Foundation of Management Essay: Paradoxical Demands and Moral Purpose

This essay, submitted by a student, delves into core concepts within the foundation of management. It begins by defining 'managerial ideology' and its associated metaphors, drawing on the work of Kallifatides and Bendix. The essay then analyzes obstacles to effective decision-making, highligh...Read More

Running head: FOUNDATION OF MANAGEMENT
Foundation of Management
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1FOUNDATION OF MANAGEMENT
Table of Contents
1.0 Meaning of the quote “managerial ideology” and metaphors associated with the concept......2
2.0 Obstacles to making the best decisions.....................................................................................3
3.0 Occurrence and significance of the term “common moral purpose” in an organization...........4
4.0 Elaboration of the statement “the transformation of organizational forms has given rise to a
variety of paradoxical demands”.....................................................................................................5
5.0 Reference List............................................................................................................................6

2FOUNDATION OF MANAGEMENT
1.0 Meaning of the quote “managerial ideology” and metaphors associated with the concept
Kallifatides (2014) stated that the term ‘managerial ideology’ refers to the beliefs and
values of both the managers along with their workplace attitude and practices. Reinhard Bendix
believed that industrial organizations and industrial relations should be the focus aspect of a
stakeholder of an organization. The prime reason is that the employees should be motivated to
work for enhanced productivity, which on the other hand affects the lives of large number of
people (Stufflebeam and Shinkfield 2012). Thus, it is the liability of the institutional authority to
adapt effective business attitude. Prior to the implementation of the factory system all the
products of an organization or factory are designed or made by skilled and professionals. It needs
time and not much product are distributed in the locals. However, institutional authority
emphasized on division of labor practice, in which more workers were included, who are not
skilled compared to the professionals (Liu and Li 2014). However, by positive business behavior,
those employees are motivated and trained to accomplish the business function. In this way, huge
amount of final products are distributed among the community.
The metaphor that is used by Reinhard Bendix is “knife-edge of the present” and
“Chicago School”. The metaphor Chicago School illustrates the behavior of the organization’s
managers to align the money supply and demand for money (Stufflebeam and Shinkfield 2012).
This concept focuses on reducing regulations on business and follows own business believes and
policies. Metaphor knife-edge of the present represents the meaning that business should be
place between the perceived past and the future of the business but without including the concept
of time (Kallifatides 2014).

3FOUNDATION OF MANAGEMENT
2.0 Obstacles to making the best decisions
Piven (2013) portrays that it is expected that a rational-bureaucratic organizations
obtained their goals effectively. The reason described by Caldwell (2012) is that in such
organization the labor and authority is clearly divided along with their job roles and
responsibility. In this formal structure of organization, employees are selected based on effectual
qualifications, they are assigned with specific roles and designation and lastly the decision taken
by company are based on survey for relevant information.
Some of the obstacle in taking best decision making are internal conflict among the
decision makers due to different business perspective (Hodson et al. 2013). Wilensky (2015)
highlighted another obstacle that is in business some decision are often made in a split second
and in such case, ethical business procedure are often overlooked by managing personnel. Some
organizations have to face more problem than others due to others. Hodson et al. (2013) stated
that organization, who are not able to establish effective communication, face challenges of
internal rivalries that affects the organizational profitability. Piven (2013) stated that
organizational structure can be underlying cause of workplace issues as multiple authorities may
suggest different decision that can be confusing for employee to follow. Thus, regular meetings
should be conducted so that all the ideas can be discussed and only the optimized yet effective
decision should be taken into consideration. Managers also have to overcome the problem of
conflicts among the employees, communication and knowledge sharing between them and
allocating job roles and responsibilities based on the skills the candidate possess. Another
challenge that these managers have to addresses is train their employees well so that they can
accomplish their desires job roles (Weber and King 2014).

4FOUNDATION OF MANAGEMENT
3.0 Occurrence and significance of the term “common moral purpose” in an organization
The theory proposed by Chester Barnard emphasized on psychological theory of
motivation and behavior, complex inter−dependencies, sociological theory of cooperation and
meritocracy ideology. Barnard suggests the theory of complex social system, systems approach
and importance of the individual. Novicevic et al. (2013) stated that Barnard’s believes are
valuable and often denotes the exact scenario of the organization. According to Chester Barnard,
the managing authorities are liable for motivating the employees and handed over some job roles
that align with their line of interests (Lopdrup-Hjorth 2015). This process is effective as every
individual is motivated differently and managers should identify their preferences so that they
can obtain the work from them. Moreover, according to Barnard’s belief, communication should
be emphasized and innovative ideas should always be welcome. Mahoney and Godfrey (2014)
furthermore stated that all the achievements and failures should be encouraged so that employees
can continuously work for the betterment of the organization and suggest new ideas so that the
organization can prosper. (Durant 2014) moreover depict that Barnard also emphasized on two
conditions- effectiveness and efficiency. These two conditions are a part of cooperative system
and there are some personnel, who are considered as contributors. These contributors are-
investors, employees, suppliers, distributors, managers and customers (Novicevic et al. 2013).
Managing the collaboration among these stakeholders so that business profitability can be
attained is necessary. Mahoney and Godfrey (2014) thus stated that it represents the real scenario
of the business as an organization can only gain advantage, if business objectives of all the
stakeholders are properly aligned.

5FOUNDATION OF MANAGEMENT
4.0 Elaboration of the statement “the transformation of organizational forms has given rise
to a variety of paradoxical demands”
In modern era, organization has to take such decision that is for the organizational benefit
but on the other hand raises an adverse situation in the business. Powell and DiMaggio (2012)
stated that business formulates new things in order to fulfill the needs of the customers and make
their living standard high. On the other hand, if these customers decide to save for their better
future and purchase less from outside, business cannot attain profit. In such case, the business
adapts necessary promotional activities so that the customers can attract towards their product.
The paradox in this case is that the company do not like that their customers are saving money.
Another situation is highlighted by Ramirez (2012), where leaders ask their employees to work
with comfort; however, in reality all the employees are judged based on their productivity and
ability to meet target irrespective of the fact whether their work has some quality issues. Smith et
al. (2012) stated that in both the cases two aspects are necessary and need to be fulfilled that is in
first case, the better life of the customers and profitability of the organization and in second case,
considering employees as important asset and fulfilling the target of the organization. Thus, it
can stated that both the aspect is required in terms of satisfying individual needs but problem
may arise if both aspects peacefully co-exist. In such case, managers are liable to take effective
steps so that the adversity can be overcome. Taken for instance, in second case, leaders may
provide additional benefits to their employees so that they can achieve their targets and also gain
something for their effort through rewards.

6FOUNDATION OF MANAGEMENT
5.0 Reference List
Caldwell, R., 2012. Leadership and learning: A critical reexamination of Senge’s learning
organization. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 25(1), pp.39-55.
Durant, R.F., 2014. Revitalizing a Sense of Common Purpose. In Why Public Service Matters
(pp. 197-215). Palgrave Macmillan US.
Foundations of Management, La Trobe University (2016), McGraw Hill 9781308739632
Hodson, R., Roscigno, V.J., Martin, A. and Lopez, S.H., 2013. The ascension of Kafkaesque
bureaucracy in private sector organizations. Human Relations, 66(9), pp.1249-1273.
Kallifatides, M., 2014. 3 Reinhard Bendix. On the Shoulders of Giants, p.47.
Liu, M. and Li, C., 2014. Environment pressures, managerial industrial relations ideologies and
unionization in Chinese enterprises. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 52(1), pp.82-111.
Lopdrup-Hjorth, T., 2015. Object and objective lost? Organization-phobia in organization
theory. Journal of Cultural Economy, 8(4), pp.439-461.
M. Novicevic, M., Zikic, J., Martin, J., H. Humphreys, J. and Roberts, F., 2013. Responsible
executive leadership: A moral-identity analysis based on Barnard's conceptualization. Journal of
Management History, 19(4), pp.474-491.
Mahoney, J.T. and Godfrey, P., 2014. 'The Functions of the Executive'at 75: An Invitation to
Reconsider a Timeless Classic (No. 14-0100).
Piven, F.F., 2013. On the organizational question. The Sociological Quarterly, 54(2), pp.191-
193.
Powell, W.W. and DiMaggio, P.J. eds., 2012. The new institutionalism in organizational
analysis. University of Chicago Press.

7FOUNDATION OF MANAGEMENT
Ramirez, G.A., 2012. Sustainable development: paradoxes, misunderstandings and learning
organizations. The Learning Organization, 19(1), pp.58-76.
Smith, W.K., Besharov, M.L., Wessels, A.K. and Chertok, M., 2012. A paradoxical leadership
model for social entrepreneurs: Challenges, leadership skills, and pedagogical tools for managing
social and commercial demands. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(3),
pp.463-478.
Stufflebeam, D.L. and Shinkfield, A.J., 2012. Systematic evaluation: A self-instructional guide
to theory and practice (Vol. 8). Springer Science & Business Media.
Weber, K. and King, B., 2014. Social movement theory and organization studies. The Oxford
book of sociology, social theory, and organization studies: Contemporary currents, Oxford
University Press. doi, 10, p.1093.
Wilensky, H.L., 2015. Organizational intelligence: Knowledge and policy in government and
industry (Vol. 19). Quid Pro Books.