Leadership within this day and age can only be remarked as one of the stronger aspects of management because it brings quite a few strengths to the fore (Wheatley, 2006). The essence of any leadership is decided by the ones who work under this leader’s aegis or alongside him on different levels. There are a number of tools that can be used in order to think differently. These include the likes of properly understanding where anomalies within leadership lie and how these can be resolved amicably. Measuring analytics is indeed one of the most sought after tools that is studied under the aegis of leadership. If these realms are seen from a perspective of deriving the strengths more than anything else, then there is little reason why leadership should fail in the very end. Leadership does have its merits and demerits which need to be understood in order to reach upon a conclusion which is elaborately drawn from all angles. This is the need of the hour, more so within the health field where patients are constantly looking up to the doctors and paramedics for their help and assistance. Since analytics are measured from a number of angles and considerations, there is little reason why there should be any hiccups encountered within the said equations. Also leadership can also be gauged through the ethical boundaries which have been manifested within the health field (Morrison, 2011). If one finds more ethical issues surfacing, then this means that the leadership tangent lacks its cohesiveness and perhaps there needs to be a number of aspects which should be taken care of to bring sanity. It must be remembered that strategic thinking comes from looking at the mission and vision objectives which are indeed of significance within any health field organization or setting. If these considerations are looked upon at with a sense of understanding and empathy, there is no reason why strategic thinking would fail to develop over a period of time. Strategic thinking involves an ideology which is comprehensive from all angles and brings into consideration some of the more important points as agenda areas which will be given the necessary highlight. It is mandatory on the part of the leadership to understand that strategic thinking requires tact and planning as well because if these two aspects seem missing, then there is no point in tackling the nuances involved with strategic thinking basis. Strategic thinking after all is a positive that should always be seen with a clear mind and complete focus. I will approach leadership in such a way that there would be more inspiration for the people involved in the process for which leadership has been enacted in the first place. This will make sure that the negativities that shall exist within the relevant domains are taken care of in a very easy manner. There is a sense of empathy that needs to be looked upon at, more so when the discussion centers on the premise of bringing a positive change within the medical basis and how leadership contributes to the said perspectives is another significant point that should always be seen and understood. I will take care of the ethical issues which remain very pivotal because I believe that leadership always instills in a sense of morality within the leader who transfers the same to his subordinates in a downward fashion (Owen, 1990). It asks for more accountability and truthfulness to exist within the r
Running Head: THE NEW SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT Student ID Lecturer Submission Date University The New Scientific Management Leadership is a trait that can only be learned through experience and considerable amount of time. The ones who believe in becoming a leader know precisely that this requires patience and hard labor…
The main premises of the theory were formulated in the 1880s and 1890s by Frederick Winslow Taylor (Lewis, Goodman & Fandt 2000). In the current management literature, the best possible use of scientific management runs counter to the most recent, and better business model, such as human relation management; hence, scientific management has been largely criticised today.
Frederick Taylor proposed the theory itself, thus it is also known as Taylorism. Taylor was an American mechanical engineer who sought to make productive contributions to industrial efficiency (Boddy 2002). His ideas would go on to make him a seminal figure in the Efficiency Movement and today he is regarded as one of the first management consultants (Boddy 2002).
Prior to this concept, there was no such idea or approach which aimed at maximization of production. The concept also came into existence as a result of large scale exploitations suffered by the workers. Scientific management is nothing but a concept which has some pre-formulated and standard norms to improve productivity and work- place environment.
Thus, he envisioned the application of scientific method to the management of workers which can significantly improve productivity and eliminate inefficiencies in business organisations (Gariepy 1). He committed himself in the conduct of time management studies which resulted in his most famous work, The Principles of Scientific Management which was published in 1911 (Frederick Taylor 1).
Nowadays, the importance of effective Human Resource Management (HRM) practices has been recognised by virtually any serious company. If an organisation fails to properly and effectively manage its human resources in the right areas of the business, at the right time and at the right cost, serious inefficiencies are likely to ensue causing considerable operational difficulties and failures (Beardwell, Claydon & Holden 2003).
These were the broad underlying principles upon which F W Taylor fashioned scientific management. This school of management thought followed experimentation and scientific rigor to demonstrate various findings. One of these, as will be tested below, adheres to the fact that through mediums like assembly line, it is possible for a group of people doing a few tasks, to out produce those doing all the tasks.
Of all of these elements organizational structure is of prime importance. In fact when organizational structure is determined it is usually done on a long term planning horizon and its selection decides and shapes the remaining elements. If one has a bureaucratic form of organization then all the remaining organizational elements would be determined by this structure.
Frederick Taylor proposed the theory itself, thus it is also known as Taylorism. Taylor was an American mechanical engineer who sought to make productive contributions to industrial efficiency. His ideas would go on to make him a seminal figure in the Efficiency Movement and today he is regarded as one of the first management consultants.
fore that in the view of Frederick Taylor, making people work as hard as they could was not seen as the most efficient approach to the work process but optimizing the way the work was done (Macionis, 2014). This means that instead of focusing on the energies and physical
1 pages (250 words)Essay
Get a custom paper written by a pro under your requirements!
Win a special DISCOUNT!
Put in your e-mail and click the button with your lucky finger
Apply my DISCOUNT
Got a tricky question? Receive an answer from students like you!Try us!
Didn't find an essay?
Contact us via Live Chat, call us at +16312120006or send an email to email@example.com