Organizational Behavior 10
Administrationin any organization is an integral factor in its development andcreation of better systems for the organization. Leadership of abusiness entity enhances how employees are alienated to theobjectives and collective responsibility of the teamto help with the creation of better ideas,which would help to make the entire company a better place. On theother hand, through the different scales of power in an organization,variousstyles providetop efficiency in running the issues in a required manner. Throughthe integration of these practices within an organization, there arestipulated measures that should be well looked at to ensure that theorganization moves to the next level. Organizationalleadership defines the entire company levels towards their goals andobjectives that determine the steps that they make.
Thereare various bases of power within an organization. In theorganizational hierarchy, there are managers and the top linemanagers who take careof different issuesin a firm. These management problemsthat the teaminitiates are integral in the creation of a better society.The power that leaders within an organization have the mandate ofmaking them put employees in line with the corerequirements of the organization. These basic needswarrant that the organization is well run and acts according to theconsiderations of the industry. In management and leadership of theteam,various bases of the powerdrive the organization to its performance. Coercion is aninstrumental tool in differenttheoretical classes considered as a must application in the processof management. Through coercion, the administrationalienates the employees to their roles through various threats ofpunishment. Nonetheless, the coercive power of a manager is also metwith the best power of the directortowards the achievements of the organizational goals.
Foraparticularperiod, the coerciveness of a managerhas been put to consideration as a great measure into making theorganization to have the best practices that it deities. The coercionforce,on the other hand,isalso metwith other schools of thought that attribute it to the short runefficiency of work in the organization and the long termdissatisfaction of the employees with their job.Therefore, the coercion of employees within the management of anorganization is differently taken in as a measureof control.The following paper keenly looks at the various perspectives offeredon the issue of coercion as an important aspect of management withinan organization. Therefore, the paper makes a keen analysis todiscern the true condition of the modern organizations in inclinationto coercion as a management tool.
Accordingto Grey (2005), the organizational management through bureaucracy isstill a relevant method in the contemporary society. Bureaucracy isassociatedwith duress within the organizations in the modern society. Throughthe practiceof administration,the organizations get to achieve their dreams through variousapproaches. The author seriously takesalook at the management structure of the large-scaleorganizations and also the manner in which these bodiesare controlled to achieve the collective goal. Since the employee andthe manager needs are always different, the bodyrequires coercive leadership to ensure that the realistic purposesof the organization are stamped to make it on the right path towardsthe achievement of their objectives. Thus, through the leadershipstyle, the organization has aconcentratedform of responsibility towards various actions. On the other hand,Grey also looks at differentperspectives of bureaucracy that helps the management of agenciesin the modern times. The author characterizes bureaucracy with thehigh specialization of the organizations to help with the carryingout of duties in various aspects (Grey, 2005). Therefore, when thegroupcomes up with a definite way of action, the bureaucratic systemscontributeto make the employees in various sectors relevant to their positionsand actions. Coercive leadership states that an employee should havethe relevant skills that tackle a given problem, to beoffereda position within the company. Therefore, the act of having coerciveleaders helps to ameliorate the functions of the organizations in abetter way that also improves the work culture of the company. Theauthor critically refers to bureaucracy as an avenue of the companieshaving their goals and objectives in check. The action of the leadersmakes the employees have the right perception of the organizationalculture and what isexpectedof them. Moreover, the specialization helps to obtain better avenuesfor the organization in the event of leadership.
Onthe other hand, the act of coerciveness makes the teamshaveeven better initiatives of controlling the organizations. The avenueof punishing employees when they stray from the norm makes them havethe perception that the organizational goals have to beachievedin the provided manner. Thisprovidesthe organization with a better model of working for their purposes,instead of straying from the provided way to have other means ofachievements of their team.Therefore, through the actions of the coercive leaders, theorganization is in a better position to act and secure the long runprofitability. In comparison to the other styles of management, thecoercive leadership, a form of bureaucracy is viewed as asignificantportion of making the employees formalized to their variousjobs and an avenue that helps to make the employees motivated to worktowards the common goal of the organization (Grey, 2005).Furthermore, the leadership process makes the company have a buildingof trust with their employees.
Despitethe great attributes given to the form of management, bureaucracy andcoerciveness have adverseeffects onthe organization according to Grey (2005). The human relations in themodern society do not require the traditional models such as coercionto work. The fast changing organizational environment shuns away therole of making the companies have a system of punishment for theiremployees. Moreover, the form makes the management have a soledecision-makingrole inhelping cover their actions.Through this, the organizations are closed to the efforts andcontributions of the other members of the groups,which would be instrumental in making the team,move a stride. The method of leadership leads to a high burnout rateof the employees and makes it difficult for the employees to carryout the relevant practices that would ameliorate their positions. Thecoercion of employees,therefore,provides asignificantdetriment to the modern system of management and organizations. Thoseorganizations that use the model of leadership experience a high rateof resignation formstheir employees to move to other groupsthat are acceptable in their relations (Grey, 2005). Therefore, themodel of management processes asignificantdetriment to the creation of a positive culture in the workplace.
Thecontemporary management styles advocate for the appreciation andinvolvement of the employees in the decision-making role of theorganization. However, the act of coerciveness does not provide forthis. The workersare dehumanized and regarded as working tools rather thaninstrumental figures of the team.Through the act of making the employees distant fromthe team,the commitment levels are lowered thus a great inclination to lowperformance and hence high burnout rates (Grey, 2005). The coercionof the employees,therefore,presents itself as a poor model of leadership for the organizations.Therefore, through the making of better initiatives of theorganization, the coerciveness should be keenly replaced with modernmethods of management.
Accordingto Adam Smith (2009), the coerciveness of nations helped toameliorate the industrialization age. Through the model of countriesaccounting for the division of labor and ensuring that there are highrates of specialization in the company, the rates of developmentincreased at greater extents. Thus, through the practice of ensuringthat the countries moved to the next level. The same methodis applicable in the contemporary society (Adam, 2009). Adam Smithis a great proponent of the idea of coerciveness and bureaucracy as amodel of management. The various aspects of the organization arebroughtunder one system of governance with the central part of makingdecisions and giving out the general punishments to the defaulters.As a result, the organization gets a better placement of success.
Organizationalsuccess isratedby the manner in which they divide their labor. The division of laborin an organization is an instrumental part of coerciveness that makesthe employees has a similar objective in the workplace. Adam Smithargues that this would ameliorate the management function and ensurethat the various acts of the society arewell putinto implementation. The administrationof an organization has a better inclination to making the rightdecisions towards aparticularaction.The economics of Adam Smiththerefore proposes that there should be better avenues through whichthe entire society acquires their general orders. The act of makingthe organizational departments as bureaus makes the actionan even better initiative in controlling the large-scale industries(Adam, 2009). Most economists apply the principle of coercion inorganizations to ensure that the scope of the organization and thegoals arewell metwith the right steps that had beenpreviously outlined.
Inthe contemporary society, through the act of making the groupsan even better place to carry out various improvements in thecommunity,they deserve great leadership styles. Usingthe coercive force as a base to drive the organizations,the entire organizationhas a potential of moving from one angle to the next. Therefore, theauthor makes a step at identifying the initiatives that make coerciona better placement in the society. Through the act, the organizationshave greater initiatives that help to market their actions in therequired way and spread the billsfrom one employee to the next. In comparison to the other managementmodels, the coercion of employees helps to achieve great resultswithin the shortest time possible since the employees know thatcontrary actions attract punishments of different kinds. Therefore,the act is even moresignificantstep to the organizations that drive it to success (Adam, 2009).Therefore, the coercion of employees in the organization is a betterinitiative for the entire economy. This theory dignifies theintimidationof employees and places it as a top priority for leaders to considerwhen carrying out their leadership roles. Therefore, the act is animportant aspect of organizational growth and ensures highadherence to the culture and regulations.
Ritzier(2011) classifies the contemporary society in a manner which showsthat there are various ways in which the old ideasthat are unacceptable in the society are included to improve theefficiency. The author argues through the macdonaldnizationof the society that the rationality of the society has beenputto substantiallyirrational levels. Through the study of the fast food restaurant, theauthor comes up with aparticularsystem that provides a stipulated form of analyzing the society togive a better view (Ritzier, 2011). The author providesan insight into the various ways in which the restaurant is run andprovides how the characteristics come in a piecewith the coercion of the workers fromthe management to carry out the proposedactivities. Therefore, through the book, the constraintstyle as a practiceof the directorateisshownas a dominant style in the modern society. Coercionpresents itself in various ways according to the author. Thecompanies use pressureto ensure that they achieve customer delight and in turnprofitability in their actions.
Thefirst characteristic of the society is the predictability. Thisshowsthat one can easily discern the organizational culture and the formof treatment in various places through an experience in one of theirbranches. The author argues that throughcoercionthe employees are made to act in similar ways that portray evengreater opportunities for the organization to movein a better way. The lawmakes the entire society have better meansof treating the companies. Therefore, through the making of apredictable movement, the society is in a better placement to receivethe best outcome of coercion in their actions.
Onthe other hand, the author states that another characteristic ofpressureis the efficiency of the organizations. The workers in the particulargroupsaretrainedon how to work in the most efficient manners. Through the making ofan effectivesystem, the organizations have a better inclination at handling theiremployees. Therefore, the act of the companies in respect to thevarious employees uses coercion to make the efficient outcome ofactions. Efficiency is also termed as an appropriate measure in themodern society to give it the best of results as estimated by thecustomers (Ritzier, 2011). Thisisachievable through strict and coercive governance that provides for aconsequence to each adverseaction that the organization’s employees do. Thus, the coercivenature of the groupshelps to bring efficiency to the table.
Calculabilityof the products and the acts of the employees is also a coerciveoutcome of the modern society. Through ensuring, that the actions arewell monitored and rated as per the required standards, theorganizations ensure that they are in the best leveling against otheractivitiesin the society. Thisalsoensures that the company works harder to achieve their goals andmakes the employees have accurateperceptions of the organization. Therefore, through the making of abetter society and a calculable system of actions, the contemporarysociety makes coercion a norm at ruling the various systems that markthe society.
Totalcontrol of the actions is also a component of coercion in the modernsociety. Despite the denial of the model of governance as anefficient method in the modern organizations, oppressionpresents itself as a better initiative towards making theorganizations better in their aspirations. Control ensures that allstages of production within an organization are in line with theprojected rules and goals of the organization (Ritzier, 2011).Moreover, monitoringin the organization provides that the various individuals who are inthe organization are required to work in astipulated mannerand have a better approach to the issues that arediscussedin the group.Thus, coercion and organizational control is a form of manipulationto bring out the intended outcome by the management.
Inconclusion, the coercive factor in management is still acommoncomponentof the directoratein the society. Through coercion, the managers have a betterapproach at issue that facesthe community.Nonetheless, pressuremakes it possible for the companies to work towards the achievementsof their goals. Despite the critical and adverseeffects of the act in the society, it is a well-knownfactor of success for the organizations that practice it in the bestway. Various scholars provide in-depthanalysis of the issues that are pertinent to the coercive nature ofmodern management and its transformation to efficient governance inthe fast changing world. Thus, through the analysis of thesedifferent viewpoints, it is noticeable that the society is a betterplacement to ensure that the management of firms is in inclination tothe strategic goals and scope. This,however, encompasses the use of coercive power base as a model ofmaking the employees work forthe betterment of the organizations Thus, Coerciveness is an elementof the contemporary management that provides organizations with abetterinclination to competitive advantage.
Adam,S., 2009. AnInquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.BiblioBazaar, LLC.
Grey,C., 2005. Avery short fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book aboutstudying organizations.Sage.
Ritzer,G., 2011. TheMcDonaldization of society 6.Pine Forge Press.