Английский для экономистов (учебник английского языка) - Шевчук Денис Александрович (книги серии онлайн txt) 📗

Organizations that enjoy any measure of success find it necessary to increase their membership and to assign duties to these additional members. The process that is used to add members to the organization will result in the necessity to divide the work of the organization into sub-units or groups. Each of these groups will be under the direction of a manager or managers. In order for these managers to perform their managerial duties properly, they must be granted appropriate responsibility and authority. The means for making these assignments is termed delegation. In general, delegation may be defined asthe process of transferring an obligation (responsibility) and anaccompanying right(authority) from a superior to a subordinate position in the organization. It is this basic process that enables an organization to grow. Without delegation, an organization simply cannot exist and prosper.

The patterns of work divisions and their hierarchical arrangements constitute the basic components of structure.  Structure, then, is the hierarchical pattern of authority, responsibility, and accountability relationships designed to provide coordination of the work of the organization. It is basically a managerial tool that aids in guiding the organization towards its goals and can be considered the skeleton of the organizational body. The idea of hierarchy of authority, the division of organization by function, the differentiation of responsibility of the line (doers) and the staff (the advisors) are all inventions of the church and military leaders who were faced with the need to manage large aggregations of human, technical, and material resources. Organizations create an officially sanctioned structure known as the formal organization or de jure  organization. This structure is often depicted by a chart as that seen in Fig. 1.

A formal organization is only half the story, for superimposed on these relationships is a whole series of informal or de facto relationships that are not sanctioned by the organization. These include informal work groupings of employees, informal leaders, informal channels of communication and informal power and status differentials. Usually the structure of an organization is rather permanent and stable but in some cases a temporary, ad hoc, organization may be created. The organization exists to reach a certain goal or set of goals and disbands once the goal is achieved.

1. What did people find early in human existence?

2. What is the meaning of the organization?

3. What is an organization?

4. What are the components of organization theory?

5. What role do power and authority play in building every organization?

6. What is the starting point for the design of an organization?

7. What is delegation and why is it necessary in today’s organization?

8. Which is more important: formal or informal structure?

9. Can you give any example of an ad hoc organization?

TEXT 2

Read the text and be ready to answer what theory you would follow as a manager. Give your reasons.

PEOPLE IN ORGANIZATION

If there is any one characteristic of people which is universally valid and important, it is that they differ. To say that all persons are created equal is a statement of human rights under the law. It communicates nothing at all about human nature. As a matter of fact, people differ greatly in intelligence, aptitudes, physical strength, manual dexterity, knowledge, skill, interests, personality traits, motivation, and many other attributes which potentially influence behavior and productivity.

We are rational – but only to a point. We plan, set goals, think, reason, and live by creeds and values. But we also become frustrated and behave in ways that can be perceived as rational only by someone who understands all our deeply embedded, sometimes conflicting needs, aspirations, and perceptions. In many situations our motivation is unconscious so that not even we understand our own actions.

The fact that one’s environment strongly influences behavior is indisputable. A number of prominent psychologists have assumed that human freedom is an illusion. Human choices are thought to be totally determined. This, of course, is an assumption. Many people do not subjectively perceive themselves in this way. It is significant that behavior and expectations are strongly influenced by what a person believes to be true. Individuals feel responsible for their actions. Also, people consciously believe that their choices are real, regardless of any awareness of philosophical arguments to the contrary. Organizations cannot function optimally without these pragmatic assumptions.

There are, of course, innumerable statements which one might make about human nature, but they would not all have a direct influence on how people should be dealt within the work environment. The late Douglas McGregor did an excellent job of conceptualizing some of the assumptions about human nature which are relevant to organizational behavior. He labeled these, Theory X, the classical or traditional view, and Theory Y, a progressive view upon which he believed a new model for human relations in organizations could be developed.

Theory X. This theory holds that the average person inherently dislikes work, is innately lazy, irresponsible, self-centered, and security oriented, and consequently is indifferent to the needs of the organization. Because of these characteristics, the average person must be threatened, coerced, and controlled. In fact, most people prefer to be directed and controlled. They seek security above all, prefer to avoid responsibility, and both want and need external control in the work situation. Because people are basically cunning and immature, management should experience little difficulty in using a highly directive and manipulative style of supervision.

Theory Y. Experience has shown that Theory X assumptions result in a great deal of difficulty for management although they remain popular with some managers. McGregor’s Theory Y makes the opposite assumptions. People do not inherently dislike work and are not inherently lazy. Rather they have learned to dislike work, to be lazy, and to be irresponsible because of the nature of their work and supervision. They have a high capacity for developing an intrinsic interest in their work, for committing themselves to organizational objectives, and for working productively with a minimum of external controls.

Two points should be made with reference to these theories. First, the Theory X characteristics are said to be inherent or innate. To be such, they would necessarily apply to everyone, which is obviously absurd. On the other hand, under Theory Y, people are said to have the potential or capacity for the responsible behavior and attitudes described. If anyone possesses these qualities, and a great many people do, then everyone has the potential for them. Second, McGregor speaks of assumptions about the average person, and one must ask, «Average on what dimensions?» Are we talking about intelligence? education? experience? Average is a statistical concept. The average person is nonexistent, hypothetical construct. When we make assumptions about the average person, at best we are referring to most people, and in doing so must recognize that there are exceptions.

TEXT 3

Here is one more text about people in organization. Read it and say whether you can take the information seriously.

When might you need to give blood for a personality test? The answer to that question may puzzle you more than the question itself: when you apply for a job. What’s more, your blood group could seriously influence your career prospects. Some people believe your blood group hides no secrets. It reveals the “real you” – a person who gets things done, a good salesman, a creative person or a problem-solver – that is why you could be asked to state your blood group when completing a job application form. This growing trend was first used in Japan and now management consultant firms in other parts of the world have joined in. Someone, somewhere has spent some time working out statistics regarding who’s who in the blood group system. The owners of certain group tend to be particularly good or bad at certain tasks. In fact, one major Japanese firm is so well informed about blood groups that the company is quite specific about its needs: “We must have 30per cent of blood group A and 15 per cent of AB, 25 per cent of blood group 0, and 30 per cent of blood group B among echelons of our management personnel”. Apparently, if you belong to blood group 0 you get things done and sell the goods. Blood group A are thinkers, while blood group B are highly creative. And if you got problems, ask the Abs to solve them.