Individual Case Analysis 1, Vol 1. page 26-28

Provide the answers to the case on Acme Manufacturing Company. 2 pages for the entire assignment

26 Chapter 2 . Nature of Managerial Work The high incidence of lateral and external interactions can be explained in terms of a manager's need for information about complex and uncertain events that influence the operations of his or her organizational subunit, and the manager's dependence on the cooperation and assistance of numerous people outside the immediate chain of command (Kotter, 1982). A large network of contacts pro- vides information about current events within or outside of the organization that may affect the man- ager's job performance and career. In addition, networks can be used to obtain assistance for solving problems or making changes. The ability to assemble a coalition of internal and external supporters is especially important to make innovative changes and ensure that they will be implemented success- fully (Kanter, 1983). Managers use different parts of their network for different purposes and extend the network as needed to accomplish a particular objective (Ibarra & Hunter, 2007; Kaplan, 1988). Networks are developed in a variety of ways, such as (1) talking with people before, dur- ing, and after meetings, ceremonies, and social events in the organization; (2) serving on spe- cial committees, interest groups, and task forces; (3) joining civic groups, advisory boards, and social clubs; and (4) attending workshops, trade shows, and meetings of professional associa- tions. Cooperative relationships are established and maintained by showing respect and posi- tive regard, offering unconditional favors (eg., passing on useful information, offering to help with a problem), keeping in touch, and showing appreciation for favors received, especially those requiring a significant effort on the part of the person doing it. The process of networking is a perpetual activity for managers. Old relationships need to be maintained and new ones estab- lished as people in key positions change, the organization changes, and the external environment changes. Good network relationships in the organization are associated with greater influence over subordinates (e.g., Bono & Anderson, 2005). Decision Making and Planning by Managers An important responsibility of formal leaders is to make decisions about objectives, strate gies, operational procedures, and the allocation of resources. The literature on decision mak- ing is extensive, and much progress has been made studying how important decisions are made in organizations. Descriptive studies and analyses of cognitive processes have both been use- ful for understanding how decisions are made in groups and organizations (Narayanan, Zane & Kemmerer, 2011). Some of the findings are reviewed in this section. Emotions and Intuition are Often Involved Decision processes are often characterized more by confusion and emotionality than by rationality. Instead of careful analysis of likely outcomes in relation to predetermined objectives, information is often distorted or suppressed to serve preconceptions and biases about the best course of action. The emotional shock of discovering a serious problem and anxiety about choosing among unattractive alternatives may result in denial of negative evidence, wishful thinking, pro- crastination, vacillation between choices, and panic reactions by individual managers or by decision groups (Janis & Mann, 1977). The greater the job demands and stress for a manager, the less likely it is that a prolonged search or careful analysis of potential costs and benefits will be made (Hambrick, Finkelstein, & Mooney, 2005). Instead, a highly stressed executive is more likely to respond to seri- ous threats and problems by relying on solutions used in the past or by imitating the practices of sim- ilar companies. Individuals with strong negative affect (fear, anger, depression) are more likely to use dysfunctional methods for decision making than individuals with positive affect (Ganster, 2005).28 Chapter 2 . Nature of Managerial Work Routine Decisions are Different Not all decisions involve major changes or prolonged political processes. Managers make many less momentous decisions in the process of solving operational problems, setting short- term goals, assigning work to subordinates, setting up work schedules, authorizing the expend- iture of funds for supplies or equipment, and approving pay increases. These decisions often involve problems for which ready-made and low-risk solutions are available, the manager has the authority to make a decision, few important people will be affected by the decision, little conflict exists about objectives or solutions, and pressure is felt for a quick decision due to a deadline or a crisis. Managers usually make this type of decision either alone or after briefly consulting with a few people, and only a short period of problem analysis and search for solutions is likely to occur (McCall & Kaplan, 1985). Although these decisions are less important, they require appropriate technical knowledge by the manager and the capacity to find a good balance between lengthy, systematic analysis and quick, decisive action. A hasty decision based in limited information may fail to solve the problem, but the problem may get worse and be more difficult to resolve if the manager delays a decision to get more information. Most Planning Is Informal and Adaptive An important type of decision for managers is planning how to achieve objectives, imple- ment changes, and conduct important activities. Planning is often described in the managerial literature as primarily a formal process of written objectives, strategies, policies, and budgets, cascading from top management down the hierarchy, with even more detailed versions at each lower level of management. The descriptive studies find that planning by managers is often informal and implicit. Kotter (1982) found that general managers develop agendas consisting of goals and plans related to their job responsibilities and involving a variety of short-term and long-term issues. The short-term (1-30 days) objectives and plans are usually quite specific and detailed, but the longer-term (5-20 years) agenda items are usually vague, incomplete, and only loosely connected. A new manager begins the process of developing this agenda immediately, but initially it is likely to be rough and incomplete. Over time, as managers gather more informa- tion about their organization or subunit (e.g., operations, people, politics, markets, competitors, problems, and concerns), the agendas are refined and expanded (Gabarro, 1985; Kotter, 1982). Kotter also found that the implementation of agenda items is also a gradual, continuous process. Managers use a variety of influence techniques during their daily interactions with other people to mobilize support and shape events. The agenda guides the manager in making efficient use of random encounters and brief interactions with relevant people in the manager's network of contacts. In his study of top executives, Quinn (1980) found that most of the important strategic decisions were made outside the formal planning process, and strategies were formulated in an incremental, flexible, and intuitive manner. In response to major unforeseen events, the executives developed tentative, broad strategies that allowed them to keep their options open until they had more opportunity to learn from experience about the nature of the environment and the feasibility of their initial actions. Strategies were refined and implemented simultaneously in a cautious, incre- mental manner that reflected the need to develop a political coalition in support of a strategy as well as to avoid the risks of an initial, irreversible commitment to a particular course of action. Instead of a top-down, formal process, overall objectives and strategies for the firms were more likely to be the result of a "bottom-up" political process in which the objectives and strategies of powerful individu- als and organizational subunits are reconciled and integrated. The formal, annual plans were merely a confirmation of strategic decisions already reached through the informal political process.Chapter 2 . Nature of Managerial Work 27 Decisions often reflect the influence of intuition rather than conscious rational analy- sis of available alternatives and their likely outcomes (Dane & Pratt, 2007; Salas, Rosen & DiazGranados, 2010; Simon, 1987). Experienced managers try to determine if a problem is familiar or novel, and for familiar ones they can apply past experience and learned procedures to determine the best course of action. However, failure to classify a problem accurately is likely to result in a poor decision on how to resolve it. When managers become attached to mental models that are no longer adequate, it is more difficult for them to recognize novel problems or innovative solutions (Narayanan et al., 2011). Involving other people can improve the quality of problem diagnosis and decision choice, but only if appropriate processes are used by the group (see Chapters 10 and 11). Important Decisions are Disorderly and Political Much of the management literature describes decisions as discrete events made by a single manager or group in an orderly, rational manner. This picture is sharply contradicted by the descriptive research on managerial work and related research on managerial decision making (Cohen & March, 1974; McCall & Kaplan, 1985; Schweiger, Anderson, & Locke, 1985; Simon, 1987). Managers are seldom observed to make major decisions at a single point in time, and they are seldom able to recall when a decision was finally reached. Some major decisions are the result of many small actions or incremental choices taken without regard to larger strategic issues. Important decisions in organizations typically require the support and authorization of many different people at different levels of management and in different subunits of the organi- zation. It is common practice for a manager to consult with subordinates, peers, or superiors about important decisions when an immediate response is not required. The person who initi- ates the decision process may not be the person who makes the final choice among action alterna- tives. For example, a section supervisor with a problem may point out the need for a decision to his or her boss, the department manager. The department manager may consult with the plant manager or with managers in other departments who would be affected by the decision. Even when not consulted in advance, the plant manager may review the department manager's deci- sion and approve, reject, or modify it. The different people involved in making a decision often disagree about the true nature of a problem and the likely outcomes of various solutions, due to the different perspectives, assumptions, and values typical of managers from different functional specialties and back- grounds. When managers have different mental models for explaining the cause of a problem, it is more difficult to reach agreement about a good solution (Mumford, Friedrich, Caughron, & Byrne, 2007). A prolonged, highly political decision process is likely when decisions involve important and complex problems for which no ready-made, good solutions are available, when many affect- ed parties have conflicting interests, and when a diffusion of power exists among the parties. The decision process may drag on for months or years due to delays and interruptions as a proposal is sidetracked by opponents, preempted by immediate crises, or recycled back to its initiators for revisions necessary to make it suitable to managers whose support is needed (Mintzberg, Raisinghani, & Theoret, 1976). For decisions involving major changes in organizational strate- gies or policies, the outcome will depend to a great extent on the influence skills and persistence of the individual managers who desire to initiate change and on the relative power of the various coalitions involved in making or authorizing these decisions (Kanter, 1983; Kotter, 1982, 1985)