Пойгина Л.Б., Туринова Л.А. - English for Masters. Management Part 1 (1175658), страница 12
Текст из файла (страница 12)
One study showed that perceived participationin the decision-making and goal -setting phase of budgeting resulted in greater commitmentto the organization and its goals.Great advances have been made in recent years in the communication of purelyquantifiable information. It is now possible for the manager to receive crucial information insynthesized form, with key comparisons already made, almost as quickly as the organizationreceives the raw data.
Some people believe that this new ability to process controlinformation at exceptional speed is what makes possible the giant organizations of today.Certainly, there is no large organization at present that does not use computers for control.We will discuss these new management information systems more fully in a later chapter.Evaluation. The final phase of the comparison stage is evaluation of the informationon results. The manager must decide whether the information is valid and whether it issignificant.
By significant it is meant both whether the information is applicable to thephenomenon under investigation and is genuinely important in decision making.Sometimes evaluation is guided by organizational policy. Top management of a bank,for example, may request a loan officer to reject an application if the individual's currentdebts are already above a certain percentage of his or her income or assets. Or, in manysituations, the range of deviation established earlier can serve as a guideline. However,managers must often use personal judgment to interpret the validity of information and therelationship between results and standards.
In doing so, the manager must take into accountrisk and other factors influencing decision making. The objective of evaluation is to make adecision on whether action is necessary and if so, what it should be.A control system that does not provide a means of correcting significant deviationsfrom standards before truly serious problems arise is valueless. Naturally, correction mustfocus on the true source of the problem. Ideally, the measuring stage should pinpoint thecause as well as the amount of deviation from .standards.
This involves effective decisionmaking. However, since much organizational work is the result of complex group effort,36 absolute precision in identifying the root of aproblem may not always be possible. The focusof correction, in any event, should be getting an understanding of the causes of deviation andgetting the organization back on course.Management can take corrective action by making improvements in any oftheinternal variables, managerial functions, or processes. For example, management may feelthe structure is the major variable causing the deviation between desired and actual results.Such was the case with the Gillette Company. After five straight years of declining earningsfrom the personal care division responsible for female products, such as Adorn and Tamecream rinse, and the toiletries division responsible for male products, such as Right Guardand The Dry Look hair spray, top management concluded its structure needed revamping.Because of changes in the social values of their customers, Gillette's topmanagement decided that having both a personal care division and a toiletries division wasno longer necessary.
It decided to consolidate them into one division. Discussing thesechanges, Derwin F. Phillips, president of the new consolidated personal care division, acombination of the two previous divisions stated, "As men and women have come closertogether in beautifying motivation, most of us came to realize that men and women weren'tthat different in what they wanted in a hair-care product." Phillips therefore felt that havingseparate divisions was too costly and constraining. For example, when the unisex marketingstrategy for Ultra Max was formulated, both divisions struggled over which one woulddevelop the product.
This infighting and double overhead were the causes of the twodivisions' lethargic performance, according to top management.It is important to stress that any of the variables may be a source of the problem andthat several factors may be contributing to a less than desired result. Naturally, the managercannot choose a particular corrective action just because it resolves the immediate problem athand. All relevant internal variables and their interrelationships must be weighed beforechoosing an action. Because of the interrelatedness of subunits, any major change will affectevery aspect of the organization.
Therefore, the manager must take care that the "correction"does not cause more difficulties than it resolves. Also, as hard as it may be at times, adedicated manager tries not to make decisions because they are beneficial in the short runwhen the long-term consequences will be costly. For example, a few years ago the head of acompany division experiencing low sales decided to lay off one-third of the work force.Analyzing the situation, the division head reasoned, "If the turndown continues, we will be ingood shape to ride it out.
If it isn't as bad as we think it will be, then after the holidays we canrehire many of the workers. Most important, my division will attain its last-quarter profitgoals. Considering the kind of year it has been, that can get me a bonus and promotion."This manager was highly commended for saving the company's profits. But within ayear his decision proved disastrous. A critical personnel strategy of the company was toavoid unionization and thereby to avoid the costs associated with rigid work rules, restrictedhiring and promotion, and strikes.
Largely because of the layoff this manager implemented,the workers voted for union representation at the first opportunity. Thus, although themanager made his short-term profit objectives, the company as a whole lost one of its mostimportant competitive advantages.Not all significant deviations from standards should be corrected.
Sometimes thestandard itself may be unrealistic because standards are based on plans, which are onlypredictions of the future. Standards must be reviewed whenever plans are revised.It often is the control system that points out the need to revise plans. If, for example,almost the entire sales force exceeds quota by 50 percent, the quota is probably too low to bea valid standard of satisfactory performance. A highly successful organization will frequentlyhave to revise its standards upward. And, although this should not happen too often, at timesa plan will prove overly optimistic and standards will have to be revised downward.37 Standards that are too difficult to attain can frustrate workers and managers needs forachievement, possibly decreasing their motivation.
As with corrective action, the need fordrastic revision of standards in either direction may be a symptom of problems in the controlprocess itself or perhaps in the planning process.Figure 1 is a comprehensive model of the control process.PlanningObjectives andstrategyEstablishPerformanceIndicators(standard)Evaluateinformationfor accuracyandsignificanceEstablishrangeof deviationCompareporformanceto standardsCommunicate results toappropriatepersonnelAre objectivesbeing attained?Do nothingAre the standards realistic?Identifycause of deviationRevise standardsCorrect deviationFig 1.Model of the Control Process(from “Management” by M. H.
Mescon, M. Albert, F.Khedouri)2. Scanning exerciseScan the text to find the following:1. The first phase of the control process.2. Evaluation of the information on results.3. Revision of standards.3. Vocabulary StudyGlossaryto attain objectivesto perform the control functionsetting standardscomparing performance to standardstaking necessary corrective actionperformance indicatortime limitspecific criterionto quantify indirectly38 a range of deviationthe exception principlemeasurement of resultscommunicationevaluationhigh-quality measurementdeviations from standardsa valid standards of satisfactory performancea) find in the text equivalents for the following:выработка стандартов; принятие необходимых корректирующих действий;сопоставление со стандартами реальных результатов; временные рамки; конкретныйкритерий; показатель результативности; стремиться обойти трудности, связанные свыражением целей в количественном виде; представить в численном виде косвенно,измеряя некоторые показатели; невозможность выразить показатель результативностинепосредственно в количественной форме; масштаб допустимых отклонений; методуправления по принципу исключения; выбор подходящей единицы измерения; бытьсокращенным с возможным искажением информации, на основе которой должныприниматься решения в области контроля; пересмотр стандартов; полная модельпроцесса контроля.Ъ) find Russian equivalents for the following:to evoke negative reactions; the most misunderstood management functions; comparingperformance to standards; an outgrowth of the planning process; to compare actual work toplanned productivity; to establish performance indicators in such areas as profit, sales, andcost of materials; to be expressed numerically; to reduce to dollar equivalents; to overcomethe quantification difficulty: affect the manifestation being measured; to establishperformance indicators in the difficult-to-measure areas of social responsibility and ethics; theintangibility of the work; the sole basis for performance appraisal; "attainment of organizationgoals"; to exceed the cost of the control system: to be uneconomical and counterproductive;exception principle; management by exception; the most troublesome; to be congruent withthe activity being controlled; to steal fortunes before detection: the major stumbling blocks ingathering and transmitting control information; to become an acute problem; to securesubordinate participation in the actual setting of standards; a management prerogative; theraw data; ability to process control information at exceptional speed.4.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
