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

Loading...

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



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Tutorial
Title:

Tasks vs People in Organizations (PhD course work)

Description:

Tasks vs People in Organizations (PhD course work)

Number of Views:1121

less

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