct my staff on right direction.
First type of management was more modern, like free-friendship relationship. It was the most big mistake that I’ve done, and consequences are till nowadays. Yes I broke up an ice between us, but they understand that they can argue with me, come late to the job; thesis was he young, our friend and he will understand. Disrespect and horizontal communications. If they have some question, they ask it to my supervisor.
To fix the situation, I’ve used classical bureaucratic method. Every morning status and strict conversation about disadvantages of the work process. To be impressive, I used HR tactic, after meeting, call to the partner where was subordinate and ask of feedback about meeting. Hat I’ve received after such actions – by every issue, or problem that occurs they call me and asks, it makes me interrupt. They couldn’t solve their problems and issues, so I’ve done not only my job but also their to.
Third step was to set a balance style of management. More conversations about business process, discussion about unknown situations, less but more proper checking of quality of the meetings. The result I thing is good, they do own job, if there is very difficult question they asks. but nobody bothers my supervision.
At the conclusion I want to notice that how I understand there is no ideal type of management, leader has to be situational leadership. We couldn’t through to the waste all experience that we received during very long period. But leadership is very close to innovation, and to make business process more effective me have to combine all types of management and create individual approach to subordinates.