I need your valuable comments on ratings of the managerial skills of a manager in the following two situations.
a) A department is working well in the presence of a manager (A) and 12 co-workers. One fine day the manager decides to move from the organisation and still the department and the system works smoothly for the next 3 months.
b) A department is working well in the presence of a manager (B)and 12 co-workers. One fine day the manager decides to move from the organisation and the department and the system gets crashed after two weeks.
In both the cases co-workers remains the regular employee in the organisation.
Regards
From India, New Delhi
a) A department is working well in the presence of a manager (A) and 12 co-workers. One fine day the manager decides to move from the organisation and still the department and the system works smoothly for the next 3 months.
b) A department is working well in the presence of a manager (B)and 12 co-workers. One fine day the manager decides to move from the organisation and the department and the system gets crashed after two weeks.
In both the cases co-workers remains the regular employee in the organisation.
Regards
From India, New Delhi
Dear Alla,
In case A definately situation is under manager's control in his absence as well presence as he/she is in the system but in case B it's not the manager but the managment who will be responsible for the crash.... :)
u really think differently which makes u different from other posts
Keep posting.
Vini K
In case A definately situation is under manager's control in his absence as well presence as he/she is in the system but in case B it's not the manager but the managment who will be responsible for the crash.... :)
u really think differently which makes u different from other posts
Keep posting.
Vini K
Hi Allahrakha ,
Referring to the 2 cases presented here, my inference would be as follows:-
Manager A: A “GOOD MANGER”. A people as well as process oriented person. He has facilitated result orientation, role clarity and delegation in the team. His effective team management has resulted in the team executing the job efficiently even in his absence. He is a manager who could prove to be a good coach as well as a mentor.
Manager B: Could be an “AUTOCRATIC / INEFFECTIVE MANAGER” leader. A manager who has not guided the team with respect to their roles and responsibility or shared work activities. Also there is a possibility hat the process or system he has put in place involves his “APPROVAL” to a great extent and hence in his absence the system crashes. On the second hand the team does not execute the task due to existing team conflicts or lack of co-ordination which have been left unresolved.
Please add or comment to my inferences.
Ashwini Rege
1Referring to the 2 cases presented here, my inference would be as follows:-
Manager A: A “GOOD MANGER”. A people as well as process oriented person. He has facilitated result orientation, role clarity and delegation in the team. His effective team management has resulted in the team executing the job efficiently even in his absence. He is a manager who could prove to be a good coach as well as a mentor.
Manager B: Could be an “AUTOCRATIC / INEFFECTIVE MANAGER” leader. A manager who has not guided the team with respect to their roles and responsibility or shared work activities. Also there is a possibility hat the process or system he has put in place involves his “APPROVAL” to a great extent and hence in his absence the system crashes. On the second hand the team does not execute the task due to existing team conflicts or lack of co-ordination which have been left unresolved.
Please add or comment to my inferences.
Ashwini Rege
Well said Ashwani,
At the same time there is something else also attached to this. Being HR professional we always tend to avoid the case (B). This area needs to be explored more. Seeking your comments in that direction too.
Regards
Allahrakha
From India, New Delhi
At the same time there is something else also attached to this. Being HR professional we always tend to avoid the case (B). This area needs to be explored more. Seeking your comments in that direction too.
Regards
Allahrakha
From India, New Delhi
I think what needs to be probed into are the reasons for the non performance of the team. One could start by having an interaction with the team members to understand the situation better. This could bring to light their concerns / issues.
These issues could be pertaining to the previous boss , current work system , conflicts within the team and or a sign of retaliation. Then depending on the reason/s one would have to dig deeper to understand the gravity of the issue and the damage caused.
Ashwini Rege
These issues could be pertaining to the previous boss , current work system , conflicts within the team and or a sign of retaliation. Then depending on the reason/s one would have to dig deeper to understand the gravity of the issue and the damage caused.
Ashwini Rege
Hi,
I agree with Ashwini's reasons stated for the issue. Just adding two more points from manger (B) psychological point of view.
a) Manager (B) lack of affective commitment to the organization might have resulted in such a result. he worked for the sake of work in the organization (normative committment).
b) Manager (B) might have perceived it as a threat to empower his subordinates or needed always to be known as the lone talented player in the organization
c) Manager (B) lack of leadership skills has been clearly been exhibited.
The above stated points are the frequently seen reasons for such a situation (fact is based on research).
Regards
From India, Madras
I agree with Ashwini's reasons stated for the issue. Just adding two more points from manger (B) psychological point of view.
a) Manager (B) lack of affective commitment to the organization might have resulted in such a result. he worked for the sake of work in the organization (normative committment).
b) Manager (B) might have perceived it as a threat to empower his subordinates or needed always to be known as the lone talented player in the organization
c) Manager (B) lack of leadership skills has been clearly been exhibited.
The above stated points are the frequently seen reasons for such a situation (fact is based on research).
Regards
From India, Madras
The reward system in the organization doesn't seem to give much importance to a Manager's efforts towards subordinate capability development. There is simply no incentive for him/her to 'let go' . Manager A is confident of his capabilities and therefore not unduly worried about his team being able to function without him. This is not the case with B.
Good Manager always improve system and procedures and definitely if Manager leave the organization routine work may not be disturbed. Similarly, some positions are very important and day to day decision is involved in that case from first day problem may be occurred. This may not be problem with the Manager rather position.
Best regards,
smr
Best regards,
smr
Hi,
We all know that in CASE (B) either the manager is ineffective or the motivational needs of the mangaer were not supplied regularly. But I want to ask even after knowing the fact why most of us try to retain the managers (Even after knowing the ineffectiveness) falling under CASE (B)?
Need more comments from all the members
Regards
Allahrakha
From India, New Delhi
We all know that in CASE (B) either the manager is ineffective or the motivational needs of the mangaer were not supplied regularly. But I want to ask even after knowing the fact why most of us try to retain the managers (Even after knowing the ineffectiveness) falling under CASE (B)?
Need more comments from all the members
Regards
Allahrakha
From India, New Delhi
hello,
the difference in both the cases is rapport between the co-workers and manager
in the first case there is an understanding- the managerwas employee oreinted, thats why they had no problem even after the manage(A) left because the work process was based on the decision of bothe sides
in the secon case it was only one side that is on the side manager(B)- he only takes the decision.
simply
in first there is participation of employees as well as manager(A)
in the second theris no participation of employees as well as manager(B)
WITH
regards
praveen kumar valbooj
From India, Hyderabad
the difference in both the cases is rapport between the co-workers and manager
in the first case there is an understanding- the managerwas employee oreinted, thats why they had no problem even after the manage(A) left because the work process was based on the decision of bothe sides
in the secon case it was only one side that is on the side manager(B)- he only takes the decision.
simply
in first there is participation of employees as well as manager(A)
in the second theris no participation of employees as well as manager(B)
WITH
regards
praveen kumar valbooj
From India, Hyderabad
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
H.R.Manager - Job Chart.doc
152120-very-use ful-hr-manageme nt-software-bui lt-excel-psa-hr -manager-mainta in-payrrol-exce l-soft.zip