add another 1000 words to the essay

Anonymous
timer Asked: Dec 13th, 2018
account_balance_wallet $30

Question Description

There are already 1000 words in the essay, please add 1000 more words to the essay. I need totally 2000 words for this essay.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

MANAGEMENT FAYOL AND MINTZBERG THEORY ON MANAGEMENT By Class: Management and Organization Professor: School: City: Date: 1 MANAGEMENT 2 FAYOL AND MINTZBERG THEORY ON MANAGEMENT Management has had different interpretations from different perspectives by theorists. Most of these theorists describe management as act of getting work done through people efficiently and effectively. Fayol and Mintzberg theories complement each other. Fayol says management system is a closed system. Mintzberg adds that the actual world is more than this. The real world is an open system with multiple dynamics and interactions. Fayol’s bureaucratic approach needs Mintzberg’s flexibility to handle modern day contingencies faced by managers in organizations. Mintzberg considers the image of management which was developed from Fayol as one of folklore. Over the years many managers in organizations across the world have been introduced to Fayol’s theory. However many arguments prove Fayol’s theory more useful in practice of management. Wren, D. A., Bedeian, A. G. , Breeze, J. D. (2002). Fayol said that managers should keep the morale of their employees high and keep them motivated so they can perform at their best. He believed that by focusing on management practices he would minimize misunderstanding and increase efficiency in organization and started working on 14 principles of management. Fayol gave us management as we would like it to be and Mintzberg gave us management as it is. In so doing, it promulgates a set of new constructions of managerial behavior – preferred managerial style (management as we would like it to be) and enacted managerial style (management as it is). Fayol’s observations led him to specify managerial roles and what they should do to achieve efficiency. Based on this observation there is a belief that managers are contemplative and methodological planners. In real world, managers adapt to their role and their behavior represents heterogeneity to action in specific context. MANAGEMENT 3 It can be noted that the work of the two theorists represent different views which are not competing. The high level view of perceived inter-relationships shows significant extent to which each of the models contain elements that represent similar ideas that support each other. The different perspectives on management given by Fayol on the functions of management, management tasks, role and control, which are logically related descriptions but distinct layers of management. Thus, for a given set of roles carried out by managers, certain management functions need to be carried out. In the same way, the manager’s roles of motivating staff – including training – must go hand in hand with the activities they aim at achieving in the future – planning, organizing, controlling and coordinating. This suggests that the theories of Fayol and Mintzberg represent different levels of reality than real realities. Mintzberg’s contribution is on managerial work where he asks what managers do and then answers the question in terms of what he describes as working roles of managers. He says the work of a manager is not that of the organization but the specified work of maintaining the organization. To him, managers are in charge of organizations that they manage. In this way, an organization needs a manager to ensure its purpose is served best as well as maintaining its stability. The manager is a link between the organization and its surrounding. Mintzberg, H. (2004). Organization management reforms are possible in the modern world by translation of the theories given by Fayol and Mintzberg when managers understand implementation of managerial and management behavior. Fayol implies bureaucracy and Mintzberg argues for flexible onsite dynamic interactions. It is noted also that this bureaucracy includes a ceremonialist process to go about things in all serviceable areas and tends to be rigid and slow to change adaptations with reliance on top down control. MANAGEMENT 4 Fayol’s descriptive functions exist only as a guide to different situations. He prescribed management as a science by giving definitions believed to be enacted in a systematic fashion. Mintzberg asks whether managers are effective, not the management function. He notes that managers fail if they are a poor fit for the role. This is true of all roles. What it takes to be a successful role-occupant is a real question. However, if management is a tool, then we want to know how to use it effectively regardless of who uses it. Role-occupants must achieve their goals to be judged effective. However, it is possible to manage effectively even if goals are not achieved. He notes that effective managers and effective management are different roles. Wren, D. A., Bedeian, A. G. , Breeze, J. D. (2002). When Mintzberg started his research, execution was the sole role requirement from managers but in today’s management roles innovation is very critical. We no longer consider what a manager does managing since they can as well participate in doing as they manage. From the foregoing, Mintzberg has focused on the role of a manager. He found that managers communicate more informally, show bias of action and engage in brief. He claims that observation makes his model of management assumption-free but he does in fact assume that managing should be equated with what managers do. It is because they spend so little time formally planning, organizing and controlling that he rejects this image of the manager. Mintzberg, H. (1990). In conclusion, even if Mintzberg says his theory on management is different from the theory of Fayol, they are not totally the same but supplement each other given they express similar thoughts. The only difference comes in the way the two theories are narrated. Mintzberg was very critical of Fayol’s theory terming it as folklore. He says management is what managers do and not about functions. He however recognizes managers as planners, controller, organizers and coordinators of people – one of the roles Fayol gave in his theory. Fayol’s theory can be seen MANAGEMENT 5 as the original foundation for management which acts as a discipline and also as a profession to modern managers in the organizations. He advocated for management education. His theory is valuable and relevant for organizational leaders because he himself practiced management and the same theories worked for him and the people he managed and worked with. His theory of management functions aligns well with strategic leadership and management models and theories. From the work of henry Fayol as one of folklore rather than fact however, it could be argued that the image portrayed by Fayol is superior to that of Mintzberg, and the latter's description is of rather ineffective management. MANAGEMENT 6 Reference Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers, not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of managing and management development. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Mintzberg, H. (1990). The Manager’s Job: Folklore and Fact; Leadership- HBR Mar- Apr 1990 Wren, D. A., Bedeian, A. G. , Breeze, J. D. (2002). The foundations of Henri Fayol’s administrative theory. Management Decision, Vol. 40 Iss: 9, pp.906 – 918 ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

ProfessorMyron
School: Cornell University

hello. Please find the below file and ask me for any possible enhancement. Otherwise if its fine, kindly invite me for more tasks. Thankyou.

FAYOL AND MINTZBERG THEORY ON MANAGEMENT

FAYOL AND MINTZBERG THEORY ON MANAGEMENT

By

Class: Management and Organization
Professor:
School:
City:
Date:

1

FAYOL AND MINTZBERG THEORY ON MANAGEMENT

2

FAYOL AND MINTZBERG THEORY ON MANAGEMENT
Management has had different interpretations from different perspectives by theorists.
Most of these theorists describe management as act of getting work done through people
efficiently and effectively. Fayol and Mintzberg theories complement each other. Fayol says
management system is a closed system. Mintzberg adds that the actual world is more than this.
The real world is an open system with multiple dynamics and interactions. Fayol’s bureaucratic
approach needs Mintzberg’s flexibility to handle modern day contingencies faced by managers in
organizations. Mintzberg considers the image of management which was developed from Fayol
as one of folklore.
Mintzberg wasn’t really satisfied with what Fayol claimed the work of managers is. His
theory is developed from a more practical perspective and have lots of managers evaluated to
really consider what it is that they do in a day and what it really entails. Mintzberg got managers
from all levels and at different countries to conduct the research. He came up with three roles
which managers documented in their line of working and which they were mostly observed
doing. (Mintzberg,1971), viewed the management roles theory as one that offers a complement
to the general roles of Fayol which can be said to outline only what manger’s jobs entails.
Interpersonal roles as defined by Mintzberg (1989), are the roles that involve people and
other duties that entails providing information and ideas. Due to authority and responsibility that
the manager has over his subordinates, he acts as a figurehead, leader, and liaison. He has the
responsibility to fulfill the duties of figurehead which means he has to be the head of the
organization in legal and ceremonial responsibilities. Such attending a colleagues wedding or
burial, this may not sound very important to an organization but it is very critical in enhancing

FAYOL AND MINTZBERG THEORY ON MANAGEMENT

3

the interrelations of colleagues and giving them a feeling of belonging. The manager acts as a
leader that is they are accountable for the work done by subordinates and they manage
performance. A manager is supposed to allocate responsibility and provide leadership to the
group. As a liaison, the manager acts as a bridge between the external and internal environment
for the benefit of the organization.
The informational role, on the other hand, involves receiving, and distribution of
information to the subordinates and in the organization. The responsibility under this role is to
monitor, disseminate and be a spokesman. As ...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Top quality work from this guy! I'll be back!

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags
Study Guides

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors