Management And Organizational Behavior Responses

Planning

Discuss about the Management and Organizational Behavior Responses.

The chief aim of the considered report is to present and analyze the findings gained from several field studies and interviews with numerous managers. Organizational behavior is the primarily the study of the process in which people in a business organization interacts with each other to establish an effective entrepreneurial culture within the enterprise. Management is the main aspect that determines the way in which internal stakeholders will systematically interact with each other (De Toni and Comello 2013). Hence, management plays a vital role in the case of creating a convenient organizational culture through maintaining an appropriate organizational behavior within a certain enterprise. The purpose of the present report is, therefore, valuable indeed as it cultivates some significant research findings with the help of acquired resources.

To produce an in-depth analysis, the report has initially started with the analyzing the findings gained from the interview questions based on the method of organizational planning. After that, the report moved on to evaluate research findings obtained from an interview with Mr. Moore on the subject matter of organizing, leading and controlling business operations and organizational behavior. Each of these assessments has been prepared considering several critical theories in the context of organizational behavior and management practices. Most importantly, the entire report has been constructed on the answers obtained from the interviews which have been conducted by a particular manager of Macquarie Group of Australia. Questions for the interview rely on prospects like motivation, individual job role, plan and procedures for maintenance.

A firm and efficient management are built upon four key aspects including planning, organizing, leading and controlling. These four possible facets of management are the pillar of a fruitful organization behavior culminating inconvenient organizational culture. The initial step of a sound management always starts with a thorough planning. As per Shafritz, Ott, and Jang (2015), experienced managers always prefer to make a scheduled plan before stepping into the field of action.

As per the theory of management of Henry Fayol, planning is the essential part of a sound management that initializes the other four aspects of management which are organizing, coordinating and commanding. Based on Parker (2016), the strategic business planning acts like a route map for organizational management through which managers can identify their existing situation about internal and external stakeholders. Furthermore, strategic business planning supports management to determine what the ultimate destination of achievement. Therefore, as per Fayol’s theory of the Directorate, Strategic Planning is the basic process with the help of which a manager can envision the future scope of progression. Through this theory, Fall indicates that a convenient business planning includes the procedure of setting objectives and thereby the strategic steps to achieve them. As opined by Booth (2015), in contrast to strategic planning, the long-term business plan is more relative to the theoretical concept of planning in management.

Theory

However, strategic planning is being frequently used by organizations currently. In strategic planning as per Fayol’s theory, managers start from the desired end. The process is a backward working method in which management always asks about the probable rectifications which can be applied to the previous stage of the current position (Hatch and Cunliffe 2013). Fool examines planning to be the beginner through which      an apt plan of action can be taken.  

According to the finding gained from the answer from the managing director of Macquarie group, it seems clear that the company prefers to promote a profitable growth which is long term. Moreover, the management follows a non-hierarchical organizational structure, based on which the management group is divided into six particular groups. Macquarie Group’s individual style of planning is further run by operating the individual business to achieve the chief objective of the company. By the answer of the respectable manager of Macquarie Group, one of the prime aims of the company is to make a steady and concise relationship with their clients (Macquarie.com 2016).

The interview data regarding the questions of planning is indicative of the fact that the enterprise prefers to follow the long-term planning process, considering which the management groups always evaluate their current status of working on a daily basis. Furthermore, the findings from the interview round infer that the company’s six individual control groups make plan o a daily basis to work closely together to strengthen the customer relationship. The findings say that the planning framework is mainly produced by four management groups which are risk management, financial management, management of corporate operations and legal management.

Most significantly, the findings implicate that planning framework of these four groups is primarily established by plans. However, the manager has disclosed little information about his plan in management. Therefore, the analysis will only analyze planning prospects of the company only. 

Based on the findings on the questions of planning which says that the enterprise’s planning process follows the long term method to achieve a maintain the volume of profitability. The theory of management of Fayol indicates that the process of planning is the preliminary phase of a systematic management that schedules every organizational task carefully (McGrath and Bates 2013). The planning style as per the finding says that the respected manager and the very company considers to firmly follow the management theory of Fall as they consider the planning process to be the introductory part of the entire process of making a strong customer relationship.

Findings

However, as Mr. Moore indicated that long-term acquisition is their prime objective, they give more importance to practice long-term planning process. On the other hand, the findings also say that a planning program includes a rigid framework for risk management. It is suggestive of the matter that strategic planning is also considered highly for Macquarie group as they give importance to presume probable future outcome through systematic planning.    

As stated by Miner (2015), process of organizing establishes a solid ground for stratagems proposed in the planning procedure. Organizing is basically the system of arranging and ensuring required resources which need to be supplied in time of final production (Hill, Jones and Schilling 2014).

In accordance with the theory of contingency, there is not any single way of organizing (Brigham and Ehrhardt 2013). Contingency theory indicates that the process of organizing is dependent upon several variables from both the internal and external sites of an organization. On the other side, the act of organizing matches itself with the aspect of system according to the System theory of management (Mikes and Kaplan 2014). Based on the System theory, system is the set or arrangement of distinct facets which cumulatively forms a concrete whole. Similarly, as per Fayol’s theory of management, the system of organizing is fundamentally the process of arranging all the necessary aspects to have a flawless production (Menz and Scheef 2014). In this context it is significant to note that the rudimentary process of organizing suits itself with the first essential element of open system kind. As per the key concepts of this theory, initial element of the open organizational system is the process of collecting or organizing the necessary resources like, employees, natural resources and technical equipment through which the ultimate outputs can be yield out. The use of organizing is also to gather or organize resources for a better outcome (Teller, Kock and Gemünden 2014).

Nevertheless, the butterfly effect of Chaos theory says that interconnected assignments of an organization can provide a completely different and unexpected outcome if slight change occurs in the organized elements (Söderlund 2013). Hence, as per the concept of butterfly effect it is important to keep in mind in time of talking about organizing is that, in the entire process of organizing sudden changes should not be granted without brief analysis (Boyd et al., 2012).   

The findings for the questions based on organizing at the very initial stage points that the management of Macquarie group prefers to organize their prime assignments base on the concept of annuity. In the context of business management, annuity refers to the method of ensuring a steady and reliable cash flow. Most significantly, the answers declare that the management of the enterprise has moved to adopt the price organizing or arranging style of fixed fee. Macquarie’s success in the business of investment banking relies on the company’s preference to conduct business in an annuity-style which has determined near about 70% of the quality performance from the group. The answers further demonstrate that the manager is well concerned about the enterprise’s adoption of this particular kind of business style and at the same time has practiced this particular style appropriately. The answers additionally implied that the organizing style of the group is one of the highly determining factors of the enterprise’s number one position in asset managing. Finally, the answer included one major fact that the manager prefers to select potential employees for the proposed assignments and arrange the financial resource at the introductory phase prior to step into the final action.

Analysis

According to the distinct findings regarding the organizing style of Macquarie group has maintained the annuity-style, which the higher authority believes is the main reason of their well renowned performance. As per the theory of Chaos and its conceptual aspect of butterfly effect, any sudden change in the entire organization system can produce a completely different kind of outcome (Puranam, Alexy and Reitzig, M., 2014). The findings from the answers of the manager are indicative of two major facts. One is indicative of the matter that the company has used the aspect of butterfly effect in a good sense for their decision to use the pricing arrangement of fixed fee. The other fact infers that points it clear that the new decision has worked in favor for the group. Specifically, quality performance of the respective manger is a major proof that the fixed fee style of pricing arrangement has helped to enhance the productivity.

On the other side, the findings implicate that the manger prefers to follow the open system approach of the system theory, as following this approach the manager prefers to collect the entire important asset at the very initial stage. Most interestingly, the manager’s success in management and potential contribution in establishing the enterprise to be Australia’s number one fund managing organization is synonymous with the conceptual method of open system. The initial element of the open system process is the resource collection process before planting the final input (Scott and Davis 2015). The respective manager’s style of selecting appropriate employees first as per the findings matches properly with the inaugural element of the open system. Similarly, the enterprise’s concept to take decisions to change the normal track of management to obtain better result as per different situation is evidence that the company gives priority towards the Contingency theory.   

Based on (), giving leadership or leading people is the way of encourage employees’ volume of productivity through proving relevant direction to individual personal potentialities. Leading is therefore the informal process of building a workplace culture of cooperative fashion.

As opined by Hazy (2012), leadership styles of most of the current leading organizations prefer to follow three distinct theories of the management leadership including the Contingency theory, transactional theory and transformational theory. Considering the management theory of Fall, the task of leading is more related with supporting people and encouraging them for better productivity (Hazy 2012). Based on the theoretical concept of transformational leadership, a leading manager is supposed to work with the fellow subordinates in a way which will support the workers to express their individual problem. Transformational theory helps managers to inspire the workers and recognizes the necessary changes to bring immediately (Dinh et al., 2014). Fayol’s concept regarding the task of commanding is rudimentarily based on the classic theory of transformational leadership.

Organizing

Nevertheless, the transactional theory of leadership is probably the apt concept for managerial prospect, following which a manager or leader is supposed to focus on making a successful group work. Additionally, according to the idea of the theory, a manager is supposed to control the volume of employee productivity through providing rewards or punishment (Daft 2014). The basic difference between transformational and transactional leadership is that a manager following transformational theory is more concern with to increase employee engagement through motivation whereas a manager considering transactional concept focuses on development to reach goal on a daily basis (Miner 2015).

The answers for this particular context from the respective manager are worth accomplishing. The manager has clearly illustrated that Macquarie group’s prolonged credit for holding Australia’s most appreciated fund managing finance association entirely goes to the management’s concept of making a strong leadership. As per the answers, the organization believes an appropriate leadership is the most convenient method for obtaining quality work from the employees. From the replies of the manager, it can be figured out that the person considers the motivation method for the task of mentoring others.

Moreover, for Mr. Moore motivation is not always related to verbal inspiration as rewards work more actively as a functional tool for motivation. Alongside, the response indicates that the company’s concept of leadership is related to their act of corporate governance and several managers from each group are supposed to engage in corporate governance which is a strategic aspect of reaching stakeholder expectations to hold sustainable shareholders.

From the above findings, it can be initially deduced that the manager possesses the traits of a transformational leader who prefers to provide inspirations to the subordinates for procuring better performances from them. On the other hand, the responder seems to consider giving rewards or punishment as for the person these are more functional than verbal inspirations. The above showcased attributes match well with the theoretical concepts of transactional leadership. Findings, however, has marked that for this individual organization leadership is related to the corporate governance. Therefore, leadership for the company seems to be not only used to control and direct employees as it is employed in a wider scope. Most importantly, the answers are evidence of the fact that Mr. Moore is actively involved in corporate governance. It means he has to change the model of leadership based on individual situations with different stakeholders. Hence, attributes and the design of leadership works are found have resemblance with the contingency theory.   

Theory

In the words of Northouse (2015), while planning is the initial process of establishing particular objectives and relevant methods to acquire them, controlling is the procedure of measuring and giving direction to the performances for achieving those objectives. Organizing is therefore the method of checking the errors and rectifies them to minimize the deviation standard (McGrath and Bates 2013).

Among the four major aspects of management, the task of controlling is probably the most crucial one through which a manager ensures the achievement of organizational goal. As stated by Mahmood, Basharat and Bashir (2012), a manager can hold a firm control only when the person will give equal importance in controlling organizational environment, certain procedures and principles. Following the Cybernetics theory of management, controlling is basically the task of measuring the output process based on distinct objectives. The cybernetics theory more illustrates that the method of controlling involves the task of predicts the probable impact of the powerful control actions and furthermore the ability to implement actions for reducing objective deviations (Hughes and Laryea 2013).

However, evolutions in the management theories have observed different aspects of controlling in management. The age old control theory of mainstream management implicates that management controlling should be oriented with an environment that is account dominant (Scott and Davis 2015). Nevertheless, the concepts of classical theory of management have proved unsuccessful for several times as the aspects of the theory are less reciprocate towards the socio-cultural aspects of management.

The response from the respected manager refers that controlling is relevantly used as a weapon for conflict management. The respondent has been little less responsive in time of disclosing any occurrence of ethical issues in the workplace. It shows that the manager is well cautious about the concept of organizational confidentialities in terms of organizational values. However, responses are indicative of the fact that workplace diversity is an important element for the company which is maintained well by the management for organizational growth and expansion. Additionally, the manager expressed that workplace diversity is maintained through the convincing power of controlling.

From the findings segment, it can be deduced that the management control theory of cybernetics is strictly followed by the manager. The findings say that the manager uses the controlling power for managing workforce conflict. Most importantly, controlling is the process for the manager for measuring the volume of potentiality of the supposed outputs to meet the target. The fundamental element of the management controlling aspects of Cybernetics system is measuring the output process to further predict the result of control actions. The management of this enterprise seems therefore more concern in presuming a future view of their formatted structure of processing inputs.

Findings

Conclusion

The report to analyze the findings with the help of relevant theories has brought out some key findings. The interview report initially refers that the respective responder is responsible for providing a potential contribution to the company’s present success. His active contribution indicates that his prosperous management is subjected to theoretical concepts of transaction and contingency of management and Fayol’s theory of management. Moreover, findings and analysis signifies that the very company of the respondent chooses the leadership approach to be a part of corporate governance. The findings additionally infer that organizing and planning are two major parts of the organization’s risk assessment process whereas leadership is used to provide motivation. The manager prefers to conduct field surveys to interact with the subordinates and utilize the controlling power for conflict management.

References

Booth, S.A., 2015. Crisis management strategy: Competition and change in modern enterprises. Routledge.

Boyd, B.K., Haynes, K.T., Hitt, M.A., Bergh, D.D. and Ketchen, D.J., 2012. Contingency Hypotheses in Strategic Management Research Use, Disuse, or Misuse?. Journal of Management, 38(1), pp.278-313.

Brigham, E.F. and Ehrhardt, M.C., 2013. Financial management: Theory & practice. Cengage Learning.

Chemers, M., 2014. An integrative theory of leadership. Psychology Press.

Daft, R.L., 2014. The leadership experience. Cengage Learning.

De Toni, A.F. and Comello, L., 2013. Theory of Complexity: Guidelines for Strategic Management and Supply. The SAGE Handbook of Strategic Supply Management, p.305.

Dinh, J.E., Lord, R.G., Gardner, W.L., Meuser, J.D., Liden, R.C. and Hu, J., 2014. Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly,25(1), pp.36-62.

Hatch, M.J. and Cunliffe, A.L., 2013. Organization theory: modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives. Oxford university press.

Hazy, J.K., 2012. Leadership as Process: A theory of organizing in complex adaptive systems.

Hill, C.W., Jones, G.R. and Schilling, M.A., 2014. Strategic management: theory: an integrated approach. Cengage Learning.

Hughes, W. and Laryea, S., 2013. Organizing for Sustainable Procurement: Theories, Institutions, and Practice. In Design and Management of Sustainable Built Environments (pp. 385-395). Springer London.

Macquarie.com. (2016). Macquarie Group. [online] Available at: https://www.macquarie.com [Accessed 22 Sep. 2016].

Mahmood, Z., Basharat, M. and Bashir, Z., 2012. Review of classical management theories. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education, 2(1), pp.512-5120.

McGrath, J. and Bates, B., 2013. The Little Book of Big Management Theories:… and how to use them. Pearson UK.

Menz, M. and Scheef, C., 2014. Chief strategy officers: Contingency analysis of their presence in top management teams. Strategic Management Journal, 35(3), pp.461-471.

Mikes, A. and Kaplan, R.S., 2014, October. Towards a contingency theory of enterprise risk management. AAA.

Miner, J.B., 2015. Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. Routledge.

Northouse, P.G., 2015. Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.

Parker, L.D., 2016. The global Fayol: contemporary management and accounting traces. Entreprises et histoire, (2), pp.51-63.

Puranam, P., Alexy, O. and Reitzig, M., 2014. What’s “new” about new forms of organizing?. Academy of Management Review, 39(2), pp.162-180.

Scott, W.R. and Davis, G.F., 2015. Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural and open systems perspectives. Routledge.

Shafritz, J.M., Ott, J.S. and Jang, Y.S., 2015. Classics of organization theory. Cengage Learning.

Söderlund, J., 2013. Pluralistic and processual understandings of projects and project organizing: towards theories of project temporality. Novel Approaches to Project Management Research: Translational and Transformational. CBS Press, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp.117-135.

Teller, J., Kock, A. and Gemünden, H.G., 2014. Risk management in project portfolios is more than managing project risks: A contingency perspective on risk management. Project Management Journal, 45(4), pp.67-80.