• Motivation is typified as an individual phenomenon. Every person is unique and all the major theories of motivation allow for this uniqueness to be demonstrated in one way or another.
• Motivation is described, usually, as intentional. Motivation is assumed to be under the worker’s control, and behaviours that are influenced by motivation, such as effort expended, are seen as choices of action.
• Motivation is multifaceted. The two factors of greatest importance are:

(i) what gets people activated (arousal); and (ii) the force of an individual to engage in desired behaviour (direction or choice of behaviour).

• The purpose of motivational theories is to predict behaviour. Motivation is not the behaviour itself, and it is not performance. Motivation concerns action, and the internal and external forces which influence a person’s choice of action.

On the basis of these characteristics. Mitchell defines motivation as ‘the degree to which an individual wants and chooses to engage in certain specified behaviours’.

I.) The chart provides only an historical record.It must be updated when organisational change occurs.
2.) If accuracy, an organisational chart can identify problems that are contributing to inefficiency. If large scale change is contemplated, then a thorough examination of the existing structure is wise.
3.) In any business activity, relationships exist that are almost impossible to chart, either because they are so complex or because they are transitory.
4.) Charts are often useful to explain the organisation of a business to a new employee. e.g. in an Induction course.
5.) An overemphasis on charts can produce a rigidity of roles as staff become obsessed by boundaries highlighted by “neat boxes”.
6.) Fixing staff in terms of vertical lines can lead to problems over status.
7.) The chart may give little evidence of the style of management.
8.) The chart may often be a starting point for an “0 & M” study. The study must then change focus from an examination of formal titles to an examination of actual work done.

• the economic and efficient performance of the organisation and the level of resource utilisation;
• monitoring the activities of the organisation;
• accountability for areas of work undertaken by groups and individual members of the organisation;
• co-ordination of different parts of the organisation and different areas of work;
• flexibility in order to respond to future demands and developments, and to adapt to changing environmental influences; and
• the social satisfaction of members working in the organisation.

These objectives provide the criteria for structural effectiveness. Structure is not an end in itself but a means of improving organisational performance. Drucker suggests that the organisation structure should satisfy three requirements.

It must be organised for business performance
The more direct and simple the structure the more efficient it is because there is less change needed in the individual activities directed to business performance and results. Structure should not rest on past achievements but be geared to future demands and growth of the organisation.

The structure should contain the least possible number of management levels
The chain of command should be as short as possible. Every additional level makes for difficulties in direction and mutual understanding, distorts objectives, sets up additional stresses, creates inertia and slack, and increases the difficulties of the development of future managers moving up through the chain. The number of levels will tend to grow by themselves without the application of proper principles of organisation.

Organisation structure must make possible the training and testing of future top management In addition to their training, future managers should be tested before they reach the top. They should be given autonomy in positions of actual managerial responsibility while still young enough to benefit from the new experience. They should also have the opportunity of at least observing the operation of the business as a whole, and not be narrowed by too long an experience in the position of a functional specialist.

It is illogical because in good social practice, as in good engineering practice, design should come first. No member of the organisation should be appointed to a senior position without identification of the responsibilities and relationships attached to that position and its role within the social pattern of the organisation.

It is cruel because it is the individual members of the organisation who suffer most from lack of design. If members are appointed to the organisation without a clear definition of their duties or the qualifications required to perform those duties, it is these members who are likely to be blamed for poor results which do not match the vague ideas of what was expected of them.

It is wasteful because if jobs are not put together along the lines of functional specialisation then new members of the organisation cannot be trained effectively to take over these jobs. If jobs have to be fitted to members of the organisation, rather than members of the organisation to jobs, then every new member has to be trained in such a way so as to aim to replace the special, personal experience of the previous job incumbent. Where both the requirements of the job and the member of the organisation are unknown quantities this is likely to lead to indecision and much time wasted in ineffective discussion.

It is inefficient because if the organisation is not founded on principles, managers are forced to fall back on personalities. Unless there are clearly established principles, which are understood by everyone in the organisation, managers will start `playing politics’ in matters of promotion and.
similar issues.

Urwick lays emphasis on the technical planning of the organisation and determining and laying out structure before giving any thought to the individual members of the organisation. Although Urwick acknowledges that the personal touch is important, and part of the obvious duty of the manager, it is not a substitute for the need for definite planning of the structure. `In short, a very large proportion of the friction and confusion in some societies, with its manifest consequences in human suffering, may be traced back directly to faulty organisation in the structural sense. Republic of Zimbabwe, for example.

An important aspect of corporate strategy and the growth and development of organisations is the concept of synergy which was developed in management applications by Ansoff. Synergy results when the whole is greater than the sum of its component parts. It can be expressed, simply as 2 + 2+5 Synergy is usually experienced in situations of expansion or where one organisation merges with another, such as an organisation responsible for the development and production of a product merging with an organisation which markets the product. The new organisation could benefit from the combined strengths and opportunities, skills and expertise, and from the streamlining and economy of its operations. Another example could be the merger of a computer firm expert in the design and marketing of hardware, with a firm expert in software manufacture and systems design.

It is possible, however, to experience negative synergy or the 2 + 2 = 3 situation. Such a situation might arise when a merger occurs between organisations operating in different fields, with different markets or with different methods, or where the new organisation becomes unwieldy or loses its cost-effectiveness.

If your manager isn’t managing, shouldn’t the job title and or job description be updated, is the person specification correct? HR VECTRO is your intrinsic partner for help with this. Contact us now.

1. An economic resource performing a series
of technical functions associated with the
organising and administration of other resources
2. A system of authority through which policy-
is translated into the execution of tasks
3. An elite social group which acts as an economic
resource and maintains an associated system of authority.

Other theorists describe management as
“making organisations perform”. Smith et-al (1980)
describe management in terms of:
1. Individuals who are delegated authority to
manage others.
2. Activities for achieving goals
3. A body of knowledge represented by theories
and frameworks about people and organisations.

What is management in your business? Need advice? Contact HR VECTRO now.

Your credibility and performance will be enhanced when you :-
* Clarify your ideas before communicating.
* Decide the purpose of each communication.
* Consider the setting both physical and human whenever you
communicate.
* Consult with others, if necessary, when planning
communication.
* Consider the needs and expectations of the receivers, and
adjust your tone of voice and expression.
* Put yourself in the receiver”s shoes and view your own
message from there.
* Highlight quality benefits to the company, department, and
individuals.
* Make your communication process interactive by asking and
encouraging questions.
* Encourage a picture of the future showing where “today’s”
actions and decisions fit in to a wider plan.
* Support your communications with action.

ABOVE ALL, LISTEN !!

~ There are definite implications here for motivational well-being and the impact that
can have internally and externally. Many companies and organisations exist in
partial oblivion to the effects created by their communications culture, and many
wonder what has happened to their standing in their chosen market, having failed
to change and improve in our customer-conscious modern trading environment.

The style and quality of communication in an organisation is a reflection of its
sense of values, and that is what determines the culture of the company. Some
companies only value clear hard-and-fast realities in the form of bottom-line
figures, percentage target achievements, graphs, and other business statistics.
Many do not link the achievement of results to the motivational well-being of all
employees, and accordingly do not place enough emphasis on the value of
effective communication. The result can often be a work environment in which:-

frustration reigns
barriers are built
mistakes are frequent
misunderstandings occur often
clear understanding is not achieved
internal customer satisfaction is lacking
quality problems are rife
arguments linger
respect and trust levels are low

Contact HR VECTRO to help your business get it right.