Introduction
As McConnell (2016) states, the main task when identifying the problem is answering the question, “Why is there a need for a change? What is wrong with the present service or system? ” (p. 194). Stemming from the answer, one could develop an appropriate plan for the situation. There are two ways of answering the question. First, one could argue that the problem lies in everyone’s inability and unwillingness to speak up about common group problems, which affect the working process. Second, there are several common problems which the employees have already stated. The leader often encounters the resistance of their subordinates both when communicating and implementing any decisions, order, or regulations, and when setting tasks, delegating, controlling, punishing, and even rewarding. However, if employees are willing to talk about problems personally, but not publicly, then the process of communicating with them can be viewed as obtaining data. Employees can make mistakes knowingly, wanting to harm the company, or by accident. Intentional mistakes occur when a subordinate has a conflict with an employer. Accidental errors arise due to the oversight of employees, especially if the staff lacks clear goals and objectives.
To avoid the repetition of systematic mistakes, employees should be guided by clear work regulations. Also, every enterprise needs a well-thought-out system of safety and control of results. For errors to be effectively corrected, employees must be able to admit their mistakes and shortcomings without fear of judgment from colleagues or dismissal. The role of the leader is essential here. The ideal solution to the problem is a joint analysis of the causes of the mistake. After that, it is worth asking the employee to find options to solve the problem independently or involve colleagues.
Thus, a series of individual discussions can be regarded as interviews with employees regarding the problems, which can be analyzed, generalized, and systematized further. Further, the issues can be divided into two large and, to some extent, interconnected clusters: those related to the work process and related personal misunderstandings and rejection of each other by employees. Following the analyzed and classified problems, an action plan is built. Group discussion of issues at this stage does not work. Accordingly, the best solution seems to be to act following their authority towards solving the problems posed without a centralized group discussion. The most important points here are to prioritize the tasks and adjust corporate values. The latter should include common visions for all of the departments’ representatives and stem from the realization that common problems are manageable.
Moving Forward and Choosing a Leadership Style
According to the classification of McConnell (2016), the team presented in the case is a Special-Purpose Standing Team. Subordinates who have already entered the usual pace of work, working “on the machine,” very often resist this because breaking their habits is difficult, unpleasant, sometimes scary, and so on. It is much easier to do what one already does well or out of habit and does not require many mental and intentional efforts. There is only one way out – to demand, not persuade. It is better to increase the requirements not to the results but to the specific behavior of the subordinate, from which the result is formed. However, in this case, it is necessary not to be an authoritarian leader but to focus on the general goals of the team and the organization as a whole, as well as the development of each subordinate.
In the new organizational reality, a person becomes the main asset of the company to achieve sustainable results. Therefore, the most important task facing it is to ensure its employees’ continuous development and abilities. This results from the fact that modern organizations are undergoing a difficult transformation period and are forced to develop new management and organization activities. The shift of organizational priorities to the “human dimension” is one of the critical characteristics of strategic personnel management in current conditions. Transactional leadership in modern literature is very close in style to what McConnell (2016) describes as a model. This management principle is fundamental when subordinates are middle and senior managers, whose effective management requires a particular approach aimed at strategic support for performance, as in the case of a case. Effectively managing employees who make a significant contribution to achieving the company’s key goals has many benefits, representing a faster and more affordable way to create a high-performing organization. Moreover, researchers have repeatedly confirmed the relationship between the behavior of managers, which stimulates the development and involvement of employees, and the financial results of organizations.
Delegating Work to the Members of the Team
When deciding whether to delegate or not delegate authority, one should consider that this process is associated with a certain risk since the ability of people to exercise authority in certain specific situations cannot be clearly defined in advance. However, this risk is justified since delegation promises significant benefits for the company, its management, and its employees. So, as a result of delegation of authority in the company, the flexibility of the management system increases. Besides, decision-making approaches the place of their implementation and their quality increases; less time is wasted waiting for instructions, and the efficiency of management increases. In addition, the conditions are created for the formation of an atmosphere of creative work in the team, the moral and psychological climate improves, and conditions are created for training personnel. The staff motivation increases; a team of like-minded people is formed, capable of solving complex production problems, and, thus, the basis for the formation of self-governing workgroups and teams is being created. It should be noted that the named advantages of delegation of authority are potential. To implement them in practice, it is necessary to build this process correctly.
For the management system to work effectively, there must be a balance between functions, authority, and responsibility. As opposed to assignment, the delegation of a task is the transfer by a manager of a specific scope of rights and duties to perform a certain function to their subordinates. At the same time, the responsibility for its implementation is assigned to associates, but it is not removed from the head. They continue to be responsible for the performance of all functions within their competence. This point of view is currently the most widespread. Responsibility, therefore, is divided into two components: managerial responsibility, which is not delegated, and executive or functional responsibility, which is entrusted to the performer simultaneously with authority to perform certain functions and tasks. Executive responsibility means that the employee is responsible for performing operations and functions to those who delegate authority to him.
Delegation facilitates the manager’s work but does not relieve him of the responsibility to make managerial decisions, making him the leader. At the same time, the expansion of the burden of subordinates contributes to the formation of their sense of involvement in the affairs of the company, makes them constantly take care of their qualifications, replenish their knowledge, and be more collected and organized in their work.
Reference
McConnell, C. R. (2016). Umiker’s management skills for the new health care supervisor. Jones & Bartlett Learning.