Value of Flexible Management Essay Example

of others, including employees, in decision-making. On the other hand, the laissez-faire style involves minimal involvement by the manager in resource direction. Ultimately, one’s management style is highly influenced by personal traits, as outlined in Silverthorne’s work.

It is important for managers to understand their personal style of management and in what situations they will be effective. This article suggests that a manager's dominant style of management limits their effectiveness, and because of personal dispositions, managers cannot change themselves. Therefore, they should align themselves with situations that are compatible with their style of management. However, this approach is impractical in reality.

It can be difficult to select the right environment to work in, and as a result, managing effectively is key. The best management style depends on the business's culture and the task, employees, and resources at hand. This highlights the importance of adapting to the current circumstances to ensure efficient management. This will be the main focus of the following discussion.

Effective management involves the ability to adapt techniques to suit various situations, in contrast with many who adhere to a dominant style. Autocratic Management, also known as Directive Management, affords managers the greatest degree of control and decision-making power over resources. This style involves setting strict protocols and utilizing checks and balances to ensure adherence. Managers give orders, dictate tasks, assign roles and responsibilities, set standards, define expectations, and establish deadlines.

Autocratic management involves one-way communication from management to resources. The manager dictates goals with set deadlines to track progress, making them the primary decision maker. The goal of this style of management is to direct resources towards achieving a defined objective.

According to Coye &

Belohlav (1995), when a problem arises, the resources report to the manager who then evaluates the options and makes a decision regarding the direction and action to be taken. The autocratic style of management requires detailed instructions on changes that need to be made to the final product. Rewards and recognition from autocratic managers are based on how well people follow directions. The United States Military is an excellent example of the autocratic style of management in action, where the ranking system sets the stage for the role of the manager. In line with a strict chain of command, individuals with higher ranks are responsible for directing the actions of subordinates (See Exhibit A).

Within the U.S. Air Force, Airmen and other subordinates are responsible for executing the orders of their commanding officers, without any opportunity for discussion or idea exchange. These managers, also referred to as senior officers, issue precise directives and anticipate that their resources will be utilized accordingly. Objectives are established by military authorities and subsequently disseminated throughout the hierarchy.

All strategic planning is carried out by top-ranking individuals who also hold the power to award military personnel with progressive ranks based on their proper execution of assigned duties. Although the autocratic style of management may appear restrictive, it offers several advantages. The clear direction provided by autocratic managers eliminates ambiguity regarding expectations, leading to prompt task completion and consistent product quality.

Despite the advantages of employing autocratic management, it also has its drawbacks such as denying employees or resources the opportunity to contribute to their assigned tasks (Vanderburg, 2004). Consequently, this can cause detachment between the producer and the product, with resources feeling undervalued

and lacking ownership over their work.

As shown in Exhibit B, a high turnover rate and decrease in motivation can occur. The participative style of management differs from autocratic by involving others in the decision-making process. Instead of solely making decisions, a participative manager may include subordinates, peers, superiors, and other stakeholders. By considering the views of others, decisions are often made based on majority agreement (Coleman, 2004).

Despite the significant focus on external sources, the primary participatory activity occurs within the immediate team of peers. The participative manager transfers less control and direction to subordinates, and the extent of this influence may vary based on personal preferences and beliefs. This management approach is also known as the democratic style and emphasizes extensive communication.

In Coleman's (2004) view, managers and resources engage in a meaningful exchange of ideas and feedback, with both parties actively involved in decision-making and striving for consensus. This collaborative approach extends to goal setting, as participative managers incorporate external input into their plans while considering the feasibility of achieving these objectives. Ultimately, this management style reflects a concern for the well-being and success of all stakeholders involved - including subordinates, peers, superiors, and other resources.

Participative management is a style that promotes inclusive decision-making and constructive feedback from managers. It involves discussions to determine the appropriate course of action when there are proposed changes to the product. This approach also encompasses positive feedback, reflecting its paternal attributes.

Participative management style is widely used in many large corporations, including IBM, Home Depot, Pitney Bowes, and many others. This style involves incorporating the performance review process, with a focus on discussing employee performance, celebrating strengths

and addressing weaknesses, given the active role of subordinates in this approach.

Operating in cohorts and subgroups, working as teams, and having access to year-end performance reviews and company management are common practices among employees. Participative management can be especially useful for complex decision-making that requires diverse specialist skills. This approach can improve job satisfaction and work quality for the overall business. In addition to fostering a sense of ownership and pride, it motivates employees to increase productivity and achieve their goals.

Participatory management can result in a slower decision-making process and the pressure of consensus may not always lead to the best decision for the business. Additionally, it can lead to unqualified parties being responsible for decision-making and the potential influence of politics and hidden agendas can act as a barrier to optimal business decisions (See Exhibit C). On the other hand, laissez-faire management is a style of management that involves minimal direction from the manager, with a "hands-off" approach to resource management (McCoy, 1996).

In laissez-faire management, resources like employees have autonomy to oversee their respective areas of business, leading to avoidance of managerial responsibilities and unorganized delegation. The communication is limited to horizontal and flat interactions, with less frequency compared to autocratic and participatory management styles. This lack of communication results in no chance for setting goals.

According to McCoy (1996), resources in laissez-faire management must have internal motivation and determine their own goals. This type of management involves subordinates and resources making all decisions, as managers are uninvolved in the production processes. Additionally, unilateral decision-making is incorporated within the framework. In this approach, managers do not provide feedback or rewards for a

job well done. A practical instance of laissez-faire management can be observed in college partnerships.

Examples of cooperative efforts with comparable expertise include law firms, private medical practices, and consulting firms. The effectiveness of laissez-faire management can be seen in emergency room doctors who are trained equally and act without explicit instruction when a patient arrives.

Laissez-faire management is best implemented in a workplace where staff members are skilled, educated, and experienced. This promotes self-motivation and pride among employees, enabling them to thrive autonomously. It works well with dependable and seasoned workers. However, it can be detrimental when resources require guidance or lack experience as the absence of a manager could lead to employee insecurity.

The manager's failure to give regular feedback to employees on their performance and room for improvement results in a lack of direction and focus, ultimately leading to dissatisfaction among the staff and a negative reputation for the company (refer to Exhibit D). After evaluating the three primary management styles, there is likely one that reigns supreme, with participative management being a strong contender. This style was the prevailing model in the 1970s (Robbins, 2005).

According to Keef (2004), the participative style of management combines qualities from democratic styles of management and is commonly used in business models. It is likely the most recognizable style of management, and many managers aspire to emulate it. Despite its popularity, there are limitations such as slow business processes and challenging decision-making, which can undermine a business's best interests. Keef does not believe that the participative style of management has reached perfection.

While participative management is a popular style, relying solely on it may not be the most effective approach.

Rather, there is a shift towards embracing versatility as the preferred method, according to Sumukadas ; Sawhney (2004). Managers should apply the most effective management style for each situation, rather than using a one-size-fits-all approach. This flexible approach is particularly important in today's rapidly changing business environment that is influenced by technology, global trading and various other dynamics. Effective managers must adapt to their surroundings and be willing to depart from traditional decision-making methods to stay competitive and get the best returns on their investments. In this diverse business world, one manager may have multiple responsibilities such as hiring, project management and resource development.

For effective management, it is essential for this particular manager to adopt an autocratic attitude when handling new employees, by giving detailed expectations. However, during project management, a participative style would work best, given that projects entail a team effort where each member contributes his/her expertise. To obtain maximum results, it is advisable for the manager to delegate resource development to experts in the industry and adopt a laissez-faire management approach. Ultimately, for optimal outcomes, the manager must be versatile and adopt the most appropriate style in every situation.

Bobby Knight and Mike Krzyzewski, also known as Coach K, are noteworthy for their managerial skills despite not being traditional business industry managers. In the realm of college basketball, where their objectives are achieving national championship glory and their available resources are youthful athletes, they excel. Despite having dissimilar management styles, both coaches are widely acknowledged as successful figures in college basketball. Their shared belief in management’s capacity to adapt to different situations has helped them become effective leaders. This flexibility is demonstrated

through key behaviors they exemplify in their coaching styles.

Both coaches have a deep understanding of personal assumptions and human nature, which helps them to recognize how their own behavior and automatic responses may be influenced. By being aware of their personal tendencies and management styles, they are able to effectively adapt their leadership skills and manage any situation that may arise. Coach Bobby Knight was well known for his autocratic management style with his college basketball players, which involved throwing chairs, yelling, getting physical, and closely monitoring team activities in order to secure wins.

Although Coach Knight's management style evolved over time as he became more confident in his team's capabilities (Sliverthorne, 2006, p. 2), his approach was initially strict and controlling. However, he adapted his management style to meet the unique needs of each athlete and ultimately became known for his tough-love and versatility in leading his college basketball team to numerous victories. In contrast to Coach Knight, Coach Mike Krzyzewski's management style was overtly defined as being at the opposite end of the spectrum.

Coach K adhered to a laissez-faire management style, as he believed that individuals possess a natural inclination to perform at their highest level and have the desire to succeed. According to Silverthorne (2006, p.1), Coach K's optimism inspired his players, but he also possessed the ability to motivate and mobilize his team when necessary.

Coach Knight was adept at strengthening and ruling over his players more authoritarianly, and he adapted his management methods to suit the challenges and assets available, resulting in numerous victories. Interestingly, this account of manager analysis pertains to Coach Knight's tenure as a basketball coach at West Point

in the 1960s, during which he enlisted a youthful Mike Krzyzewski.

Silverthorne (2006) states that Coach K possessed strong leadership potential despite not being the team's top athlete. After leaving the Army, he became a graduate assistant under Knight at Indiana and viewed him as a valuable mentor. Despite having contrasting coaching methods, these coaches have maintained a close friendship for years and achieved numerous college basketball triumphs by adapting to varied circumstances rather than relying on a uniform approach.

Effective management involves three main types of approaches. Resources that require specific direction should be handled through an autocratic approach, while peers and engaged employees benefit from a participative approach. High-level experts are best managed with a laissez-faire approach. Successful managers like Bobby Knight and Coach Krzyzewski have shown that adaptability is key to maximizing return on investment with resources, by meeting the unique needs of individuals. Ultimately, survival and success depend on being adaptable.

Coleman (2004) delves into the subject of power within organizational contexts in his article titled "Implicit Theories of Organizational Power and Priming Effects on Managerial Power-Sharing Decisions: An Experimental Study."The website of Columbia University's International Center for Cooperation and Conflict Resolution (ICCCR) hosts Coleman's (2000) article, titled "Abstract Implicit Theories," which spans pages 297-321. The publication can be accessed via http://www.tc.columbia.edu/icccr/Documents/Coleman/AbstractImplicitTheories.pdf until October 24, 2007. Coye also presents relevant material but no date is given for their work.

W. and J.A. Belohlav conducted a study titled "An Exploratory Analysis of Employee Participation" in 1995 and published their findings in Group and Organization Management journal, volume 20.

Greenfield, W. M. (2004) explores the relationship between decision making and employee engagement within the range of pages

4-17.

The publication titled "Employment Relations Today" featuring authors S. Kaner and L. Lind is available in volume 31, issue 2, with a page range from 13 to 24.The Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-making, published by New Society Publishers on Gabriola Island, BC, Canada in 1996, and "Generating Quality Interaction" by L. Keef in 2004 both discuss ways to enhance group decision-making.

McCoy, T. J. (1996) emphasizes the importance of creating an open book organization where employees can think and act like business partners in Occupational Health ; Safety 73, no. 5:30–31.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall published the 8th edition of Essentials of Organizational Behavior by Robbins, S. P., while Amacom published it in New York.

Lessons from The Classroom by Silverthorne, S. (2006) includes insights on management from Bobby Knight and "Coach K" in Boston, Massachusetts.

N. Sumukadas can be accessed through http://hbswk.hbs.edu/pdf/item/5464.pdf, as of October 27, 2007.

, and R. Sawhney wrote a paper titled "Workforce Agility through Employee Involvement" in 2004 and published it in IIE Transactions 36, no.

In the publication "Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society" from 2004, author D. Vanderburg describes the story of Semco, a company that focused on humanizing work during the years 1011-1021.

The information provided is from two sources: Weiss, W. H.'s "Improving Employee Performance: Major Supervisory Responsibility" article in Supervision (1998), and the website http://www.brainfuel.tv/maverick-the-story-of-semco-an-amazing-workplace accessed on October 24, 2007.

Exhibit A displays a comprehensive List of Military Rank for the Navy, Army, Air Force, and Marines. The list encompasses Officers, Warrant Officers, and Enlisted Personnel grades with titles like Grand Admiral, Fleet Admiral, Chief of Operations, General, Vice Admiral, Lieutenant General, Rear Admiral, Commodore, Captain O-1

to Captain O-10 ranks in addition to Colonel , Commander , Major General , Lieutenant Commander , First Lieutenant , Second Lieutenant , Chief Warrant Officer 1-5 rank levels along with Master Chief Petty Officer , Sergeant Major and more. The rank list highlights the significance of Flexible Management across all military branches. Furthermore,it is stated that an effective manager's ability to adapt their techniques according to different circumstances defines them as competent rather than having a dominant style of management.

III. Body:
a. Definition of autocratic style:
i. Illustrations of scenarios where this management style is necessary.
b.

This text discusses two management styles: participatory and laissez-faire. It defines each style and provides examples of situations in which they are appropriate. The text also mentions historical examples of successful managers who adapted to either the situation or went against the typical management model.

Example 2 iii. Anti-Model IV. In conclusion, restate the thesis and summarize the importance of adapting to situational nuances. V. Display relevant exhibits VI.

References