MAN EXAMINATION

NORVIN T. MIGUEL, R.N.

September 14, 2008

Master of Arts in Nursing Student

Answer the following questions comprehensively.

1. Define management.
If you look up the dictionary for the definition of management, among many examples you
will find clues as to the real definition of management. Management (from Old French
mnagement the art of conducting, directing, from Latin manu agere to lead by the
hand) characterises the process of leading and directing all or part of an organization,
often a business, through the deployment and manipulation of resources (human, financial,
material, intellectual or intangible). This definition is interesting because it traces the root
meaning of management back to the Latin phrase meaning to lead by the hand. Leading by the
hand implies giving direction that is stronger than just a passing suggestion yet still fairly gentle
in approach. Leading by the hand also implies that the person doing the leading is the one who
first goes where the follower is being lead. The leader is not asking the follower to do something
he is not willing to do himself.
MANAGEMENT is the guidance and control of action required to execute a
program. Also, the individuals charged with the responsibility of conducting a program.
This definition of management refers to a program. This implies that, for management to be
effective there needs to be some type of defined approach or system in place. This system
becomes the plan and management is guiding others in following that plan. This is often the
downfall of managers. They have no plan or system. As a result their actions seem random to the
people they are managing and this leads to confusion and disappointment. This is why it is so
important for business managers to have an employee manual. Without the employee manual
providing direction, managers will struggle to be fair and balanced in their dealings with
employees.
MANAGEMENT is the organizational process that includes strategic planning,
setting; objectives, managing resources, deploying the human and financial assets needed to
achieve objectives, and measuring results. Management also includes recording and storing
facts and information for later use or for others within the organization. Management
functions are not limited to managers and supervisors. Every member of the organization
has some management and reporting functions as part of their job. This definition is more in
depth and tailored toward business management. Notice that it consists of three primary
activities. First, management establishes a plan. This plan becomes the road map for what work
is going to be done. Second, management allocates resources to implement the plan. Third,
management measures the results to see how the end product compares with what was originally
envisioned. Most management failings can be attributed to insufficient effort occurring in one of
these three areas. The definition goes on to talk about how management is responsible for
measuring details that may not be required presently, but may be useful later on. These
measurements often help determine the objectives in the planning stage. When management is

following this type of sequence, it becomes a continuing cycle. Plan, execute, and measure. The
measurements become the basis for the next planning stage and so on.
MANAGEMENT is the activity of getting things done with the aid of people and
other resources. This definition of management focus on management as the process of
accomplishing work through the efforts of others. Skilled managers can accomplish much more
through others than they can through their own single efforts.
MANAGEMENT is the effective utilization and coordination of resources such as
capital, plant, materials, and labor to achieve defined objectives with maximum efficiency.
This definition of management looks at not only the people but the entire range of resources
necessary to follow a plan. Notice how it focuses on efficiency. Management isnt just getting
from point A to point B. It is getting there by choosing the best possible path.
MANAGEMENT is the process of getting activities completed efficiently with and
through other people; the process of setting and achieving goals through the execution of
five basic management functions: planning, organizing, staffing, directing, and controlling;
that utilize human, financial, and material resources. The first definition looks at the fact that
management is getting work done through other people. The second definition divides
management up into five components. These components are all parts of the three components
(plan, execute, measure) that we looked at above. However the more detailed definition helps
show the activities that occur in each of the three phase definition.
MANAGEMENT is the process of achieving the objectives of the business
organization by bringing together human, physical, and financial resources in an optimum
combination and making the best decision for the organization while taking into
consideration its operating environment. This definition talks about the different components
that managers need to control in order to achieve objectives. One differentiator of this definition
is the way it considers the operating environment as part of what a manager must understand.
MANAGEMENT is the role of conducting and supervising a business. This is a broad
definition of management that doesnt consider management as something that can take place
outside of a business.
In my standpoint management means to get the things done in the right way by the right
poeple at the right time; it is a process where the human beings gathered in an environment to
achieve the common goals effectively and efficiently.

2. Why is management considered a Science and an Art?

One of the enduring questions in the field of management is whether it is an art or a
science. Webster's College Dictionary defines an art as "skill in conducting any human activity"
and science as "any skill or technique that reflects a precise application of facts or a principle."
Reflected in the differences in these definitions is the use of precision in science, in that there is a
particular, prescribed way in which a manager should act. Thus, management as a science would

indicate that in practice, managers use a specific body of information and facts to guide their
behaviors, but that management as an art requires no specific body of knowledge, only skill.
Conversely, those who believe management is an art are likely to believe that there is no specific
way to teach or understand management, and that it is a skill borne of personality and ability.
Those who believe in management as an art are likely to believe that certain people are more
predisposed to be effective managers than are others, and that some people cannot be taught to be
effective managers. That is, even with an understanding of management research and an
education in management, some people will not be capable of being effective practicing
managers.
FOUNDATIONS OF THE MANAGEMENT AS A SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE
Practicing managers who believe in management as a science are likely to believe that here
are ideal managerial practices for certain situations. That is, when faced with a managerial
dilemma, the manager who believes in the scientific foundation of his or her craft will expect
that there is a rational and objective way to determine the correct course of action. This manager
is likely to follow general principles and theories and also by creating and testing hypotheses.
For instance, if a manager has a problem with an employee's poor work performance, the
manager will look to specific means of performance improvement, expecting that certain
principles will work in most situations. He or she may rely on concepts learned in business
school or through a company training program when determining a course of action, perhaps
paying less attention to political and social factors involved in the situation. Many early
management researchers subscribed to the vision of managers as scientists. The scientific
management movement was the primary driver of this perspective. Scientific management,
pioneered by Frederick W. Taylor, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, and others, attempted to discover
"the one best way" to perform jobs. They used scientific processes to evaluate and organize work
so that it became more efficient and effective. Scientific management's emphasis on both
reducing inefficiencies and on understanding the psychology of workers changed manager and
employee attitudes towards the practice of management. See Exhibit 1 for a summary of the
principles of scientific management.
FOUNDATIONS OF THE MANAGEMENT AS AN ART PERSPECTIVE
Practicing managers who believe in management as an art are unlikely to believe that
scientific principles and theories will be able to implemented in actual managerial situations.
Instead, these managers are likely to rely on the social and political environment surrounding the
managerial issue, using their own knowledge of a situation, rather than generic rules, to
determine a course of action. For example, as a contrast to the example given previously, a
manager who has a problem with an employee's poor work performance is likely to rely on his or
her own experiences and judgment when addressing this issue. Rather than having a standard
response to such a problem, this manager is likely to consider a broad range of social and
political factors, and is likely to take different actions depending on the context of the problem.
Henry Mintzberg is probably the most well-known and prominent advocate of the school of
thought that management is an art. Mintzberg is an academic researcher whose work capturing
the actual daily tasks of real managers was ground breaking research for its time. Mintzberg,
through his observation of actual managers in their daily work, determined that managers did not
sit at their desks, thinking, evaluating, and deciding all day long, working for long, uninterrupted

time periods. Rather, Mintzberg determined that mangers engaged in very fragmented work, with
constant interruptions and rare opportunities to quietly consider managerial issues. Thus,
Mintzberg revolutionized thinking about managers at the time that his work was published,
challenging the prior notion that managers behaved rationally and methodically. This was in line
with the perspective of management as an art, because it indicated that managers did not
necessarily have routine behaviors throughout their days, but instead used their own social and
political skills to solve problems that arose throughout the course of work.
Another scholar that promoted the notion of management as an art was David E. Lilienthal,
who in 1967 had his series of lectures titled Management: A Humanist Art published. In this set
of published lectures, Lilienthal argues that management requires more than a mastery of
techniques and skills; instead, it also requires that managers understand individuals and their
motivations and help them achieve their goals. Lilienthal believed that combining management
and leadership into practice, by not only getting work done but understanding the meaning
behind the work, as effective managerial behavior. Thus, he promoted the idea of the manager as
a motivator and facilitator of others. This manager as an artist was likely to respond differently to
each employee and situation, rather than use a prescribed set of responses dictated by set of
known guidelines.
Another proponent of the management as art school of thought is Peter Drucker, famed
management scholar who is best known for developing ideas related to total quality
management. Drucker terms management "a liberal art," claiming that it is such because it deals
with the fundamentals of knowledge, wisdom, and leadership, but because it is also concerned
with practice and application. Drucker argues that the discipline (i.e., the science) of
management attempts to create a paradigm for managers, in which facts are established, and
exceptions to these facts are ignored as anomalies. He is critical of the assumptions that make up
the management paradigm, because these assumptions change over time as society and the
business environment change. Thus, management is more of an art, because scientific "facts" do
not remain stable over time.
Frederick W. Taylor's Principles of Scientific Management
1. Managers must study the way that workers perform their tasks and understand the job
knowledge (formal and informal) that workers have, then find ways to improve how tasks
are performed.
2. Managers must codify new methods of performing tasks into written work rules and
standard operating procedures.
3. Managers should hire workers who have skills and abilities needed for the tasks to be
completed, and should train them to perform the tasks according to the established
procedures.
4. Managers must establish a level of performance for the task that is acceptable and fair and
should link tit to a pay system that reward workers who perform above the acceptable level.
ART AND SCIENCE IN MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Noted researcher Thomas Kuhn, in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,
addresses issues associated with the state of current scientific research and the opportunities for

scientific discovery. Kuhn, in his previous editions of this text, drew distinctions between mature
and immature fields of study. In mature fields of study, many of the central questions of that field
have been answered, and strong consensus exists among researchers regarding the fundamental
assumptions of that field. Conversely, in immature fields of study, there is still a great deal of
debate on major questions in the field, and gains in knowledge come sporadically. In many ways,
management is an immature science. While its foundations in psychology, sociology, and other
related areas give it a long and rich history, the nature of the areas of study renders it immature.
That is, due to the difficulties of studying human behavior in a number of disparate settings, the
study of management is still very young when compared to other fields of research (e.g., in the
physical sciences). In fact, many scholars have argued that the social sciences (e.g., management
research) suffer from envy of the physical sciences, in which "truths" are able to be determined
through research. As such, social sciences researchers may strive to create a more "scientific"
approach to their fields in order to grant them more legitimacy. Despite its relative immaturity,
some consistent answers have been developed in the field of management. In many ways this is
due to the increased sophistication of management research. However, there are still a number of
research gaps in management; despite our increased knowledge in some areas, there is still a
great deal of disagreement and confusion in other areas. In these circumstances, the practice of
management is likely to be dictated by the perspective of management as an art. Because there
are no hard and fast rules in certain circumstances, individual managers' experiences and skills
must guide them. Today, much of the management research conducted in academic institutions
blends the notion of management as an art and as a science. Some of these trends in management
research that have pushed the field in either directionnamely increased statistical
sophistication and the emphasis on contextual influencesare described below.
INCREASED STATISTICAL SOPHISTICATION.
As computer technology continues to improve, the ability of management researchers to
conduct sophisticated statistical analyses has also been enhanced. Powerful statistical computing
packages are now readily available for desktop computers, allowing for high-speed analysis of
complex statistical models. Additionally, new statistical modeling techniques, such as structural
equations modeling, have gained footing in management research. Thus, management
researchers are now better able to empirically test more complex research hypotheses, and
management as a science is perpetuated.
The improvement in researchers' ability to analyze statistics more quickly has resulted in an
increase in information about theories of management. Practicing managers may now know of
certain relationships that have received strong support through decades of empirical research.
Such "truths" may become guiding principles that practicing managers see as ideal solutions to a
variety of situations. For instance, numerous empirical studies over several recent decades have
supported the relationship between appropriate goal setting and higher work performance. This
relationship has been tested in a variety of situations, with a number of contextual influences
present, yet the statistical relationship holds in nearly all of them. Thus, a practicing manager
may see this body of empirical research and, in a work situation, see the benefits of goal setting
on performance as a scientific ideal. He or she may then implement goal setting in a number of
practical situations, bolstered by the confidence afforded by decades of research supporting such
actions.

Meta-analysis, in particular, is a methodological procedure that has contributed

significantly to the study of management. Meta-analysis is a statistical technique that allows a
researcher to combine findings from multiple studies, correct for errors in study design, and
determine an "average" statistical relationship among variables. Meta-analysis first gained a
foothold in management research in studies of the validity of selection techniques for different
jobs in different organizations. Before the application of meta-analysis to research on the validity
of different selection techniques, there was a belief in the situational specificity of these selection
methods. That is, studies of the accuracy of selection techniques in predicting subsequent job
performance had such disparate results that academics concluded that validity of a standardized
test, for example, would differ dramatically in each selection situation (e.g., with different job
applicants, in different organizations, in different geographic regions). This myth was dispelled,
however, with the application of meta-analysis to the results of the collected body of research on
the validity of selection methods. The use of meta-analysis established that the differences in
findings were due primarily to limitations of research design, such as small sample size,
unreliability of measures, and other correctable problems. When meta-analysis was applied to
this group of studies, they were combined to determine that validates of selection techniques
were general across jobs and organizations. Thus, the use of meta-analysis helped to establish
that cognitive ability tests and structured interviews were highly valid selection methods in
nearly every job. Meta-analysis has now been applied to many different areas of management
research, including training, recruitment, fairness, and many other topics. Additionally, there
have been a number of refinements to the statistical corrections used in meta-analysis. This
increased acceptance of and use of meta-analysis in management research supports the notion of
management as a science. Meta-analysis provides for "truths" in managementrelationships
between variables that hold strong regardless of the people or situation involved. For instance,
one consistent finding is that structured selection interviews, ones in which applicants are asked
the same set of predetermined questions, and in which responses are evaluated using the same
criteria, are a more valid predictor of future job performance than are unstructured interviews, in
which applicants are asked different questions and responses are evaluated using different
criteria. Meta-analysis has been used to establish this finding, and thus a practicing manager may
use this information as a scientific "fact" when conducting selection interviews.
CONTEXTUAL INFLUENCES.
While improvements in management researchers' ability to conduct statistical analysis in
heir studies has promoted the notion of management as a science, in some ways it has also
promoted management as an art. Because of the capability to statistically analyze and interpret
larger, more complex models of behavior, researchers are now testing models with this increased
complexity. In particular, there is an increased emphasis on contextual influences. That is, rather
than focusing solely on how behaviors are linked to outcomes, many researchers now include
individual, social, and political variables in research models to have a richer understanding of
behavior. Thus, there are more complex recommendations that can be made from recent research,
rather than basic "truths."
For example, one of the most prominent areas of contextual research in recent years is in
person-organization fit. Person-organization fit is a part of the attraction-selection-attrition model
that suggests that certain types of individuals are attracted to particular organizations, selected by
those organizations, and either adapt to become an effective part of the organization, or leave if

they do not fit with the organization. Person-organization fit (p-o fit) is the notion that the
particular skills, attitudes, values, and preferences of an individual employee should fit with
those of the organization in order for that employee to have high job satisfaction and
performance. The p-o fit model indicates that this fit is likely to be as important as an assessment
of applicants' abilities when hiring. Previous models of selection emphasized a strict
interpretation of applicant skills, with the use of valid selection tests as most important.
However, the p-o fit model indicates that, even if skills and abilities have been appropriately
measured, that hiring the applicant with the best skills is not always the best course of action, but
that hiring an individual who fits into the culture of the organization could be more
advantageous.
This move towards including contextual influences in management research models
promotes the notion of management as an art. Rather than indicating that there are specific
principles and guidelines that can guide management practice, it suggests that managerial
behavior should change based on the social and political context of the situation.
ART AND SCIENCE IN MANAGEMENT EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Management education and development, which attempt to prepare today's managers for
organizational challenges, are guided by both the notion of management as an art and as a
science. The approach to management education and development is likely to differ dramatically
depending on the belief one has as to the nature of the practice of management. The perspective
of management as an art assumes to some extent that a manager has a disposition or experiences
that guide him or her in managerial decisions and activities. Thus, with this perspective, many
managers may be successful without any formal education or training in management. The
perspective of management as a science, however, would indicate that management skills can be
taught through an understanding of theory and principles of management. Many of today's
educational institutions and workplaces blend the notion of management as a science and an art
in their approach to preparing employees for management.
Primarily, formal management education for practicing managers, such as with bachelors
and masters degrees, emphasizes the science of management. Management education in today's
universities primarily emphasizes management as a science. Textbooks are used in management
courses for bachelors' degrees, and these texts emphasize many of the consistent findings of
many decades of management research. And, as these degrees increase in popularity, it is likely
that more practicing managers will have a set of established management ideals with which they
operate.
While formal management education may promote management as a science, many
development efforts support the notion of management as an art. To cultivate management talent,
organizations offer mentoring, overseas experiences, and job rotation. These activities allow
managers to gain greater social and political insight and thus rely on their own judgment and
abilities to improve their management style. Much of mentoring involves behavior modeling, in
which a protg may learn nuances of managerial behavior rather than a set of specific
guidelines for managing. Overseas experiences are likely to involve a great deal of manager
adaptation, and the general rules by which a manager might operate in one culture are likely to
change when managing workers in other countries. Finally, job rotation is a technique that

requires a manager to work in a variety of settings. Again, this encourages a manager to be

flexible and adaptive, and likely rely more on his or her personal skill in managing.
The foundations of management as an art and management as a science are evident in
today's educational institutions and work organizations. Management as a science was primarily
influenced by researchers in the area of scientific management, such as Frederick Taylor, and
continues today in much of the empirical research on management issues. Management as an art
has been influenced by scholars such as Henry Mintzberg and Peter Drucker, and is often evident
in complex theories of management. Many scholars and practitioners blend art and science to
more effectively cultivate managerial talent. This is evident in recent theories of management,
research in workplaces, and education and development of managers.

3. What are the six (6) Ms of Management?

1. Manpower and 2. Machinery, if you think about it in terms of the 6 M's. Website
experience is a machine, and call center operators would equate to Manpower. Once you
populate all of the drivers or inputs (or x's) that affect a customer's value proposition when they
use the website or call into the call center on the fishbone, along with the other 4 bones: 3.
Methods(Process), 4. Mother Nature(Environment), 5. Measurements and 6. Materials
(tools to do their job), you will most likely notice a commonality between the smaller bones
under each heading. For example, under website experience, Manpower (Agents, in our
example), you might see inputs like training, administration/support procedures and computer
response latency, which are affecting their ability to service the customer. I would expect to see
computer response latency under Machinery as well. Likewise, I would expect to see
administration/support procedures under Methods as well.

4. What are the three (3) basic skills a manager must possess?
5. What should happen as a manager moves up in an organization in
terms of management activities vs. technical activities?
6. In your own opinion, to become an effective nurse-manager utilizing
Henri Fayols fourteen principles, rank them according to their priority or
significance. Explain why.
7. The goal of providing quality nursing care seemed to be eternal but
with the present situation in management-red tapes, padrino system, and
the like serve as hindrances in the attainment of set goal. In your own
concept, does Bureaucracy help in the attainment of set goals and
objectives?
8. Simplifying Henri Fayols principles into four (4) categories which of
the fourteen (14) principles fall under Mooneys?
A. Coordination
B. Functional Effect

C. Scalar Process
D. Authority
9. Define planning as a nursing management function.
10. What are the two major types of organizational planning?
11. What are the different elements of planning?
12. Enumerate three (3) purposes of planning.
13. What are the steps in the decision-making process?
14. How can managers effectively manage group decision-making?
15. What are the three (3) aspects of delegation?
16. Enumerate two (2) principles of time management.
PRINCIPLES OF TIME MANAGEMENT
1. The importance of learning time management skills is so you can Work smarter
rather than harder. Good time managers have more free time without worrying
about tasks that have not been completed.
2. Development of Short- and Long-Range Goals Establishing short- and long-range
goals is essential to successful time management in both one's personal life and
one's work life. When establishing goals, it is necessary to determine and specify
standards that must be achieved within stated dates and/or times. This involves
identifying a series of specific steps designed to bring one closer and closer to a
stated goal. A good plan must include amounts of time per day or hour (or other
time measurement) that will be devoted to work geared to achievement of the goal.
It should include estimated time costs that might result from barriers or obstacles
encountered along the way. Prioritizingthat is, ranking goals in order of
importanceis necessary in situations where the most important of the possible
goals may not be easily determined.

17. Enumerate three (3) time management strategies to help managers use
their time wisely and effectively.
a. Recognize that inevitably some of your time will be spent on activities outside of your
control. Dont fret about it.
b. Concentrate on one thing at a time.
c. Set deadlines for yourself.

18. Define organizing as a nursing management function.

19. Why do we organize?
To establish the internal organizational structure of the institution. The focus is on division,
coordination, and control of tasks and the flow of information within the organization. Managers
distribute responsibility and authority to job holders in this function of management

20. Why is planning the first management function that is necessary to

organize?
21. What are some guidelines for organizing?
1. Organize around a specific issue A group formed for some vague purpose, such as to improve
relations between parents and professionals is much less likely to succeed
than a group whose goal is to double the number of medically fragile children receiving
nursing and other essential medical services in their own home.
2. Make certain the organizations purpose is clear. David Belasco used to tell budding
showmen, if you cant write the idea for your show on the back of my calling card, you
dont have a good idea. Belasco was right: if you cannot describe the purpose of your
group in a few words, you are in trouble.
3. Start work on your issue at once. Spend the absolute minimum amount of time on such trivia
as fundraising, writing by-laws, choosing officers, etc.
4. Avoid detailed planning. Instead, watch for chances to capitalize on opportunities as they
develop. Too much detailed planning produces overly rigid organization that cannot
respond quickly to changing situations or promising alternatives.
5. Select your strategies (general ways to achieve your purpose) with great care. Strategy
is a fancy word for finding the best way to get the person you are trying to influence to make
the right decision. Picking the right strategy will not necessarily ensure success, but it
will certainly make your life easier. Choose strategies that suit your community, your target, and
the members of your group.
6. Find a role for everyone who wants to help. Dont worry about ideological purity; if someone
is willing to help, put them to work.
7. Match people to work. There really are things that parents do better than professional, and that
professionals do better than parents. Dont be afraid to reflect this fact in the
way you assign tasks within your group. But dont put too much emphasis on roles;
find and exploit what each person in the group does best.
8. Let your leaders emerge from the group. One reason for starting work before the structure of
your group is set is to permit leaders to emerge from the actual work of the group.
9. Dont worry about how many people are active in the organization. Do worry about whether
the organization is achieving its purpose.
10. All organizations need to be nurtured and supported. Pay attention to the health of your
organization. Make sure members feel that their work is appreciated.
11. Dont try to sustain an organization beyond its useful life. When the job is done, consider
getting rid of the organization. It is easier to rally people around a new organization with a new
purpose than to sustain an old organization until the right issue comes along.

22. What are the basic concepts in organizing?

23. What are the elements of organizing?
24. What is meant by the principle of unity of command?
A concern of all managers in applying staff and functional authority is violation of the
principle of unity of command which is also one of Henri Fayols management principles. The
principle requires that each person within the organization take orders from and reports to only one
person. Unity of command should guide any attempt to develop operating relationships. Although
each person should have only one boss, the operating relationships developed through staff
departments mean that workers may have more than one supervisor in a given situation or at
least perceive that they do from the style with which advice is given. A departmental manager or
subordinate may receive guidance or directives on a given day from human resources on
employment practices, from finance on budget time frames, and from data processing concerning
computer procedures. If possible, these situations should be minimized, or at least, clarified for the
sake of all affected.

25. What is meant by division of labor?

In the early 1900s, Max Weber, one of the pioneers of modern sociology, designed a
perfectly rational organizational form, called a bureaucracy. Among the characteristics of this
"ideal" organization were specialization, division of labor, and a hierarchical organizational design.
Division of labor is a form of specialization in which the production of a product or service is
divided into several separate tasks, each performed by one person. According to Weber's design,
inherent within the specialization and division of labor is knowledge of the precise limit of each
worker's "sphere of competence," and the authority to perform individual tasks without
overlapping others. Adam Smith, an early economist, suggested that productivity would rise
significantly when the division of labor principle was used. Output per worker would be raised
while costs per unit produced would be reduced. Division of labor was applied, for example, in
manufacturing plants that incorporated mass production tech inquest. In organizations that used
mass production, each worker specialized in completing one specialized task; the combined work
of several specialized workers produced the final product. For example, in manufacturing an
automobile, one worker would assemble the dashboard, another would assemble the wheels, and
yet another would paint the exterior. Since the time of Adam Smith, division of labor has been
perceived as a central feature of economic progress. Two aspects of labor exist. First is the division
of labor within firms; this concerns the range of tasks performed by workers within a particular
firm. Second is the division of labor between firms; this concerns the range of products or services
the firm produces.
Current Application of Division of Labor
Fred Luthans (1998) describes the bureaucratic model proposed by Max Weber as an
"historical starting point" for organizational analysis. Citing "complex, highly conflicting
relationships, advanced information technology, and empowered employees," Luthans (p. 519)
discusses the functional and dysfunctional consequences of specialization uncovered in several

research studies. For example, although specialization has enhanced productivity and efficiency, it
has also led to conflict between specialized units, hindering achievement of the overall goals of the
organization. Further, specialization can impede communication among units, as highly specialized
units tend to "withdraw into themselves and not fully communicate with other units above, below,
or horizontal to it: (Luthans, p. 519). In addition, highly specialized jobs can lead to employee
boredom and burnout. Given these concerns, a significant change is under way in management of
work in organizations. According to Richard Walton (1991), the work force can be managed in two
ways, one based on control and the other based on commitment. Key factors that differ between
the control and commitment approaches are job design principles, performance expectations,
management organization (structure, systems, and style), compensation policies, employment
assurances, employee input in policies, and labor-management relations (Walton, 1991). The
control-oriented approach is based on the classic bureaucratic principles of specialization and
division of labor. In the control-oriented environment, worker commitment does not flourish.
Division of labor can ultimately reduce productivity and increase costs to produce units. Several
reasons are identified as causes for reduction in productivity. For example, productivity can suffer
when workers become bored with the monstrous repetition of a task. Additionally, productivity can
be affected when workers lose pride in their work because they are not producing an entire product
they can identify as their own work. A breakdown in the mass production line can bring an entire
production line to a standstill. And, with highly specialized jobs, worker training can be so
narrowly focused that workers cannot move among alternate jobs easily. Consequently,
productivity can suffer when one key worker is absent. Finally, discontent with control is
increasing in today's work force, further hindering the long-term success of the classic bureaucratic
application of specialization and division of labor. In contrast to the control-oriented approach, the
commitment-oriented approach proposes that employee commitment will lead to enhanced
performance. Jobs are more broadly designed and job operations are upgraded to include more
responsibility. Control and coordination depend on shared goals and expertise rather than on
formal position. The control and commitment oriented approaches are only one way to view the
concepts of division of labor and specialization. These concepts influenced organizations in the
late 1990s by a complex array of organizational dynamics. In response to such complex
organizational dynamics as intense competitive pressures, organizations were being restructured.
Hierarchies were becoming flatter, meaning that fewer levels of management existed between the
lowest level of worker and top management. In some organizations, web-like and network
organizational structures were replacing traditional hierarchical organizations (Kerka, 1994). In
these redesigned organizations, the shift was away from departments that focused on traditional
organizational functions such as production, administration, finance, design, and marketing
(Lindbeck and Snower, 1997). In these redesigned organizations, the shift was away from highlyspecialized jobs toward workers performing a multitude of tasks within relatively small
autonomous customer-oriented teams. In these working groups, workers were given a broad task
specification by management and within those loose constraints, the teams were allowed to
organize, to allocate roles, to schedule tasks, and so forth (Bessant, 1991). With this design,
traditional occupational barriers and clear-cut specialized job descriptions began evaporating as
workers were empowered to define their own job tasks; this movement resulted in a decrease of
the division of labor and specialization within firms. As a consequence of these changes, during the
1990s, increased division of labor between firms was often accompanied by a reduction in the
division of labor within firms. In other words, while firms were becoming more specialized in the
products and services they offered, individual workers within firms were handling an increasing

range and depth of job responsibilities. As mentioned earlier, this work was often completed in
autonomous teams.
Effects of Size, Cost, and Performance on Division of Labor
In some organizations, division of labor and the degree of specialization are being reduced,
while in other organizations, division of labor and specialization are increasing. A number of
factors can influence this discrepancy among organizations. For example, the degree of
specialization and division of labor can be related to the size of the organization; typically, small
and mid-sized employers are not able to cost justify specialized division of labor. Lindbeck and
Snower (1997) report that, as the costs of communication among workers declines, the degree of
specialization, and consequently, division of labor within organizations, may rise. Some literature
reports that, as the size of the market increases, it sup ports more division of labor. The degree of
division of labor within firms can also depend on the degree to which performance on particular
tasks is measurable, and the degree to which wages affect task performance. Implementation of
technology can also have a profound influence on the division of labor in organizations.
Effects of Technology on Division of Labor
Computerization has enabled organizations to increase the variety of tasks performed by
workers, consequently reducing specialization and division of labor. For example, information
technologyflexible machine tools and programmable multipurpose equipmentcan reduce the
division of labor within firms as workers transfer their knowledge from task to task more easily.
Information and manufacturing technology can also enable individual workers or work teams to
combine different tasks more readily to meet a customer's needs while enhancing productivity. For
example, customer information gained from production activities can be used to improve financial
accounting practices, and employee information gained from training activities can be used to
improve work practices. Eric Alsene (1994) reported that increased integration of computer
databases has the potential to profoundly alter task and functional assignments in organizations,
consequently affecting division of labor and specialization. Originally, the purpose of integrating
computers into organizations was to merge the various functions of labor. Computer integration
was designed to restructure businesses around their core business processes, outsourcing some
activities to specialized external organizations and strengthening partnerships with suppliers and
subcontractors. In the newculture shaped by computer integration, every worker was to have a
broader view of the organization. Workers were expected to work in teams with enhanced
communication, participation, teamwork, and an enhanced sense of belonging and continuous
learning. In this new organizational model enabled by technology, the classic bureaucratic mass
production model in which workers performed functions separately and sequentially was
eliminated. The computer integration model was designed to ultimately lead to the dismantling of
vertical and horizontal barriers while supervisory control concentrated increasingly on work
methods rather than on final products (Child, 1987). In other words, the new design enabled
organizations to focus on how products and services were delivered rather than on what products
or services were delivered. This design facilitated continuous improvement in the organization.
The newtechnologies assisted in blurring the boundaries among departments while information
flowed freely throughout the organization, thereby disregarding the traditional bureaucratic
hierarchy. As work groups and task forces were formed, units no longer worked in isolation. The
new model enabled by technology calls into question the traditional division of labor in

organizations. For example, flexible manufacturing systems eliminate the barrier between
maintenance and production. This increased automation supports the movement described earlier
of work becoming more diversified, independent, intellectual, and collective.