During Enterprise Week, one of the events I chose to attend was a two-hour lecture with a speaker, entitled ‘If it all goes wrong I’ll get a job,’ whereby the purpose of the talk was to give first-hand insight into becoming an entrepreneur.
The speaker in question was a highly successful owner of an advertising recording studio business, who explained how he went about starting his business from scratch, giving first-hand insight into successes and failures he encountered along the way, and how to deal with them. Such problems included raising finances, such as acquiring loans from the bank, and working cohesively with partners, issues which are present for most entrepreneurs.
As a result I felt the event was extremely useful, due to the fact that, as business degree students, we were given a level of first-hand insight into addressing the problems encountered in setting up and running a business not offered by textbook theories.
It was principally interesting to hear what the speaker felt, from experience, were personal qualities required in order to become a successful entrepreneur, such as the ability to take risks and apply strong determination in order to get things done.
However, what I felt was particularly enlightening was the speaker’s opinion on traits not to have. Primarily, it was insisted that no entrepreneurial venture would be successful with a lack of strong personal desire and passion for the business, due to the fact that without motivation, a person is not encouraged to achieve aims required to the best of their abilities. I feel such advice is particularly applicable to me in the type of career I pursue further on in life; the business event has shown me I need to consider personal happiness when considering possible career routes, not just selecting the routes that would be the most successful financially and in terms of status.
Furthermore, the speaker, explaining how to determine if an entrepreneurial idea is good or not, also addressed issues I previously had with the level of risk involved in investing in new product routes and ventures. The business owner’s primary advice, in answer to the issue of garnering whether the outcome of a decision would be successful or not, was to research as widely and extensively as possible. It was stipulated that the role of the entrepreneur is to come up with new ideas and concepts which ‘satisfy a gap in the market’, and that, in order to understand the market as widely as possible, it is required to research all aspects of the venture, from the needs of target consumers, to buying trends and potential competitors. However, the speaker emphasised that such research should be coupled with a ‘risk-taking’ nature, in order to come up with new and original concepts not explored before.
As a result of this, I not only feel more equipped in knowing how to judge whether a potential idea or decision will be successful or not within my business career, I also feel inspired to adopt a more risk-taking nature within such a career, and feel encouraged to look at new and unknown routes rather than making safe decisions.
Conclusively, I feel that the business event on entrepreneurship not only gave helpful and first-hand insight into the day-to-day aspects of setting up and running a business, but was successful in inspiring me to see the benefits of being a risk-taker rather than risk-averse, and thus illustrating a different and more exciting level to the sort of career I could have in business.
Conflict can be basically summarised as a disagreement between parties in terms of personal needs, interests and concerns. Mullins (2010) defines it as ‘behaviour intended to obstruct the achievement of some other person’s goals;’ it is based on the ‘incompatibility’ of goals and arises from contrasting behaviours.
Personal conflict I have encountered is in the form of working within a group for a school film project. The main issues arose due to numerous plotlines being discussed, and the fact that several team members had personal ideas on how to execute and portray the storyline of the film in order to meet the brief we’d been given. This, as Mullins (2010) states, led to opposing members of the group partaking in behaviour intended to restrict others from developing their own ideas. Consequently, the group ran far behind schedule, with a substantial amount still to do with the deadline days away.
As a result, in order to resolve the conflict that had arisen, an impartial team member took charge of communication and organisation in order to persuade all members of the group to negotiate leeway on individual stances and discuss a solution which would satisfy everyone. As a result, the filming of the project was broken down in such a way to allow all members to incorporate their individual ideas within different aspects of the film.
Primarily, it was the impartiality of the self-appointed team leader which allowed them to have an influence on the group, as the person in question was not biased to one particular side. Mullins (2010) describes exercise of power, such as in the example given, a ‘social process’ which helps to explain how different people influence the actions and behaviour of others. In turn, according to the theory by French and Raven, there are many sources of power on which ‘the influence of the leader is based’ (Mullins 2010), such as referent power, reward power and expert power.
Referent power is based on the identification peers have with the leader. This is likely to be based on the fact that the leader commands their respect and esteem due to personal characteristics, reputation etc. An example of this could be the ‘impartial group member’ within the group I worked in for the school film project, where it was their level-headed communication and organisation of the team which caused the group to give them universal respect and acknowledge their assertion of authority.
In turn, reward power refers to people’s perception that the leader has the resources to give out rewards, and that complying with their orders will lead to receiving said rewards. This could be in the form of a department manager or such being able to reward good performance with job promotion, motivating employees below them to increase their efforts in order to achieve good job performance.
Expertpower, on the other hand, is based on the ‘subordinate’s perception of the leader as someone who is competent and [has] knowledge or expertise in a given area.’ (Mullins 2010).Such power is based on credibility, and could refer to long-term and respected members of any organisation, who have experience of dealings within the company. A specific example could be a long-term successful football manager, whose experience would make them a respected figure within the footballing community, and allow them influence over lesser managers and such.
In general however, according to Mullins (2010), there are also many strategies which can be used to overcome conflict at work, the first of which being to clarify goals and objectives. Unclear objectives often create conflict as employees become frustrated in trying to perform assigned tasks. Therefore, such clarification helps to reduce misunderstanding and aid employee efficiency.
Furthermore, a strategy should also be implemented to improve interpersonal and group skills, whereby employees would be able to improve communication skills and learn to empathise with the other person’s viewpoint. Such a strategy would thus help reduce disagreements of points of views and encourage cooperation.
Leadership and management styles should also be analysed in order to resolve conflict. A more personal and supportive style of leadership and behaviour would help manage conflicts, for example, by creating an atmosphere of trust to engage employees.
Conflict can also be resolved through the provision of non-monetary rewards, in the form of a more satisfying job and workplace. This involves addressing things such as training, flexible working hours, and ensuring work remains interesting and challenging, in order to create a content and satisfied staff.
Changing organisational processes, moreover, may also help reduce conflict. Such processes include the authority/hierarchy structure, methods and patterns of communication, and unnecessary bureaucratic procedures, all of which can be altered in order to resolve conflict and again ensure a satisfied workforce.
Conclusively, however, my research into the topic of conflict not only shown me the various reasons for which it can arise, but also the methods that can be put into place in order to resolve and reduce it, thus creating an efficient workforce.
References:
Mullins, Laurie J. (2010) Management and Organisational Behaviour. 9th ed. Essex: Pearson
Leadership, although having several similar traits to management, is essentially very different. Leadership is described by Stacey (1996) as being as ‘transferring directives of those higher up in the hierarchy into the goals and tasks of the group.’ Leaders are present to create ideas; to build and motivate a ‘cohesive team’ {Stacey 1996}, in order to perform tasks effectively and efficiently. A natural born leader is insinuated as possessing the traits to inspire and instigate passion within his peers.
Management on the other hand, is seen as very much formal, consisting of ‘formal administrative bureaucracy.’ The manager’s job is primarily to plan, control, organise and, in turn, to achieve results. As a result, managers are seen as more impersonal and less emotionally involved; where a leader requires to be able to understand and interpet his peers on an emotional level, no such skills are required in management, which is primarily autocratic.
The variance in leadership styles has been developed through many different theories, one of which being Blake and Mouton’s ‘Managerial Grid.’ (1964).
As shown in the grid above, Blake and Mouton suggest that there are five main types of leaders: ‘Impoverished,’ ‘Country club’ (social), Authoritarian,’ ‘Middle of the Road’ and ‘Team leader.’
According to Mullins (2010), the impoverishedmanager has low concern for both production and people and tend to be remote from both. The idea with this leadership style is that too much attention to production will cause difficulties with staff and vice versa.
In turn, the country club manager is said to have low concern for production and high concern for people. Such managers believe that ‘a contented staff will undertake what is required of them and achieve a reasonable level of output,’ (Mullins 2010). However, this means production is second to avoidance of conflict and maintaining a content staff, which may mean organisational output suffers as a result. Alternatively, the authoritarian manager has a high concern for production and low concern for people and tends to ‘rely on a centralised system’ (Mullins 2010), and the use of authority. Staff are regarded as a means of production and is motivated through competition amongst them in order to get the job done.
The middle-of-the-road management style refers to managers who have moderate concern for both staff and production. According to Mullins (2010), such managers are usually referred to as ‘dampened pendulums,’ with them swinging between concern for production and concern for people, dependant on the pressure they are put under.
Finally, the highest rated style of management refers to team managers, who, as a result of having high concern for both production and people, combine and integrate task needs with the needs of staff, therefore managing both tasks and employees efficiently.
To apply the theory behind the Blake-Mouton managerial grid practically, I have chosen to use the scenario of the team leader I worked under as part of an advertising sales team for a local newspaper. Due to the fact that the team leader continually alternated from prioritising the task OF ensuring maximum advertising space was sold for maximum price, to the needs of staff, dependant on the pressure to address each, the leader’s management style was relatable to that of a middle-of-the-road manager. This is as a result of the fact that although at times the team leader would entirely focus on the task at hand, she would then alternate to focusing on staff concerns, regardless of production, such as general staff difficulties in meeting sales targets meaning the targets had to be lowered, irrespective of the affect to sales figures.
In general, however, there are many well-known figures which epitomise good leadership. One such person I feel shows strong leadership qualities is Martin Luther king, the American civil rights campaigner for black people. King, in my opinion, effectively characterised aforementioned traits of good leadership. One such skill is inspiring and instigating passion within your peers, which King was known for, proven through the fact that his campaign was the major cornerstone in improving the rights of black people in America. King effectively conveyed his message in a way that inspired people to understand and act upon his way of thinking. This shows his method of leadership is directly relatable to Stacey’s (1996) theory on leadership, as King effectively ‘took’ directives and turned them into ‘goals and aims,’ which he achieved through instigating passion within his peers.
Conclusively, my research on leadership has shown me that there are major differences between leaders and managers, with distinct qualities defining each. Whilst the latter is usually impersonal and autocratic, focused on organisation, plan and control, the former is more concerned with personally directing and inspiring people, and the best leaders are able to do so to the extent of bringing out the best in their peers in terms of output and achievement.
Organisational culture is defined by Mullins (2010) as the ‘collection of values, policies, beliefs and attitudes’ that illustrates a universal and general context for everything we think and do within an organisation.
The organisation I have chosen in order to exemplify the idea of organisational culture is the retailer John Lewis. The company is famous for its dedication to customer service, and its staff and work policies are tailored to create the best service possible for customers. As a result, staff at John Lewis is trained to be polite, friendly and well-mannered, and employees are instructed to go out of their way in dealing with customer enquiries. One example of this is the employees on the shop-floor dedicated to checking on the welfare of customers and aiding them in their purchases, not only illustrating John Lewis’s dedication to its customer service, but the strong ‘people’ culture it employs, where staff are very much hands on with customers.
In addition to customer service, John Lewis strives to create a formal and professional environment reflective of the expensive and high quality nature of the products in its department stores. As such, employees are always dressed in formal attire, and company policy dictates that they be well-groomed in appearance at all time, in order to reflect the nature of the stores. This again ties in with company policy of staff being well-spoken and polite, as John Lewis aims to look both professional and reputable, maintaining its primary aim of good customer satisfaction.
The formal nature of the culture within John Lewis is further emphasised through the structure of the organisation, which primarily consists of a rigid hierarchical structure from management at the top of the organisation to bottom-tier employees. For example, shop floor attendants report directly to department managers and so forth. This illustrates the formal and autocratic nature of the organisation, which aids John Lewis in maintaining high professional standards reflective of their brand.
However, the formal presentation of staff and structure of the company contrasts to the engaging and light-hearted way in which staff interact with one another and customers. As all staff members are ‘partners’ of John Lewis, there is a culture of equality amongst employees, encouraged by John Lewis, which motivates staff and propels them to be more enthusiastic and interested in the organisation’s operations. John Lewis primarily believes in the theory that happy staff will translate into happy customers.
Conclusively, the cultural aspects of equality amongst staff, formal presentation, and also the company’s dedication to good and strong customer service and relations is exemplified within the video below.
In general terms, there are various ways in which organisational culture can be categorised. The most well-known theory of types of culture, however, is that of Charles Handy. Each of Hardy’s proposed culture types is said to have stemmed ‘from a different presupposition about human motivation, thought and learning,’ (Work.com), and each is said to assume a different basis for power and influence within the organisation. The four types Hardy suggested were the cultures of Power, Role, Task and Person.
A Power culture is defined as an organisation where decisions are ‘centralised around one key individual’ or power source (Learnmanagement2.com). Power cultures are usually found in small or medium-sized businesses, where control is had by one individual or source, and thus there are few rules and procedures. An example of organisations utilising such a culture could be small corner shops and off-licences, where operational decisions are made through one key individual, likely the owner, and there are no formal procedures or guidelines, due to the informal nature of the business.
A Role culture entails working by ‘logic and rationality’ (Mullins 2010) and is often seen as a bureaucracy. In depth, a role culture involves organisations being ‘split into various functions, and each individual within the function… assigned a particular role.’ (Learnmanagement2.com). The benefit of this type of culture is specialisation, where employees focus on their particular job roles assigned to them, thus increasing productivity. As this is a logical and simple structure to use most formal organisations adopt some semblance of this culture. For example, the technology company Microsoft is likely to have set departments within its organisation, whereby staff are given specific job roles, e.g. software developers to write and test new software, and recruitment personnel tasked with hiring and firing staff.
Alternatively, a Task culture is job or project oriented and refers to a ‘team-based approach to complete a particular task,’ (Learnmangement2.com). Such a culture allows ‘flexibility [and] adaptability,’ (Work.com), due to the team-based approach of the culture, where ideas and expertise comes together collectively, rather than through one individual. Such culture can also be present within a multitude of organisations such as, for example, the software company Sage, whereby new software projects are taken on and developed in teams with tasks allocated within the group to those best suited to completing them.
The final culture theorised by Hardy is a Person culture, whereby the individual is the ‘central focus, and any structure exists to serve the individuals within it.’ (Mullins 2010). According to thetimes100.co.uk, this form of culture exists when individuals are allowed fully to express themselves and make their own decisions. An example of this could be a professional such as a fashion or interior designer, where the structure of the business exists solely to aid them and the end product is directly a result of their vision and creativity.
The main problem with classifying organisations using the culture types above is that some companies, especially larger ones with separate departments and a large number of employees, do not comply rigidly with any one culture. Most organisations tend to use a multitude of the culture types stated, and various types may be found in different aspects of the business. For example, a company like Apple could be said to have a personculture due to the head of the company Steve Jobs, who possesses the vision and creativity to delve into new technological concepts and is seen by most as the mastermind behind new ideas. However, the technology development departments of the businesses would employ a task culture, whereby employees work in teams to create and develop a single product.
Conclusively, I feel that although there is reason to conclude that there are different types of cultures which organisations employ, the evidence states that not all organisations conform rigidly to one specific type, and instead are likely to use a mixture of culture types for different aspects of the business.
Beck, R C. (2004) Motivation Theories and Principles. 5th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education
CIPD [n.d] Vision and values: organisational culture and values as a source of competitive advantage [online]. Available from: http://www.cipd.co.uk/research/_visionandvalues.htm [Accessed 28 December 2010]
