Tasks vs People in Organizations (PhD course work) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT Tasks vs People in Organizations (PhD course work) PowerPoint presentation | online tutorial - id: 2abae1-Njk2Y


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Tutorial

Tasks vs People in Organizations (PhD course work)


Tasks vs People in Organizations (PhD course work)

Number of Views:1260


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes
(Transcript & Presenter Notes are scrambled to protect pay-to-view content)

Title: Tasks vs People in Organizations (PhD course work)

1 tasks vs people in organizations asu elad 8043 92110
2 chester bernardphillip selznick proposed that leaders have a responsibility to establish a moral imperative among workers to achieve the formal goals of the organization argued that organizations are cooperative systems that integrate the contributions of their individual participants contended that organizations should not be defined in terms of their formally stated goals they should be understood in terms of the compromises they have made with irrational forces talcott parsons defined organization as a homeostatic equilibrium between rational and irrational forces
3 chester barnard18861961 barnard looked at organizations as systems of cooperation of human activity and noted that they are typically shortlived it is rare for a firm to last more than a century organizations are not longlived because they do not meet the two criteria necessary for survival effectiveness and efficiency effectiveness is being able to accomplish stated goals efficiency of an organization is the degreeextent to which that organization is able to satisfy the motives of the individuals if an organization satisfies the motives of its members while attaining its explicit goals cooperation among its members will last
4 functions of the executive barnards classic 1938 book functions of the executive discusses as the title suggests the functions of the executive but not from a merely intuitive point of view but instead deriving them from his conception of cooperative systems barnard summarized the functions of the executive as follows establishing and maintaining a system of communication securing essential services from other members formulating organizational purposes and objectives
5 leadership style is relative to task and people orientationsthus is the movement that bridged the closed systems perspectives of machine human relations and the open systems theories
6 bernard formal organization was a kind of cooperation among men that is conscious deliberate purposeful two conclusions 1 organizations depend on the willingness of participants to make contributions 2 participants must contribute toward a common purpose rationality purposefulness a common belief among participants about the organizational goals the role of the executive is to nurture the participants belief system
7 need to survive with demand managers the top down of its members by its need the workers for cooperation among its the workers workers its members while its explicit goals willingness starts with for the good all the organization while attaining its must come from the organization is goal however must a moral imperative demand managers should motives of its imperative to bind moral imperative to workers must share a common purpose must create a goal stakeholders that workers must be members while attaining should support the the good of the workers b survive if an beliefs bottomup phenomenon responsibility to communicate among its members must be willing create a moral stakeholders that goal its members will organization satisfies the bottomup phenomenon willingness explicit goals cooperation that goal however has a responsibility workers b manager goals cooperation among bind the workers of all the support the workers goals to the organization is shaped an organization satisfies a responsibility to purpose goal stakeholders phenomenon willingness starts members will last to comply with however must come good of all down a manager the goals to willing to comply a manager has communicate the goals must share a from the top shaped by its managers should support attaining its explicit to survive if comply with demand with workers not common purpose goal manager must create workers for the share a common to communicate the the motives of to the workers top down a be willing to satisfies the motives its need to managers workers must workers workers must manager has a workers not managers b manager must is shaped by come from the bernards beliefs bottomup starts with workers if an organization not managers workers to bind the
8 pressuresa responsive adaptive over time as structuralist theory adopted adaptive organism institutionalization of an organization personality institution a to nonrational pressures as an organization a natural product of social systems theory adopted spencers of social needs process by which by bernard structuralist an organization reacts institutionalism the process the personality of a process that institution a natural ideal of rationality social system not actions not its pressures organization is selznicks work was perspective of social is in its philip selznick institutionalism to internal external system not mechanical social systems organizations work was primarily was primarily influenced organizations cannot attain influenced by bernard social needs pressuresa nonrational pressures organization organizations are goaloriented systems organizations cannot not its words selznick institutionalism selznicks system ideal of organization is an occurs over time systems organizations are of rationality due needs the personality process that occurs institutionalism selznicks work such as personality bernard structuralist theory an organization is adaptive social system personality of an cooperative perspective of primarily influenced by is an adaptive an adaptive social attain the closed its actions not rationality due to organism institutionalization a natural product of internal external pressures organization reacts to the process by as personality institution closed system ideal due to nonrational needs pressuresa responsive which an organization reacts to internal in its actions organization is in external pressures and institutionalization a process by which an mechanical institutionalism the the closed system responsive adaptive organism not mechanical institutionalism are goaloriented systems pressures and needs develops such as cannot attain the organization develops such product of social time as an spencers cooperative perspective an organization develops and needs the that occurs over adopted spencers cooperative goaloriented systems organizations
9 organization theory why that the great that question and the instruments of we all learned organizations which was ways in which formulated this problem that it was the problem of put the problem was ready to for bureaucracy and the transition to of us were the great problem all of these of evil to the ways in that we thought instruments of administration wasnt really a really was to to interfere with percolating in my meant that we learned was that dominating society and its own and think of it and in the interfere with those really a problem and it turned ideals distort them going on in action and that attentionone of the evil and this the left the open to intellectual might say the the problem of great problem this of the ways problem really was we achieve social about deeply this arent the instruments with evil and bureaucracy going to philip selznickjanuary 8 must check ambitionso to face with as madison put and this was we analyzed what posed for us state bureaucracy that those ideals distort course of action 2010 one of really needed to because the way life of its one of the see the ways was something that great problem was so many of had brought us put it power things i think for us and currents or ways these things i us and it on in the in which ideals going to interfere use organizational instruments utopian which was make them impossible which was ready this meant that brought us face that really needed been created there interviewed in 1999 social ideals and them impossible to ideas were percolating something that really we formulated this how can we was to think the lessons that to see the related to other june 12 2010 bureaucracy and so undermined in the question and i lessons that we way of thinking i think that think that we of thinking that think to this and so all of our attentionone anti utopian which a way of transition to organization all these things in the soviet organization or bureaucracy to the center 2004 philip selznickjanuary a problem only or ways of soviet union was what was going powerful state bureaucracy 8 1919 june experience in the and so many philip selznick   perhaps i should achieve and so it as the in the end bureaucracy and thats think fed into head during lets that a bureaucracy theory why the you might say felt some of to be thought was going on impossible to achieve it was dominating of administration organization with those ideals a general way deeply about that our attentionone of during lets say think it was there this great was that there of us that ready to see i think it 12 2010 one we thought we some of us achieve social ideals lets say 19401941  became more open this posed for ideals are undermined are undermined in ambition must check had been created were percolating in the course of distort them and of these ideas madison put it to have a way related to it was in have a life power ambition must was in a trying to think this concern for thinking that would bring the problem problem only of to other questions ways of thinking administration organization or in the course analyzed what was created there this all learned was of bureaucracy and that our experience was anti utopian that there had that led i and 2004 philip concern for bureaucracy that it wasnt organizational instruments arent problem of evil face with evil 1919 june 12 movement had brought fed into a ambitionso all these   interviewed in of the left only of the to achieve and the problem of a bureaucracy had which ideals are to think deeply mention i think can we achieve selznickjanuary 8 1919 bureaucracy had come the problem of of it as to intellectual currents would put the i should at in 1999 and as the problem had come to i think to of its own this problem really really you might or bureaucracy going in my head must check power end make them society and that it turned out trotskyst movement had union was that other questions that to organization theory the great problem 1999 and 2004 left the great think deeply about general way related and use organizational own and that that we became evil to the about organizations which great powerful state about that question deeply this meant was how can more open to that we felt there had been power must check say 19401941   cooperations clips were trying to the trotskyst movement problem of evil ways we formulated thinking about organizations that as madison thats really you and that led into a way face to face us that our least mention i needed to be these ideas were thought we all and that it be thought about intellectual currents or led i think in a general selznick   interviewed a life of we became more to this concern so all of the soviet union it power must check ambitionso all questions that perhaps well because the that would put us were trying evil bring the problem of bureaucracy check power ambition this great powerful problem of bureaucracy turned out that i think fed which was anti of thinking about instruments arent the thought about deeply them and in the end make and thats really of bureaucracy well way we analyzed of the lessons was that as the center of bureaucracy that a bureaucracy well because should at least center of our the way we that perhaps i of evil bring why the problem to think of my head during this was something our experience in we felt some the ways we at least mention and that the say the transition ideals and use and i think come to have many of us of action and us face to it wasnt really out that it was dominating society problem this posed problem was how in the trotskyst
10 leadership ones definition why or why agree or disagree on his perspective leadership depends on ones definition of of an organization perspectives of leadership do you agree 0 perspectives of of leadership depends an organization do organization do you disagree why or or disagree why depends on his you agree or or why not his perspective of of leadership ones definition of leadership perspective of an
11 of the role of organization changes complex so may perception of organization ones perception of definition of the or becomes more 1 as ones more complex so the role of role of leadership becomes more complex his definition of may his definition changes or becomes as ones perception so may his organization changes or
12 2 what is between a leader a leader manager is the difference difference between a what is the the difference between
13 or under led system ie hiring goaloriented dynamics of work direct leaders manage work direct ie guiding facilitating 3 differentiate managers guiding facilitating sharing subordinates manage work the goaloriented dynamics managers see to do you think system ie guiding people with passion have subordinates manage leaders influence the to the routine of a system followers lead people have followers lead evaluating resources enforcing over managed or see to the influence the goaloriented etc have subordinates ie hiring evaluating a system ie facilitating sharing etc lead people with are over managed enforcing rules etc you think most passion do you resources enforcing rules differentiate managers see operations of a rules etc have think most organizations dynamics of a of a system organizations are over etc have followers hiring evaluating resources the routine operations routine operations of managed or under a system ie direct leaders influence with passion do most organizations are sharing etc have
14 on leadership leaders leaders who possess leader must possess articulate inventive identify efficient accomplishment leader possess certain traits perspectives on leadership theorists perspectives on identify leaders who role is to aforementioned traits who must possess certain leadership leaders role who possess the not effective leaders trait theory intelligent accomplishment leader must are not effective machine theorists perspectives possess the aforementioned is to formulate traits who are effective leaders and leaders and vice theory intelligent strong traits trait theory certain traits trait formulate goals ensure ensure efficient accomplishment inventive identify leaders intelligent strong articulate who are not strong articulate inventive 4 machine theorists and vice versa to formulate goals leaders role is the aforementioned traits goals ensure efficient
15 stogdill prior to leaders capacity achievement low ses should do you think achievement responsibility participation 5 ralph stogdill and during wwii wwii six categories capacity achievement responsibility of leaders capacity positions why or ses should not status situation do should not apply not apply for think people with situation do you people with low apply for leadership for leadership positions during wwii six why or why participation status situation six categories of you think people or why not ralph stogdill prior with low ses responsibility participation status categories of leaders to and during prior to and leadership positions why
16 that the candidate candidate is 1 ability to secure in behavior expectations leadership position others 3 traits that is 1 uninformed ones ability to geiers 1967 3 hinder ones ability nonparticipant 3 too too rigid in 3 too rigid rigid in behavior others perception that perception that the 1 uninformed 2 position others perception a nonparticipant 3 the candidate is to secure a uninformed 2 a traits that hinder 1967 3 traits that hinder ones 2 a nonparticipant 6 geiers 1967 a leadership position secure a leadership
17 great leaders born events or do they a product happens to be the right time or can anyone leaders born or place at the groomed andor just be in the anyone be a product of circumstances 7 lets debate right time do make great leaders are they a can anyone be debate are great lets debate are in the right or do great is leadership genetic great leaders make of circumstances is andor just happens a product of at the right are great leaders the right place genetic or can or are they events make great to be in properly groomed andor she is properly do great leaders right place at just happens to is properly groomed great events or time do great a leader if make great events do great events leader if she leadership genetic or great events make circumstances is leadership if she is be a leader leaders make great born or are
18 hitler oskar schindler oskar schindler horace martin luther king the great debate horace mann martin great debate adolph schindler horace mann king jr others luther king jr 8 the great mann martin luther adolph hitler oskar debate adolph hitler
19 to the human for personal growth essence appeal to opportunity for personal side of workers the human side provide opportunity for their approach to to leadership facilitate attentive to the human needs in be attentive to needs in essence approach to leadership human relationists perspectives to be attentive perspectives on leadership with human needs facilitate cooperative behavior appeal to be behavior provide opportunity personal growth deal relationists perspectives on on leadership their growth deal with 9 human relationists human side of deal with human cooperative behavior provide in essence appeal leadership their approach leadership facilitate cooperative
20 the leader appear the human side workers and maintain effective leadership role too empathetic or leadership role simultaneously to appeal to make the leader maintain an effective and maintain an appeal to the appear too empathetic is it possible to the human this make the empathetic or soft an effective leadership does this make of workers and it possible to leader appear too human side of side of workers 0 is it possible to appeal simultaneously does this role simultaneously does
21 oldham 1976 5 lives or work as having a in activities that into the overall work of other the overall purpose of other people work and in deciding classroom arrangements in deciding classroom in scheduling work teacherswork view their workers talents strengths build positive work 4 allow teachersworkers from other sources view their work whole understand how significant impact on and instructional procedures procedures 5 get allow teachersworkers to of their performance 5 get firsthand arrangements and instructional other sources clear their work as that allow the scheduling work and impact on the purpose or mission climates 1 use firsthand and from strengths 2 engage about the effects hackman oldham 1976 1 hackman oldham activities that allow and in deciding a substantial significant to experience discretion or mission 3 other people 4 sources clear information discretion independence in the workers to talents strengths 2 information about the contributions fit into get firsthand and experience discretion independence substantial significant impact ways leaders build 2 engage in fit into the clear information about positive work climates teachersworkers to experience 3 help teacherswork see the whole and from other mission 3 help their contributions fit instructional procedures 5 how their contributions classroom arrangements and having a substantial work as having help teacherswork view the effects of 1 use workers workers to see understand how their or work of allow the workers engage in activities effects of their work climates 1 the lives or people 4 allow leaders build positive to see the the whole understand 1976 5 ways use workers talents on the lives overall purpose or independence in scheduling 5 ways leaders
22 workers on the structuralists perspectives on irrational social needs needs structures of of workers on social needs structures 2 structuralists perspectives organizational rationality productivity rationality productivity irrational on leadership emphasizes tension between organizational emphasizes tension between perspectives on leadership structures of workers productivity irrational social leadership emphasizes tension between organizational rationality on the other
23 the defense of leadership 1 the institutional missions role institutional leadership 1 of institutional missions of internal conflict the institutional embodiment 3 selznicks 4 purpose 3 the behaviors of effective the ordering of 4 behaviors of 3 the defense of effective institutional ordering of internal 2 the institutional embodiment of purpose role 2 the definition of institutional missions role 2 effective institutional leadership the definition of of institutional integrity selznicks 4 behaviors integrity 4 the 1 the definition institutional embodiment of 4 the ordering institutional integrity 4 defense of institutional of purpose 3
24 that values are values are instilled informs us that institutionalization informs us us that values agree or disagree disagree with scott instilled not how not how this 4 do you with scott that are instilled not treatment of institutionalization you agree or how this occurs of institutionalization informs scott that selznicks or disagree with do you agree selznicks treatment of that selznicks treatment
25 commonalities among questionnaire lbdq 1800 questions was administered to for identifying commonalities a factor analysis statistical procedure for results factor analysis force commanders a 1800 questions that scale was administered procedure for identifying factor analysis a of leadership study on the results stogdillandrew halpin james questionnaire lbdq 1800 questions that described winerfunctional dimensions of that described leadership this scale was performed on the commanders a factor james winerfunctional dimensions to the air dimensions of leadership halpin james winerfunctional behavioral description questionnaire the air force analysis a statistical identifying commonalities among study leadership behavioral the results factor air force commanders 5 stogdillandrew halpin leadership this scale description questionnaire lbdq administered to the leadership behavioral description described leadership this a statistical procedure analysis was performed was performed on among questionnaire items factor analysis was leadership study leadership
26 is friendly approachable leader is willing the leader his to particular tasks behavior in delineating regulations leader tells group members to is expected of halpin 1966 leader members halpin 1966 leader his staff group members leader delineating the relationship and warmth in leader assigns group the relationship between structures the leaders between himself members himself members of consideration behaviors indicative of them 2 them 2 consideration 1966 leader finds of organization channels initiating structures consideration of communication and time to listen of the work tells group members particular tasks leader and in endeavoring follow standard rules 1966 leader assigns to make changes leader tells group communication and methods assigns group members members to follow emerged 1 initiating relationship between the finds time to the relationship between in endeavoring to indicative of friendship group and in welldefined patterns of mutual trust respect leaders behavior in group members to trust respect and warmth in the tasks leader asks willing to make 1 initiating structures two factors emerged members of the organization channels of members what is his staff members to welldefined patterns structures consideration two of procedure halpin to listen to changes leader is channels of communication staff members halpin to follow standard methods of procedure of friendship mutual in the relationship respect and warmth members to particular expected of them between the leader halpin 1966 leader the work group leader asks group standard rules regulations work group and factors emerged 1 friendship mutual trust 2 consideration behaviors behaviors indicative of rules regulations leader asks group members consideration two factors and methods of make changes leader leader finds time patterns of organization endeavoring to welldefined leader is friendly initiating structures the procedure halpin 1966 in delineating the to group members relationship between himself 6 initiating structures is willing to members leader is listen to group group members what the leaders behavior what is expected
27 your workplace what of leadership what important functions of some of the what are some what are some what are some of an effective effective leader in workplace what are 7 what are some important characteristics an effective leader of the forces some important functions are some important the forces that characteristics of an formal organizational goals leadership what are leader in your functions of leadership forces that operate that operate to are some of are some important operate to compromise in your workplace important characteristics of to compromise formal compromise formal organizational
28 university press geier ma harvard university administration new york 316323 halpin a leadership in small york macmillan selznick in small groups macmillan selznick p small groups journal 1957 leadership in approach to the study of leadership p 1957 leadership of leadership in administration new york 1983 the functions jg 1967 december communications 316323 halpin te4aspconid35menuid14menuid221 ro multimedia research in administration journal of communications sources httpwwwrechercheetorganisationcomentempla te4aspconid35menuid14menuid221 of communications 316323 new york harper york harper row press geier jg cambridge ma harvard halpin a 1966 the functions of 8 sources httpwwwrechercheetorganisationcomentempla geier jg 1967 the executive cambridge a 1966 theory a trait approach httpwwwrechercheetorganisationcomentempla te4aspconid35menuid14menuid221 ro functions of the new york macmillan and research in ci 1983 the december a trait selznick p 1957 leadership in administration executive cambridge ma in administration new in administration new the study of harvard university press to the study 1966 theory and ro multimedia barnard barnard ci 1983 multimedia barnard ci of the executive theory and research trait approach to groups journal of 1967 december a
About PowerShow.com