Monthly Archives: July 2010

Styles to handle Conflict

Posted on by
1

Teams and individuals develop specific styles for dealing with conflict, that are based on the desire to satisfy their own concern or the other’s. Effective team members vary their style of handling conflict to fit a specific situation. Each of these five styles is appropriate in certain cases.

  1. The competing style reflects assertiveness to get one’s own way, and should be used when quick, decisive action is vital on important issues or unpopular actions, such as during emergencies or urgent cost cutting.
  2. The avoiding style reflects neither assertiveness nor cooperativeness. It is appropriate when an issue is trivial, when there is no chance of winning, when a delay to gather more information is needed, or when a disruption would be costly.
  3. The compromising style reflects a moderate amount of both assertiveness and cooperativeness. It is appropriate when the goals on both sides are equally important, when opponents have equal power and both sides want to split the difference, or when people need to arrive at temporary or expedient solutions under time pressure.
  4. The accommodating style reflects a high degree of cooperativeness, which works best when people realize that they are wrong, when an issue is more important to others than to myself, when building social credits for use in later discussions, and when maintaining harmony is especially important.
  5. The collaborating style reflects both a high degree of assertiveness and cooperativeness. The collaborating style enables both sides to win, although it may require substantial bargaining and negotiation. The collaborating style is important when both sets of concerns are too important to be compromised, when insights from different people need to be merged into an overall solution, and when the commitment of both sides is needed for a consensus.

These styles of handling conflict are especially effective when an individual disagree with others. According to research, it suggests that several techniques can be used as strategies for resolving conflicts among people or organizations.

Reference: New Era of Management

Locus of Control

Posted on by
Reply

Locus of control defines whether people place the primary responsibility within themselves or on outside forces. Some people believe that their own actions strongly influence what happens to them. They feel in control of their own fate. These individuals have a high internal locus of control. Other people believe that events in their living occur because of chance, luck, or outside people and events. They feel more like pawns of their fate. These individuals have a high external locus of control. Many top leaders of e-commerce and high-tech organizations possess a high internal locus of control. These managers have to cope with rapid change and uncertainty associated with Internet business. They must believe that they and their employees can counter the negative impact of outsides forces and events.

Research on locus of control shows real differences in behavior across a wide range of settings. People with an internal locus of control are easier to motivate because they believe the rewards are the result of their behavior. They are better better able to handle complex information and problem solving, are more achievement oriented, but are also more independent and therefore more difficult to manage. However, people with an external locus of control are harder to motivate, less involved in their jobs, more likely to blame others when faced with a poor performance evaluation, but more compliant and conforming and, therefore, easier to manage.

Big five personality factors

Posted on by
1

The Big Five Personality Factors describe an individual’s extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience:

  1. Extroversion. The degree to which a person is outgoing, sociable, assertive, and comfortable with interpersonal relationships.
  2. Agreeableness. The degree to which a person is able to get along with others by being good-natured, likable, cooperative, forgiving, understanding, and trusting.
  3. Conscientiousness. The degree to which a person is focused on a few goals, thus behaving in ways that are responsible, dependable, persistent, and achievement oriented.
  4. Emotional stability. The degree to which a person is calm, enthusiastic, and self-confident, rather than tense, depressed, moody, or insecure.
  5. Openness to experience. The degree to which a person has a broad range of interests and is imaginative, creative, artistically sensitive, and willing to consider new ideas.

Reference: The New Era of Management.

People can suffer from Information Overload

Posted on by
Reply

Getting data  and information to people who need it and to those who can use it to improve their performance and decision-making is important. But advance in technology may lead the company to become a quagmire of information, with employees so overwhelmed by the sheer volume that they miss to dig the valuable from the useless.

In many cases, the ability to produce data and information is outstripping employees’ ability to process it. One British psychologist claims to have mentioned a new mental disorder caused by too much information; he has termed it information fatigue syndrome. Information technology is a primary culprit in contributing to this new “disease.”

However, managers have the ability to encounter the problem and improve information quality. Firstly the suppliers of information technology and CIOs need to ensure to collaborate with employees to identify the kinds of questions they must answer and the kinds of data and information they really need. Specialists are often attracted with the volume of data a system can produce and overlook the need to provide small amounts of quality information in a timely and useful manner for decision making. Top executives should be actively engage in setting limit by focusing the organization on key strategies and on the critical questions that must be answered to pursue those strategies.

Reference: New Era of Management

Line and Staff Authority

Posted on by
2

An important distinction in many organizations is between line authority and staff authority, reflecting whether managers work in line or staff departments in the organization’s structure. Line department performs tasks that reflects the organization’s primary goal and mission. In a software company, line departments make and sell the product. In an Internet-based company, line departments would be those that develop and manage online offerings and sales. Staff departments include all those that provide specialized skills in support of line departments. Staff departments have an advisory relationship with line departments and typically include marketing, labor relations, research, accounting, and human resources.

Line authority means that people in management positions have formal authority to direct and control immediate subordinates. Staff authority is narrower and includes the right to advise, recommend, and counsel in the staff specialists’ area of expertise. Staff authority is a communication relationship; staff specialists advise managers in technical areas. For example, the finance department of a manufacturing firm would have staff authority to coordinate with line departments about which accounting forms to use to facilitate equipment purchases and standardize payroll services.

Activity-Based Costing (ABC)

Posted on by
Reply

Managers measure the cost of producing goods and services so they can be sure they are selling those products for more than the cost to produce them. Traditional methods of costing assign costs to various departments or functions, such as purchasing, manufacturing, human resources, and so on. With a shift to more horizontal, flexible organizations has come a new approach called activity-based costing (ABC), which allocates costs across business processes. ABC attempts to identify all the various activities needed to product a product or service and allocate costs accordingly.

For example, an activity-based costing system might list the costs associated with processing orders for a particular product, scheduling production for that product, producing it, shipping it, and resolving problems with it. Because ABC allocates costs across business processes, it provides a more accurate picture of the cost of various products and services. In addition, it  enables managers to evaluate whether more costs go to activities that add value (meeting customer deadlines, achieving high quality) or to activities that do not add value (such as processing internal paperwork). They can then focus on reducing costs associated with non-value-added activities.

Reference: New Era of Management