Manager: Symbolic or Omnipotent
- Pages: 2
- Word count: 310
- Category: College Example Organizational Behavior
A limited time offer! Get a custom sample essay written according to your requirements urgent 3h delivery guaranteedOrder Now
-The omnipotent view of management says that managers are directly responsible for the success or failure of an organization. 1. The differences of an organization’s performance are assumed to be due to the manager’s decisions. 2. When the organization’s performance is outstanding, managers take the credit and are rewarded with bonuses, stock option and the like even if they had little to do with it. 3. But when the organization’s performance is poor, the manager usually gets fired and takes the blame for they are believed to be responsible. “New Blood” is believed to bring improved results.
This isn’t limited to organization and managers alike. This can be related to other fields like coaches. For example, the coach is said to be the reason why a team is doing an excellent performance in a game or league. If the team is doing poorly, the coach is blamed and gets replaced by a new coach that is expected to do better results.
-The symbolic view of management takes the view that much of an organization’s success or failure is due to external forces outside managers’ control. 1. What managers do affect greatly are symbolic outcomes.
2. Organizational results are influenced by factors outside the control of managers; economy, market changes, governmental policies, competitors’ actions, the state of the particular industry, the control of proprietary technology, and decisions made by previous manager in the organization. 3. The view is labeled as “symbolic” because it’s based on the belief that managers symbolize control and influence. 4. According to the symbolic view, the actual part that management plays in the success or failure of an organization is minimal.
In reality, managers are neither helpless nor all powerful. Instead, it’s more logical to look at the manager operating within constraints imposed by the organization’s culture and environment.