Exponents of business administration

I know nothing. In this world nobody knows anything. Zero. And do you know why? It is because the business world is changing too fast.

A few people now start laughing. So the man on stage stops and points at them.

Why are you laughing? General Motors was the largest company in the world. It was probably a hundred times bigger than his company. And its directors were probably a hundred times better. But their problem was that they thought they knew everything and, in fact, they knew nothing. And that's my message today.

The people who are seeing this man are all very successful businessmen and businesswomen. So why are you seeing a man who knows nothing? Why do they listen to your insults? The answer is because man is a genius at administration.

Guru is an Indian word for a religious teacher. A guru is a person who thinks deeply about life. In India, they are admired and loved by society because they are wise and full of ideas. But in the US and Europe, the word has a slightly different meaning. It is a word that often describes people who write and talk about business and management. These gurus are not trying to answer questions like: How can we live in peace? And what is the meaning of life? ' Instead, they ask, How can I make more profit? ' And why don't people work harder?

In recent years, the ideas of management gurus have had a major effect not only on business, but also on politics, schools, hospitals, and everyday lifestyles.

This article features six management gurus whose thinking has created the modern business world, even though they say they know nothing.

How were current management theories developed?

People have been directing the work for hundreds of years, and we can trace the formal management ideas of the 1700s. But the most important events in management theory emerged in the 20th century. We owe much of our understanding of management practices to the many theorists of this period, who sought to understand the best way to do business.

P historical erspective

Frederick Winslow Taylor

One of the first theorists was Frederick Winslow Taylor. The scientific administration movement began, he and his collaborators were the first to study the scientific work process. They studied how work was done, and observed how worker productivity was affected. Taylor's philosophy focused on the belief that although people worked as hard as they could it was not as efficient as optimizing the way the work was done.

In 1909 Taylor published "The Principles of Scientific Management." In this, it is proposed that by optimizing and simplifying jobs, productivity would increase. The idea that workers and managers need to cooperate with each other was also advanced. This was very different from the way of work that was normally done in companies beforehand. A factory manager at that time had very little contact with workers, leaving them alone to produce the necessary product. There was no standard, and a worker's primary motivation to continue employment, so there was no incentive to work as quickly or as efficiently as possible.

Taylor believes that all workers were motivated by money, so he promoted the idea of ​​"a fair day's worth of work pay." In other words, if one worker did not achieve enough in one day, he did not deserve to be paid as much as another worker who was highly productive.

With a background in mechanical engineering, Taylor was very interested in efficiency. While advancing his career as a steelmaker in the U.S., he designed workplace experiments to determine optimal levels of performance. In one, he experimented with the design of the shovel until he had a design that would allow workers to spank for several hours straight. With bricklayers, he experimented with the various movements necessary and developed an effective way of laying bricks. And I apply the scientific method to study the best way to perform any type of task in a workplace. As such, he found that by calculating the time required to complete the various elements of a task, the "best" way to complete the task could be developed.

"These studies of time and motion" also led Taylor to the conclusion that certain people could work more efficiently than others. These are the people managers should try to hire whenever possible. Therefore, selecting the right people for the job was another important part of workplace efficiency. Drawing on what he learned from these workplace experiments, Taylor developed four principles of scientific management. These principles are also known simply as "Taylorism."

Taylor's four principles are as follows:

1. Replace work with the "golden rule," or simple habit and common sense, and instead use the scientific method to study work and determine the most efficient way to perform specific tasks.

1. Rather than simply assigning workers to any job, locating workers for their jobs based on ability and motivation, and empowering them to work with maximum efficiency.

1. Monitor worker performance, and provide instructions and supervision to ensure they are using the most efficient ways of working.

1. Assign work between managers and workers so that managers spend their time in planning and training, allowing workers to effectively do their jobs.

The critics of Taylorism

Taylor's Scientific Management Theory promotes the idea that there is "one right way" to do something. As such, it disagrees with current approaches, such as MBO Management by Objectives, Continuous Improvement, BPR Process Reengineering, and other tools like them. These promote individual responsibility, and try to push decision-making through all levels of the organization.

The idea here is that workers are given as much autonomy as possible in practice, so that they can use the most appropriate methods for the situation in question. (Do they reflect here in their own experience? Are they happier and more motivated when you are following strictly controlled procedures, or when working using your own judgment?) What's more, frontline workers need to show this kind of flexibility in a rapidly changing environment. Rigid, rule-based organizations really struggle to adapt in these situations.

Teamwork is another area where pure Taylorism is in opposition to current practice. Essentially, Taylorism breaks tasks down into small steps, and focuses on how each person can do their specific set of steps better. Modern methodologies prefer to examine work systems more comprehensively in order to assess efficiency and maximize productivity. The extreme specialization that Taylorism promotes is contrary to modern ideals of how to provide a motivating and fulfilling workplace.

Where Taylorism separates the mental workbook, modern productivity improvement practices seek to incorporate worker ideas, experience, and knowledge into best practice. Scientific administration in its pure form focuses too much on mechanics, and fails to value the human side of work, so motivation and job satisfaction are key elements in an efficient and productive organization.

P daubs key

The principles of Taylor's Scientific Management Theory became widely practiced, and cooperation between workers and managers became what we eventually know today as teamwork. While Taylorism in a pure sense is not widely practiced today, scientific management made many significant contributions to the advancement of management practices. Selection and systematic training procedures were introduced, providing a way to study workplace efficiency, and encouraged the idea of ​​systematic organization design.

H

Henri Fayol (1841 - 1925) was a French coal mining engineer, director of mines, and management theorist. His theory of scientific administration forms the basis for business administration and business management.

In the academic world, this is also known as "fayolismo". Henri Fayol was always one of the most influential modern concepts of his time. He is the founder of the 14 principles of management and the five management functions.

Henri Fayol was born in a neighborhood in Istanbul, Turkey, in 1841. His father, an engineer, was appointed construction supervisor for the construction of a bridge over the Golden Horn (Galata Bridge). The family returned to France in 1847. I study mining engineering at the Ecole Nationale Supérieure Nationale de Mines in Saint-Étienne.

Henri Fayol began his career as an engineer at the Compagnie de Commentry Fourchambeau Decazeville mining company in Commentry at the age of 19. In 1888, he became the CEO of this mining company that employs more than 1,000 people. He was very successful in this position for more than 30 years (until 1918). Around 1900 the mining company was one of the largest producers of iron and steel in France. At this time this industry is considered to be of vital importance to France.

In addition to being the CEO of the Commentry Fourchambault- mining company (1900), Henri Fayol was also one of the founders of the principles of modern management. His research work was in competition with that of another great theorist, Frederick Taylor. In 1916, he published his work experience in the book "Industrial and General Administration". A few years later, Frederick Taylor published his scientific theory on management.

I

Organizations have had to deal with management in practice in the past century. In the early 1900s, large organizations, such as production factories, had to be managed as well. At the time there were only a few (external) tools, models, and methods available. Thanks to scientists like Henri Fayol (1841-1925) the first bases for modern management were laid.

These first concepts, also called principles, are the underlying factors for successful management. Henri Fayol explored this global way and, as a result, synthesizes the 14 principles of administration. Henri Fayol's principles and research were published in the book "General and Industrial Management" (1916).

14 Principles of management

14 management principles are statements that are based on a fundamental truth. These principles serve as a guide for decision making and action management. They are established through observations and analysis of the events that managers face in practice. Henri Fayol was able to synthesize 14 principles of administration after years of study, namely:

1. Division of labour

In practice, employees are specialized in different areas and have different skills. The different levels of experience can be distinguished within the areas of knowledge (from generalist to specialist). Personal and professional developments support this. According to Henri Fayol, specialization promotes the efficiency of the workforce and increases productivity. In addition, the specialization of labor increases its precision and speed. This principle of management of the 14 principles of administration is applicable to both technical and managerial activities.

1. Authority and Responsibility

In order to get things done in an organization, management has the authority to give orders to employees. Of course, with this authority comes responsibility. According to Henri Fayol, the accompanying power or authority gives management the right to give orders to subordinates. Responsibility goes back to performance and therefore agreements need to be reached on this. In other words, authority and responsibility go together and are two sides of the same coin.

1. The discipline

This third principle of the 14 principles of management is about obedience. It is often a part of the mission's core values ​​and vision in the form of good conduct and respectful interactions. This management principle is essential and is seen as the oil to make an organization's engine run smoothly.

1. Unity of command

The management principle 'unity of command' means that an individual employee must receive orders from a manager and that the employee is accountable to the same manager. If employee related tasks and responsibilities are given by more than one manager, this can lead to confusion that can lead to potential employee conflicts. By using this principle, liability for errors can be more easily established.

1. Management Unit

This principle of management of the 14 principles of management has to do with focus and unity. All employees offer the same activities that can be linked to the same goals. All activities must be carried out by a group that forms a team. These activities should be described in an action plan. The principal is ultimately responsible for this plan and oversees the progress of defined and planned activities. The areas of interest are the efforts made by employees and coordination.

1. Subordination of individual interest

There are always all kinds of interests in an organization. In order to also have an organizational function, Henri Fayol indicates that personal interests are subordinate to the interests of the organization (ethics). The main focus is on the objectives of the organization and not on those of the individual. This applies to all levels of the entire organization, including managers.

1. remuneration

Motivation and productivity are close to each other when it comes to the smooth running of an organization. This management principle of the 14 principles of administration argues that remuneration must be sufficient to keep employees motivated and productive. There are two types of compensation, that is, non-monetary (a compliment, more responsibilities, credits) and monetary (compensation, bonuses or other financial compensation). Ultimately, it is about rewarding the efforts that have been made.

1. The degree of centralization

Management and authority for the decision-making process must be properly balanced in an organization. This depends on the volume and size of the organization, including its hierarchy. Centralization implies concentration of decision-making authority in managing the upper part (Board of Directors). The exchange of authorities for the decision-making process with the lowest levels (middle and low) of management, known as decentralization by Fayol. Henri Fayol indicates that an organization must strive for a good balance in this.

1. Climbing chain

The hierarchy occurs in any organization. This varies from top management (Board of Directors) to the lowest levels of the organization. Henri Fayol's "hierarchy" management principle states that there must be a clear line at the level of authority (from top to bottom and from all managers at all levels). This can be seen as a type of management structure. Each employee can contact a manager or superior in an emergency situation, without questioning hierarchy. Especially when it comes to reporting the calamities to immediate managers / bosses.

1. Order

In accordance with this principle of the 14 principles of management, the employees of an organization must have adequate resources at their disposal so that they can function properly in an organization. In addition to social order (responsibility of managers) the work environment must be safe, clean and orderly.

1. Equity

The principle of equity management often occurs in the core values ​​of an organization. According to Henri Fayol, employees should be treated kindly and equally. Employees must be in the right place in the organization to do things right. Managers must supervise and control this process and must treat employees fairly and impartially.

1. Stability of staff permanence

This principle of management of the 14 principles of administration represents the deployment and management of personnel and this must be balanced with the service provided to the organization. Management strives to minimize staff turnover and have the right staff in the right place. Areas of interest, such as frequent change of position and sufficient development, must be well managed.

1. Initiative

Henri Fayol argued that with this principle of employee management, you should allow yourself to express new ideas. This encourages interest and participation and creates added value for the company. Employee initiatives are a source of strength for the organization according to Henri Fayol. This encourages employees to be involved and interested.

1. Esprit de corps

The "esprit de corps" management principle of the 14 principles of administration means the struggle for employee participation and unity. Managers are responsible for the development of morale in the workplace; individually and in the communication area. Body spirit contributes to the development of culture and creates an atmosphere of mutual trust and understanding.

AND

The 14 principles of administration can be used to manage organizations and are useful tools for forecasting, planning, process management, organization management, decision making, coordination and control.

Although they are obvious, many of these issues are being used based on common sense in current management practices in organizations. A practical list is maintained with focus areas based on Henri Fayol's research that is still applied today due to a number of logical principles.

M

Max Weber, (born April 21, 1864, Erfurt, Prussia died June 14, 1920, Munich, Germany) German political sociologist and economist best known for his "Protestant ethics" thesis, in relation to Protestantism to capitalism, and for his ideas on bureaucracy. Weber's profound influence on sociological theory is due to his demand for objectivity in scholarship and his analysis of the motives for human action.

Since the early 1980s it has become fashionable to criticize bureaucracy for being out of touch with the rapidly changing market conditions. As the first to develop the concept of bureaucratic organization, the German-born Max Weber has borne the brunt of much of that criticism. This is quite unfair, since Weber did not promote bureaucracy as something that others should adopt, but simply described it as the most efficient form of organization to work, and the description is not synonymous with promotion.

Weber's key theories

Power and authority

Weber describes power as the probability of carrying out one's own will despite resistance or, at its extreme, as the ability to compel people to obey. It is not necessarily the same as leadership or authority, but it is invariably linked to them. The organizational power that links structure and authority and considers inherent in any hierarchy or bureaucracy. Invariably, the effects of power depend on who has it, how that person is perceived, and the particular situation in which power is invoked.

Weber identified three types of legitimate authority:

1. Charismatic authority: the leader is fulfilled due to 'faith in the special and supernatural qualities of his followers. Weber proposed in his Theory of Social and Economic Organization that the term "charism" was associated with a person who possesses exceptional and supernatural qualities, and who is therefore distinguished from ordinary people. These qualities form the basis on which the person is considered to be, and is treated as a leader.

Commentators at the beginning of the 21st century could conclude that very few business leaders could claim to have supernatural qualities. It must be remembered, however, that Weber was discussing from a philosophical point of view, not a current one, the pragmatic management; therefore, we can understand 'supernatural' as 'supernormal' and at the opposite end of the scale balanced by 'rational'. While not considered supernatural, many business leaders have been considered special in some way, and have been attributed qualities that set them apart from "ordinary people." In fact, research in the 1970s and 1980s by Warren Bennis suggested that leaders have qualities that set them apart,although he did not use the word "supernatural" and went so far as to suggest that leadership qualities can be developed.

Of Weber's three models of legitimate authority, he thought, charisma is the least stable because his inspirational and motivational qualities disappear when the leader leaves office. For Weber, charisma was not a sustainable option as a basis for authority. He advocated locating legitimacy in something more durable and systematic.

1. Traditional authority: leaders have authority by virtue of the situation they have inherited, the scope of their authority is determined by birth, commission, precedents and their use. Although Weber derives his theory from a study of history, we can still witness today the number of positions of authority passed down from one generation to the next, as companies establish dynasties, and dating has more to do with family ties other than competition. Another characteristic of traditional authority-based organizations is that things tend to be done in a particular way, simply because "they have always been done this way."

In today's competitive world, the dangers of this approach are only too obvious: Larger organizations get caught up in their own systems and either fail to detect when competitors are catching up or markets are escaping. Or, on the contrary, they are simply caught by their own preceding inertia, rather than a rational analysis, which becomes the motive itself for doing things.

Weber's search for a sustainable form of authority for the organization based on rational analysis led him to distinguish a third system of authority.

1. Legal-rational authority: a bureaucracy, in which authority is legal and rational because it is exercised through a system of rules and procedures attached to the "office" - the job that an individual occupies.

W

The organization is structured around the official functions that are bound by rules, and each zone has its own competence that is established, the functions are structured in the offices, organized in a hierarchy that follows the rules and technical norms for which it is submitted training, the administration is separate from the ownership of the means of production, the rules, decisions and actions of the administration are recorded in writing.

Weber affirmed that bureaucracy was technically the most efficient form of the organization, since, within it, the work is done with precision, knowledge of the archives, continuity, discretion, unity, strict subordination and reduction friction.

B

Within organized bureaucracies along rational lines, abuse of power by leaders is minimized because:

-The offices are classified in hierarchical order

-Operations are characterized by impersonal rules

-Officials are assigned specific roles and areas of responsibility

-The appointments are made on the basis of qualifications and suitability for the position.

Bureaucracies can represent an extreme of depersonalization, because the functions of officials are circumscribed by the written definitions of their authority, and there are a number of rules and procedures to deal with all contingencies.

Weber was aware of the shortcomings of the bureaucracy:

-Their characteristic information processing and filtering to the top also made them cumbersome and slow to react

-Its machinery makes it difficult to handle individual cases, because the rules and procedures need all individuals to be the same

-Bureaucratization leads to depersonalization.

Weber recognized that the more efficient the bureaucracy, the more successful it is at excluding staff, the irrational and the incalculable in favor of emotional detachment and "professionalism." Perhaps it takes a long way to explain why Weber is held in low regard in today's changing and uncertain business environment.

E n perspective

Weber recognized the dangers of bureaucratization and talked about how measurement processes could turn people into cogs in a machine. In this sense, Weber's reflections are not too distant from Marx's theories of alienation. Although organizational bureaucratization increases efficiency and production capacity, mechanical efficiency also threatens to dehumanize its participants. Weber also believed, however, that the only way that people could make a significant contribution was by submitting their personalities and desires to fulfill the impersonal goals and procedures of large-scale organizations. Paradoxically, Weber believes that the only way to escape from such a mechanical future was a charismatic leader to transform the organization into something new.

The bureaucracy became the model for the organization of the 20th century, and it was encapsulated in the organization of Alfred Sloan of General Motors and ITT of Harold Geneen. Perhaps the worldliness and regularity of corporate bureaucratic life are best described in the organization. William Whyte's Man of Organization (1956) is where the individual was taken for the bureaucratic apparatus, in the name of efficiency. A more recent and humorous interpretation of life in a bureaucracy has been portrayed by Scott Adams in The Dilbert Principle.

The bureaucracy may have survived its age of supremacy, but it is still difficult to foresee a future without any need for the requests, procedures, levels of authority and controls that constitute a bureaucracy. The problem is how to develop systems that combine the necessary bureaucratic features with a flexible, imaginative, people-centered style.

Today's top social scientist of his day (with little interest in management) Weber would have found it hard to believe that he was going to exert such a dominant influence on the way organizations have been run. It was difficult to believe the idea that he was going to be cited as one of the pioneers of a management trinity, along with Henri Fayol and FW Taylor, contemporaries whom he had not met or read as well.

TO

Abraham Harold Maslow was born on April 1, 1908 in Brooklyn, New York. He was the first of seven children of his parents, who themselves were uneducated Jewish immigrants from Russia. His parents, hoping for the best for their children in the new world, pushed him hard for academic success. As expected, as a child, he found his refuge in books.

He received his BA in 1930, his MA in 1931, and his doctorate in 1934, all in psychology, all from the University of Wisconsin. A year after graduating, she returned to New York to work with EL Thorndike in Columbia, where Maslow became interested in research on human sexuality.

He began teaching full time at the University of Brooklyn. During this period of his life, he came into contact with the many European intellectuals who went to emigrate to the US, and Brooklyn, at that particular time, people like Adler, Fromm, Horney, as well as various Gestalt psychologists. and Freudians.

Maslow served as the chair of the psychology department at Brandeis from 1951 to 1969. There he met Kurt Goldstein, who had originated the idea of ​​self-actualization in his famous book, The Organism (1934). It was also here that his crusade for a humanistic psychology began which is ultimately far more important to him than his own theory.

T

One of the many interesting things Maslow noticed while working with monkeys early in his career was that some needs take precedence over others. For example, if you are hungry and thirsty, you tend to try to deal with your thirst first. After all, you can live without food for weeks, but you can only live without water for a couple of days. Thirst is a "stronger" need than hunger. Similarly, if you are very, very thirsty, but someone has put a brace on your neck and you cannot breathe, what is more important is the need to breathe, of course.

Maslow took this idea and created his now famous hierarchy of needs. Beyond the details of air, water, food, and sex, he presented five broader layers: physiological needs, needs for safety and protection, needs for love and belonging, needs for esteem, and need for self-improvement, in that order.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs

Each of us is motivated by needs. Our most basic needs are innate, having evolved over tens of thousands of years. Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs helps explain how these needs motivate us.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs states that we must satisfy every need, in turn, starting with the first, which addresses the most obvious needs for our own survival.

Only when the lower order needs for physical and emotional well-being are satisfied will we be concerned with the higher order needs for influence and personal development.

Conversely, if the things that satisfy our lower order needs are erased, we are no longer concerned with maintaining our higher order needs.

The original Maslow hierarchy of needs model developed from 1943 to 1954, and was published in Motivation and Personality in 1954. At this time the needs hierarchy model included five needs. This original version remains for most people the final Hierarchy of Needs.

1. Physiological and biological needs - air, food, drink, shelter, heat, sex, sleep, etc. Security need - protection from the elements, security, order, law, limits, stability, etc. Belonging and needs of love - group work, family, affection, relationships, etc. Needs of esteem - self-esteem, performance, dominance, independence, status, dominance, prestige, managerial responsibility, etc. Self-actualization needs - the realization of personal potential, personal fulfillment, the search for personal growth and peak experiences.

This is the hierarchy of the definitive and original Maslow of Needs.

While Maslow addressed several additional aspects of motivation, he expressed the hierarchy of needs in these five clear stages.

This is a simple quick self-test based on Maslow's original 5-level hierarchy of needs. It is not a scientific or validated instrument - simply a quick indicator, which can be used for self-awareness, discussion, etc.

The hierarchy of needs and how to help others

There are certainly some behaviors that are quite difficult to relate to Maslow's hierarchy of needs. For example:

Normally, we consider that one disinterestedly helps others, as a form of motivation or personal growth, which would be found in the framework of self-realization, or perhaps even 'transcendence' (if you subscribe to the extended hierarchy).

So how can we explain the examples of people who seem to be far below self-realization, and yet still able to help others in a meaningful and selfless sense?

Interestingly, this concept seems to be increasingly used as an effective way to help people deal with depression, low self-esteem, poor life circumstances, etc., and it almost turns the essential Maslow model on its head: it is In other words, by helping others, a person helps himself to improve and develop as well.

The principle has also been applied very little to school development, which, as part of its own development, has been encouraged and allowed to "teach" other younger children (which can certainly be interpreted as their performance at a self-realization, selflessly helping others). Children without affection, theoretically trying to belong and be accepted (level 3 - belonging) were actually very good at helping other children, despite their own negative feelings and problems.

Under certain circumstances, a person strives to meet his needs at level 3 - belonging, seems capable of self-fulfillment - Level 5 (and perhaps beyond that, at

'transcendence') for selflessly helping others, and at the same time beginning to satisfy their own needs for belonging and self-esteem.

These examples demonstrate the need for careful interpretation and application of Maslow's model. The hierarchy of needs is not a tailor's box, but it does provide a wonderfully useful framework for analyzing and trying to understand the subtleties as well as the broader aspects of human behavior and growth.

TO

Maslow's work and ideas extend far beyond the hierarchy of needs. Maslow's concept of self-fulfillment directly relates to current challenges and opportunities for employers and organizations to provide true meaning, purpose, and true personal development for their employees for life, not just for work.

Maslow saw these issues fifty years ago: the fact that employees have a basic human need and a right to strive for self-fulfillment, just as corporate directors and owners do.

Increasingly, successful organizations and employers will be the ones that truly care about, understand, encourage, and enable their people to grow personally toward self-fulfillment, far beyond traditional job-related and development training., and of course goes beyond the old style of Theory X, management autocracy, which remains the basis for most organized employment today.

The best employers and modern organizations are beginning to learn at last: that sustainable success is based on a serious and compassionate commitment to help people identify, pursue and achieve their unique personal potential.

When people grow as people, they automatically become more effective and valuable as employees. In fact, practically all personal growth, whether in a hobby, a talent or special interest, or a new experience, produces new skills, attributes, behaviors and wisdom that is directly transferable to any type of job.

The best modern employers recognize this and, as such, support the development of their staff in whatever direction the person seeks to grow and be more accomplished.

R

When you read Maslow's work, and especially when you hear about it, the relevance of his thinking in our modern world of work and management is amazing.

The term 'Maslow's Hammer' is a simple quick example. Also called 'The Law of Act', the expression refers metaphorically to a person who has only one 'tool' (known or available / learned approach or method) and thus then treats each situation in the same way. Other authors have made similar observations, but

'Maslow's Hammer' is the most widely referenced commentary on the subject. Maslow's quote is from his 1966 book The Psychology of Science. "I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail…" ("Maslow's Hammer '- Abraham Maslow, 1966)

Maslow's explanations and interpretations of the human condition remain fundamentally helpful in understanding and dealing with all sorts of behavioral and social questions (forty or fifty years after his death).

You will see great importance above all of your ideas regarding current job challenges such as psychological engagement and leadership ethics, and it even extends to globalization and society.

Maslow is obviously most famous for his Hierarchy needs theory, for good reason, as it is a wonderfully simple and elegant model for understanding many aspects of human motivation, especially in the workplace. The simplicity of the model, however, tends to limit appreciation of Maslow's vision and humanity, which are still remarkably penetrating and sensitive today.

P

Peter Drucker is known as the creator of management as a discipline in its own right. He was born in 1909 in Vienna, and was educated both there and in England before emigrating to the US in 1937. When he became Professor of Management at New York University in 1950, he was, in his own words, «The first person in any part of the world who had as such a title to teach such a subject.

Drucker's innovative management book on General Motors, the Corporation's concept, was published in 1946. In it, he stated that management was not a rank or a title, but a responsibility and a practice that can be taught and must be studied, like other disciplines. Drucker is a prolific writer who has coined new phrases and introduced new concepts that have firmly established the facts of the administration's life. His two famous books, The Practice of Management (1954) and Tasks of Management, Responsibilities and Practices (1973), describe his management philosophy and approach, and are also the textbooks that teach the reader how to lead. Its five basic management principles are:

1. Adjustment Goals Organization Motivation and Communication Establish Performance Measurements Developing People.

Despite his advanced age, Drucker has continued to contribute fresh ideas, editorial management challenges for the 21st century in 1999. He has a knack for presenting concepts and ideas clearly and persuasively to his audience, and is eminently citable.

The best way to predict the future is to create it.

A manager is responsible for the application and performance of knowledge.

The most important management contribution that has to be made in the 21st century is: increasing knowledge of work productivity and worker knowledge.

H

The reality of Henry Mintzberg's administration

The nature of management work was published in 1973 (based on his research doctoral thesis). It was created by describing the ripples of what managers actually do rather than the theory of what they do, what they say they do, or what they should be doing.

There are really no tangible posts where I can stop and say, "now my job is done" the manager is a person with ongoing concern. In practice, Mintzberg found that managers' work occurs in very short episodes, is highly fragmented, often interrupted, and short-lived. Managers are not systematic, planners thoughtful, but prefer (and gravitate toward) activities that are current, specific, well-defined, and not routine. The complexity of organizations means that managers are forced to brevity, fragmentation, and superficiality.

They focus on what is current and tangible in their work, even despite the complex problems faced by many organizations that call for reflection and a forward-looking perspective.

The reality of managerial behavior is messy and not in line with the rational model. In practice, administrators use a narrow model of decision-making rationality.

Since 1973, Mintzberg, a professor at Montreal's McGill University, has remained iconoclastic and provocative, and has solicited his attention on a variety of subjects. In its own field, strategy, which has remained at the forefront of the debate. An advocate of strategy as a creative and emerging process, which consistently defended it against those trying to reduce it to prescription analysis. His value to 21st century managers is found in his constant and challenging questioning of received wisdom, and his emphasis on people and relationships within organizations.

The MBA is really about business, which would be great unless people leave these programs thinking they have been trained to do the management. There really are no tangible milestones where you can stop and say, now my job is done, the manager is a person with ongoing concern.

And the problem is not only that they are not trained to manage, but that they are given a totally wrong impression of what management is, namely decision-making through analysis. The impression they get from what they have studied is that people's skills don't really matter.

The global style is not global, it is American. The problem is that everywhere, people think that the universal form of management is what happens in the United States. However, each place has its own different style

P

The learning organization

The youngest thinker in this article, Peter Senge was born in 1947. His 1990 book The Fifth Discipline popularized the concept of "learning organization" and brought it to the forefront of managerial thinking. Senge describes learning in an organization as a place where:

People continually expand their ability to create the results they really want, where new and expansive thought patterns are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning to see the whole picture.

In an environment of rapid change, Senge maintains, only those organizations that have the flexibility and the ability to adapt will survive, and to outperform the competition, organizations must achieve the commitment of all employees, regardless of level, and foster their learning capacity.

Being a true learning organization, it requires a change of mentality to allow the organization not only to survive, but also to acquire the capacity to continue creating. Learning organizations must master five basic disciplines.

1. Systemic thinking - central to learning organization, philosophy is the ability to see the whole, rather than focus on the parts. Self-control - the ability to live in 'a continuous learning mode', which brings self-confidence the individual, who is not afraid to admit ignorance and the need to grow Mental models - deeply rooted assumptions, generalizations or even photographs and images that influence the way we understand the world and the way we act The shared vision of a Building - a genuine vision that encourages people to excel and learn because they want. Learning Team - because people have to be able to act together and learn from each other in order to achieve maximum creativity and innovation.

Within the learning organization, the leader is not so much a decision maker and motivator as he is a designer, administrator and teacher. Senge's learning organization is hard to find in practice, and he disagrees with the need to offer short-term benefits to shareholders. However, the 20th and 21st centuries are the times of rapid movement, when knowledge and the ability to come together to create and innovate are very scarce. If it is not yet a reality, the learning organization's aspiration has helped many individuals and organizations that focus on learning as a benefit, rather than a cost, and it will be interesting to see if it is true that learning organizations are develop during the course of our lives.

Sources:

Frederick Winslow Taylor (1911) Principles of Scientific Administration. Harper and Brothers

Fayol, H. (1949). General and Industrial Management. Martino Fine Books.

Wren, DA, Bedeian, AG, Brisa, JD (2002). The foundations of Henri Fayol's administrative theory. Management decision, vol. 40 pp. 906 - 918

Weber, M. Theory of social and economic organization. New York: Free Press, 1947. Abraham Maslow. Hierarchy of Needs original concept from 1954

Peter Drucker Sixth Edition (2002). The Effective Executive: The Ultimate Guide to Getting Things Done Right. Harper collins

Henry MIntzberg (2013). Simply Management: What do managers do and can it be done better? Pearson Education.

Dilan Robinson (2005) Administration Theorists Thinkers for the 21st Century?

Download the original file