Kindly critique and provide a band score
Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2015 3:20 pm
Some people think that managers alone should make decisions in the company, while other think that employees should be involved. Discuss both points of view and give your opinion.
In any organisation apt decesion making help the company to achieve set goals. Recently there has been a move from authoritarian style of management to participative management, which envolve employees in decision making. Some argue that this brings with it myriad of benefits, however, others refute it. Both sides of this debate will be analyzed in this essay before a reasoned conclusion is reached.
On the one hand, participative management instills a sense of ownership and responsibility which motivate employee to increase their productivity. For example, in RNHS hospital located in Sydney involved nurses in prepare their duty schedule and invited their suggest to improve it. Eventually the number of absenties and sick leaves reduced by 30%. Thus from this example it is clear that involving employees participation in decision making, setting goals, work schedules and making suggestion inspire them to work harder for the institute. Thus the merits of participative management are clearly seen.
On the other hand, managers are well trained and skilled in decision making. For instance, multi-national companies such as Microsoft, involving every employees in decision making is nearly impossible. In such large organisations managers analyze the problem and develope strategies for employees after weigh pros and cons of any decision. When looking at the discussion in this light, it is clear why large institutions prefer authoritative style of management.
After pondering upon both sides of the argument, it is felt that although inviting employees in decesion making improve their performance, but sometimes its practicle impossible. It is thus hoped that crucial decisions will be made by managers in foreseeable future.
In any organisation apt decesion making help the company to achieve set goals. Recently there has been a move from authoritarian style of management to participative management, which envolve employees in decision making. Some argue that this brings with it myriad of benefits, however, others refute it. Both sides of this debate will be analyzed in this essay before a reasoned conclusion is reached.
On the one hand, participative management instills a sense of ownership and responsibility which motivate employee to increase their productivity. For example, in RNHS hospital located in Sydney involved nurses in prepare their duty schedule and invited their suggest to improve it. Eventually the number of absenties and sick leaves reduced by 30%. Thus from this example it is clear that involving employees participation in decision making, setting goals, work schedules and making suggestion inspire them to work harder for the institute. Thus the merits of participative management are clearly seen.
On the other hand, managers are well trained and skilled in decision making. For instance, multi-national companies such as Microsoft, involving every employees in decision making is nearly impossible. In such large organisations managers analyze the problem and develope strategies for employees after weigh pros and cons of any decision. When looking at the discussion in this light, it is clear why large institutions prefer authoritative style of management.
After pondering upon both sides of the argument, it is felt that although inviting employees in decesion making improve their performance, but sometimes its practicle impossible. It is thus hoped that crucial decisions will be made by managers in foreseeable future.