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:1351


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