Essential Of Management
The managers should possess excellent professional and individual skills no one can deny. However, what these skills are and how they work in real-life workplace environments is still a matter of hot debate. Professionals and scholars in organizational studies describe and evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of different management styles and their applicability in different organizational contexts, which implies that there is no perfect managerial style and any manager can become a successful CEO. At the same time, there is a wealth of literature on the topic of managerial skills. It appears that a good manager would be able to comprise and utilize the five different mind-sets, to create a well-integrated picture of organizational environment and to use it for the sake of achieving the major organizational objectives.
Generally, management is about the four basic functions: planning, organizing, leading, and controlling (Bateman & Snell, 2004). Planning involves a logical procedure of thinking about the goals and possible pathways for achieving them; organizing implies the need for a manager to structure the staff and resources in a way that would make them effective and lead to the desired goal; leading is associated with but is not limited to the manager’s ability to motivate and persuade followers; and controlling requires that managers evaluate how plans are being implemented and to what outcomes they lead (Bateman & Snell, 2004). In this complex environment, a good manager is not simply expected to plan, organize, lead, and control, but to broaden the scope of the managerial activity and to use his managerial potential to the fullest. DuBrin (2008) writes that successful managerial skills actually comprise the five different mind-sets, which any successful manager must possess: reflective, analytical, worldly, collaboration, and active. In other words, a successful manager must be able to stop and reflect on their achievements and failures, to analyze the organizational environment, in which he (she) is bound to operate, to understand the contexts and culture in which decisions are to be taken, to manage relationships between people, and to make necessary changes (DuBrin, 2008). Although both managers discussed within the article are aimed to make changes and both seem to possess a good analytical mind, neither of them looks like an appropriate candidate for promotion; and there are several reasons for that.
Mr. Jager is obviously the man of action. “Mr. Jager’s supporters cite his turnaround of P&G’s troubled business in Japan. Mr. Jager is also known as the architect of P&G’s highly successful everyday low pricing strategy” (Stern, 1994). As a result, Mr. Jager is one of the few who possess skills necessary to analyze the contexts and environments, in which he works, and to take decisions that fit into these environments. However, Mr. Jager is not about human relationships, and the fact that he is ready to sacrifice his employees for the sake of the company’s profitability does not create an image of a consensual partner. With the lack of consensus, and with such rigid attitudes toward change, Mr. Jager may become the sword of Damocles in the company’s way to success. Everything is different with Mr. Pepper, who views Mr. Jager as the example of a harsh leadership style and adheres to the principles of generosity and personal attraction (Stern, 1994). He has broad practical experience in management and the one, who would choose management features other than toughness and fear (Stern, 1994). It is clear that Mr. Pepper devotes time to reflection and analysis but is too much concentrated on the need to maintain general agreement, which is virtually impossible. In his striving to lead and organize available resources, Mr. Pepper tends to forget that his strategies cannot satisfy everyone. He is collaborative and worldly, and even active, but not to the extent, which would make him a good CEO. In light of this information, and taking into account the company’s desire to preserve both employees, who successfully compensate for each other’s professional deficiencies, the company should choose the third person as its next leader.
Conclusion
A successful manager is expected to possess excellent skills necessary to plan, organize, lead, and control business. At the same time, a successful manager is expected to be reflective, analytical, worldly, collaborative, and active. In the discussed article, the two managers represent the two ultimate forms of managerial style, and neither of them can become a good candidate for a promotion. At the same time, where the company seeks to preserve both employees, and taking into account that both successfully compensate for each other’s professional deficiencies, a third person should become the company’s next leader.
Processing your request, Please wait....
