PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Company Products & Services
Page: |
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT FOR THE INDUSTRY |
~ .... PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT |
|
~ .... MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES |
|
~ ...... 1. MANAGEMENT DIRECTION |
|
~ ...... 2. MANAGEMENT LEVELS |
|
~ ...... 3. MANAGER OBJECTIVES |
|
~ ...... 4. MANAGER CONTROL |
|
~ ...... 5. MANAGEMENT CONTROL MEASUREMENT |
|
~ ...... 6. MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES |
|
~ ...... 7. MANAGEMENT ETHIC |
|
~ ...... 8. MANAGEMENT TASKS |
|
~ ...... 9. MANAGER RESPONSIBILITIES |
|
~ ...... 10. MANAGEMENT DELEGATION |
|
~ ...... 11. MANAGEMENT CHANNELS |
|
~ .... MANAGEMENT RATINGS |
|
~ ............ SUPERVISORY / BOARDROOM MANAGEMENT |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ EXECUTIVE SUPERVISORY TEAM |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ SENIOR MARKETING MANAGEMENT |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ SENIOR PRODUCT + PROCESS MANAGEMENT |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ SENIOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Management Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Manager Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ MIDDLE SALES + MARKETING MANAGERS |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Sub-ordinate Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ MIDDLE SOURCING / PROCESS / DISTRIBUTION MANAGERS |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Sub-ordinate Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ MIDDLE FINANCIAL + ACCOUNTING MANAGERS |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Sub-ordinate Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ MIDDLE ADMINISTRATION + PERSONNEL MANAGERS |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Delegation Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Planning & Procedures |
|
~ ~ ...... Sub-ordinate Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ SALES + CUSTOMER SERVICE PERSONNEL |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Supervision Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Supervisory Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Planning |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ BUYING / PROCESS / DISTRIBUTION STAFF |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Supervision Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Supervisory Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Planning |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ CREDIT + ACCOUNTING STAFF |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Supervision Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Supervisory Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Planning |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ ............ ADMINISTRATIVE + SECRETARIAL STAFF |
|
~ ~ ...... Direction & Supervision Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Supervisory Effectiveness |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Planning |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Control & Monitoring |
|
~ ~ ...... Activity Performance & Efficiency |
|
~ ~ ............ Operations |
|
~ ~ ............ Markets + Trade Cell |
|
~ ~ ............ Products |
|
~ ~ ............ Competitors |
|
~ .... HISTORIC FINANCIAL DATA FOR PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT ISSUES |
|
~ .... Historic Balance Sheet |
|
~ ~ ...... Historic Costs & Margins |
|
~ ~ ........ Historic Financial Ratios & Margins |
|
~ ~ .......... Historic Operational Ratios & Margins |
|
~ .... Financial forecast notes |
|
~ .... PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT BASED BALANCE SHEET FORECASTS |
|
~ .... Base Forecast : Median Market Scenario Balance Sheet Forecast |
|
~ ...... Base Forecast : Median Market Scenario Operational Costs Forecast |
|
~ ........ Base Forecast : Median Market Scenario Financial Ratios |
|
~ .......... Base Forecast : Median Market Scenario Operational Margins |
|
~ .... Personnel + Staff Improvement Balance Sheet Forecast |
|
~ ...... Personnel + Staff Improvement Operational Costs Forecast |
|
~ ........ Personnel + Staff Improvement Financial Ratios |
|
~ .......... Personnel + Staff Improvement Operational Margins |
|
~ .... Sales Personnel + Staff Improvement Balance Sheet Forecast |
|
~ ...... Sales Personnel + Staff Improvement Operational Costs Forecast |
|
~ ........ Sales Personnel + Staff Improvement Financial Ratios |
|
~ .......... Sales Personnel + Staff Improvement Operational Margins |
|
~ .... Payroll & Staff Cost Scenarios Balance Sheet Forecast |
|
~ ...... Payroll & Staff Cost Scenarios Operational Costs Forecast |
|
~ ........ Payroll & Staff Cost Scenarios Financial Ratios |
|
~ .......... Payroll & Staff Cost Scenarios Operational Margins |
|
~ .... Administration Cost Scenarios Balance Sheet Forecast |
|
~ ...... Administration Cost Scenarios Operational Costs Forecast |
|
~ ........ Administration Cost Scenarios Financial Ratios |
|
~ .......... Administration Cost Scenarios Operational Margins |
|
~ .... Profit Impact From Payroll Cost Reduction Balance Sheet Forecast |
|
~ ...... Profit Impact From Payroll Cost Reduction Operational Costs Forecast |
|
~ ........ Profit Impact From Payroll Cost Reduction Financial Ratios |
|
~ .......... Profit Impact From Payroll Cost Reduction Operational Margins |
|
~ .... Financial data definitions |
|
The industry must build a true team and weld individual efforts into a common effort
whereby each member of the enterprise contributes something different, but they
must all contribute towards a common goal. Their efforts must all pull in the
same direction, and their contributions must fit together to product a whole -
without gaps, without friction, without unnecessary duplication of effort.
Business performance therefore requires that each job be directed towards the
objectives of the whole business; and in particular each manager's job must be
focused on the success of the whole. The performance that is expected of the
manager must be derived from the performance goal of the business; his results
must be measured by the contribution they make to the success of the
enterprise. The manager must know and understand what the business goals demand
of him in terms of performance, his superior must know what contribution to
demand and expect of him, and must judge him accordingly. If these requirements
are not met, managers are misdirected and their efforts are wasted. Instead of
team work, there is friction, frustration and conflict.
Management by objectives requires major effort and special instruments. For in
the business enterprise managers are not automatically directed towards a
common goal. On the contrary, business, by its very nature, contains three
powerful factors of misdirection: in the specialized work of most managers; in
the hierarchical structure of management; and in the differences in vision and
work and the resultant insulation of various levels of management.
A favorite story at management meetings is that of the three stone-cutters
who were asked what they were doing. The first replied: 'I am making a living.'
The second kept on hammering while he said: 'I am doing the best job of
stone-cutting in the entire county.' The third one looked up with a visionary
gleam in his eyes and said: 'I am building a cathedral.'
The third man is, of course, the true 'manager'. The first man knows what he
wants to get out of the work and achieves precisely this. He is likely to give
a 'fair day's work for a fair day's pay'. But he is not a manager and will
never be one.
It is the second man who is a problem. Workmanship is essential; without it no
work can flourish; in fact, an organization demoralizes if it does not demand
of its members the most scrupulous workmanship they are capable of. But there
is always a danger that the true workman, the true professional, will believe
that he is accomplishing something when in effect he is just polishing stones
or collecting footnotes. Workmanship must be encouraged in the business
enterprise. But it must always be related to the needs of the whole.
The majority of managers in any business enterprise are, like the second man,
concerned with specialized work. True, the number of functional managers should
always be kept at a minimum and there should be the largest possible number of
'general' managers who manage an integrated business and are directly
responsible for its performance and results. However, even with the utmost
application of this principle the great bulk of managers will remain in
functional jobs. This is particularly true of the younger managers.
A man's habits as a manager, his vision and his value, therefore, will as a
rule be formed while he does functional and specialized work; and it is
essential that the functional specialist develops high standards of
workmanship, that he strive to be 'the best stone-cutter in the county'. For
work without high standards is dishonest. It corrupts the man himself. It
corrupts those under him. Emphasis on, and drive for, workmanship produces
innovations and advances in every area of management. That managers strive to
do 'professional personnel management', to run 'the most up-to-date plant', to
do 'truly scientific market research', to 'put in the most modern accounting
system', or to do 'perfect engineering' must be encouraged.
But this striving for professional workmanship in functional and specialized
work is also a danger. It tends to direct a man's vision and efforts away from
the goals of the business. The functional work becomes an end in itself. In far
too many instances the functional manager no longer measures his performance by
its contribution to the enterprise, but only by his own professional criteria
of workmanship. He tends to appraise his subordinates by their craftsmanship,
to reward and to promote them accordingly. He resents demands made on him for
the sake of business performance as interference with 'good engineering',
'smooth production', or 'hard-hitting selling'. The functional manager's
legitimate desire for workmanship becomes, unless counter-balanced, a
centrifugal force which tears the enterprise apart and converts it into a loose
confederation of functional empires, each concerned only with its own craft, each
jealously guarding its own 'secrets', each bent on enlarging its own domain
rather than on building the business.
The danger will be greatly intensified by the technological changes now under
way as the numbers of highly educated specialists working in the business
enterprise are bound to increase tremendously; and so will the level of
workmanship demanded of these specialists. The tendency to make the craft (or
function) an end in itself will therefore be even more marked than it is today.
But at the same time the new technology will demand much closer co-ordination
between specialists and it will demand that functional men even at the lowest
management level see the business as a whole and understand what it requires of
them. The new technology will need both the drive for excellence in workmanship
and the consistent direction of managers at all levels towards the common goal.
1. MANAGEMENT DIRECTION
The hierarchical structure of management aggravates the danger that what the
'boss' does and says, his most casual remarks, his habits, even his mannerisms,
tend to appear to his subordinates as calculated, planned and meaningful.
"All you ever hear around the place is human-relations talk; but when
the boss calls you on the carpet it's always because the budget figure is too
high; and when it comes to promoting a guy, the plums always go to those who do
the best job filling out accounting forms."
This is one of the most common tunes, sung with infinite variations on every
level of management. It leads to poor performance - even in cutting the budget
figure. It also expresses loss of confidence in, and absence of respect for,
the company and its management.
Yet the manager who so misdirects his subordinates does not intend to do so as
he genuinely considers human relations to be the most important task of his
line managers. Yet he talks about the burden figure because he feels that he
has to establish himself with his men as a 'practical man', or because he
thinks that he shows familiarity with their problems by talking their 'patois'.
He stresses the accounting forms only because they annoy him as much as they do
his men - or he may just not want to have any more trouble with the comptroller
than he can help, yet alas, to his subordinates these reasons are hidden; all
they see and hear is the question about the burden figure, the emphasis on
forms.
The solution to this problem requires a structure of management which focuses
both the manager and his attention on what the job, rather than what the boss
demands. To stress behavior and attitudes, as does a good deal of current
management literature, cannot solve the problem. It is likely instead to
aggravate it by making managers self-conscious in their relationships. Indeed,
everyone familiar with business today has seen situations in which a manager's
attempt to avoid misdirection through changing his behavior has converted a
fairly satisfactory relationship into a nightmare of embarrassment and
misunderstanding. The manager himself has become so self-conscious as to lose
all easy relationship with his men; and the men in turn react with: 'So help
us, the old man has read a book; we used to know what he wanted of us, now we
have to guess.'
2. MANAGEMENT LEVELS
The misdirection that can result from the difference in concern and function
between various levels of management is illustrated in the following story,
called “The mystery of the broken washroom door”.
The newly appointed comptroller of a railroad noticed, when going through the
accounts, that extraordinarily large sums were spent each year for the
replacement of broken doors in passenger stations. He found that washroom doors
in small stations were supposed to be kept locked, with the key obtainable from
the ticket agent on request. For economy reasons the agent was only issued one
key per door - a long-defunct manager had decreed this economy measure and had
preened himself on thus saving the company two hundred dollars at one stroke.
Hence when a customer walked off without returning the key - as happened all
the time - the agent had a locked door on his hands and no means of opening it.
To get a new key made (cost $1) was however regarded as a 'capital
expenditure', and agents could make capital expenditures only with the approval
of the company headquarters, which it took six months to obtain. 'Emergency
repairs', however, an agent could make on his own and pay for out of his cash
account. There could be no clearer emergency than a broken washroom door - and
every small station has an axe!
This may seem the height of absurdity, yet every business has its 'broken
washroom doors', its misdirection, its policies, procedures and methods that
emphasize and reward wrong behavior, penalize or inhibit right behavior. In
most cases the results are more serious than an annual twenty-thousand-dollar
bill for washroom doors.
This problem, too, cannot be solved by attitudes and behavior; for it is rooted
in the structure of the enterprise. Nor can it be solved by 'better
communications'; for communications presuppose common understanding and a
common language, and it is precisely that which is usually lacking.
It is no accident that the old story of the blind men meeting up with an
elephant on the road is so popular among management people. For each level of
management sees the same 'elephant' - the business - from a different angle of
vision. The production foreman, like the blind man who felt the elephant's leg
and decided that a tree was in his way, tends to see only the immediate production
problems. Top management - the blind man feeling the trunk and deciding a snake
bars his way - tends to see only the enterprise as a whole; they see
stockholders, financial problems, altogether a host of highly abstract presages
and figures. Operating management - the blind man feeling the elephant's belly
and thinking himself up against a landslide - tends to see things functionally.
Each level needs its particular vision; it could not do its job without it.
Yet, these visions are so different that people on different levels talking
about the same thing often do not realize it - or, as frequently happens,
believe that they are talking about the same thing, when in reality they are
poles apart.
An effective management must direct the vision and efforts of all managers
towards a common goal. It must ensure that the individual manager understands
what results are demanded of him. It must ensure that the superior understands
what to expect of each of his subordinate managers. It must motivate each manager
to maximum efforts in the right direction. And while encouraging high standards
of workmanship, it must make them the means to the end of business rather than
ends in themselves.
3. MANAGER OBJECTIVES
Each manager, from the 'big boss' down to the maintenance foreman or the chief
clerk, needs clearly spelled-out objectives. These objectives should lay out
what performance the man's own managerial unit is supposed to produce. They
should lay out what contribution the manager can expect from other units
towards the attainment of his own objectives. Right from the start, in other
words, emphasis should be on team-work and team results.
These objectives should always derive from the goals of the business
enterprise. In some companies, one has found it practicable and effective to
provide even a foreman with a detailed statement of not only his own objectives
but those of the company and of the department. Even though the company is so
large as to make the distance between the individual foreman's production and
the company's total output all but astronomical, the result has been a
significant increase in production. Indeed, this must follow if we mean it when
we say that the foreman is 'part of management'. For it is the definition of a
manager that in what he does he takes responsibility for the whole - that, in
cutting stone, he 'builds the cathedral'.
The objectives of every manager should spell out his contribution to the
attainment of company goals in all areas of the business. Obviously, not every
manager has a direct contribution to make in every area, in that the
contribution which marketing makes to productivity, for example, may be very
small. But if a manager and his unit are not expected to contribute towards any
one of the areas that significantly affect prosperity and survival of the
business, this fact should be clearly brought out. For managers must understand
that business results depend on the balance of efforts and results in a number
of areas. This is necessary both to give full scope to the craftsmanship of
each function and specialty, and to prevent the empire-building and clannish
jealousies of the various functions and specialties. It is necessary also to
avoid over-emphasis on any one key area.
To obtain balanced efforts the objectives of all managers on all levels and in
all areas should also be keyed to both short-range and long-range
considerations, and of course, all objectives should always contain both the
tangible business objectives and the intangible objectives for manager
organization and development, worker performance and attitude and public
responsibility. Anything else is short sighted and impractical.
4. MANAGER CONTROL
Proper management requires balanced stress on objectives, especially by top
management. It rules out the common and pernicious business malpractice:
management by 'crisis' and 'pushes'.
There may be companies in which management people do not say: 'The only way we
ever get anything done around here is by making a push on it'. Yet, 'management
by push' is the rule rather than the exception. That things always collapse
into the status quo only three weeks after the push is over, everybody knows
and apparently expects. The only result of an 'economy push' is likely to be
that messengers and typists get fired, and that $100,000 executives are forced
to do $400-a-week work typing their own letters. Yet many managements have not
drawn the obvious conclusion that pushes are, after all, not the way to get
things done.
Albeit over and above its ineffectiveness, management by push misdirects
and thus puts all emphasis on one phase of the job to the inevitable detriment
of everything else.
In an organization which manages by pushes, people either neglect their job to
get on with the current push, or silently organize for collective sabotage of
the push to get their work done. In either event they become deaf to the cry of
'wolf'. And when the real crisis comes, when all hands should drop everything
and pitch in, they treat it as just another case of management-created
hysteria.
Management by push, like management by 'bellows and meat axe', is a sure sign
of confusion. It is an admission of incompetence. It is a sign that management
does not know how to plan. But, above all, it is a sign that the company does
not know what to expect of its managers - that, not knowing how to direct them,
it misdirects them.
By definition, a manager is responsible for the contribution that his component
makes to the larger unit above him and eventually to the enterprise. His
performance aims upward rather than downward. This means that the goals of each
manager's job must be defined by the contribution he has to make to the success
of the larger unit of which he is a part. The objectives of the district sales
manager's job should be defined by the contribution he and his district
salesforce have to make to the sales department, the objectives of the project
engineer's job by the contribution he and his engineers make to the engineering
department. The objectives of the general manager of a subsidiary should be
defined by the contribution his unit has to make to the objectives of the
parent company.
This requires each manager to develop and set the objectives of his unit
himself. Higher management must, of course, reserve the power to approve or
disapprove these objectives; but their development is part of a manager's
objectives - indeed, it is his first responsibility. It means, too, that every
manager should responsibly participate in the development of the objectives of
the higher unit of which his is a part to give him a sense of participation
is not enough. Being a manager demands the assumption of a genuine
responsibility. Precisely because his aims should reflect the objective needs
of the business, rather than merely what the individual manager wants; he must
commit himself to them with a positive act of assent; he must know and
understand the ultimate business goals, what is expected of him and why, what
he will be measured against and how. There must be 'a meeting of minds' within
the entire management of each unit. This can be achieved only when each of the
contributing managers is expected to think through what the unit objectives
are; in other words, are led, to participate actively and responsibly in the work
of defining them. Thus only if his lower managers participate in this way can
the higher manager know what to expect of them and can make exacting demands.
This is so important that some of the most effective managers go one step
further. They have each of their subordinates write a 'manager's letter' twice
a year. In this letter to his superior, each manager first defines the
objectives of his superior's job and the objectives of his own job as he sees
them. He then sets down the performance standards which he believes are being
applied to him. Next, he lists the things he must do himself to attain these
goals - and the things within his own unit he considers the major obstacles. He
lists the things his superior, and the company, can do that help him, and the
things that hamper him. Finally, he outlines what he proposes to do during the
next year to reach his goals. If his superior accepts this statement, the
'manager's letter' becomes the charter under which the manager operates.
This device, like no other brings out how easily the unconsidered and casual
remarks of even the best 'boss' can confuse and misdirect. One large company
has used the 'manager's letter' for ten years. Yet almost every letter still
lists as objectives and standards things which completely baffle the superior
to whom the letter is addressed. Thus whenever he asks: 'What is this?' he gets
the answer: 'Don't you remember what you said last spring going down with me in
the elevator?'
The 'manager's letter' also brings out whatever inconsistencies there are in
the demands made on a man by his superior and by the company. Does the superior
demand both speed and high quality when he can get only one or the other? And
what compromise is needed in the interest of the company? Does he demand
initiative and judgment of his men - but also that they check back with him
before they do anything? Does he ask for their ideas or suggestions - but never
uses or discusses them?
Does the company expect a small maintenance team to be available immediately
whenever something goes wrong in the office, and yet, bend all its efforts to
the completing of new designs? Does one expect a manager to maintain high
standards of performance but forbid him to remove poor performers? Does one
create the conditions under which people say: 'I can get the work done as long
as I can keep the boss from knowing what I am doing?'
These are common situations. They undermine spirit and performance. The
'manager's letter' may not prevent them. But at least it brings them out in the
open, shows where compromises have to be made. Objectives have to be thought
through, priorities have to be established, and behavior has to be changed.
As this device illustrates: managing managers requires special efforts not only
to establish common direction, but to eliminate misdirection. Mutual
understanding can never be attained by 'communications down', can never be
created by talking. It can result only from 'communications up'. It requires
both the superior's willingness to listen and a tool especially designed to
make lower managers heard.
5. MANAGEMENT CONTROL MEASUREMENT
The greatest advantage of management by objectives is perhaps that it makes it
possible for a manager to control his own performance. Self-control means stronger
motivation: a desire to do the best rather than just enough to get by. It means
higher performance goals and broader vision. Even if management by objectives
were not necessary to give the enterprise the unity of direction and effort of
a management team, it would be necessary to make possible management by
self-control.
So far one has not considered 'control' at all - but 'measurements'. This was
intentional as 'control' is an ambiguous word. It means the ability to direct
oneself and one's work. It can also mean domination of one person by another.
Objectives are the basis of 'control' in the first sense; but they must never
become the basis of 'control' in the second, for this would defeat the purpose.
Indeed, one of the major contributions of management by objectives is that it
enables us to substitute management by self-control for management by
dominations.
That management by self-control is highly desirable will hardly be disputed in
business today. Its acceptance underlies all the talk of 'pushing decisions
down to the lowest possible level' or of 'paying people for results'. But to
make management by self-control a reality requires more than acceptance of the
concept as right and desirable. It requires new tools and far-reaching changes
in traditional thinking and practices.
To be able to control his own performance a manager needs to know more than
what his goals are and he must be able to measure his performance and results
against that goal. It should indeed be an invariable practice to supply
managers with clear and common measurements in all key areas of a business.
These measurements need not be rigidly quantitative; nor need they be exact,
but they have to be clear simple and rational. They have to be relevant; and
direct attention and efforts where they should go. They have to be reliable; at
least to the point where their margin of error is acknowledged and understood,
and they have to be, so to speak, self-announcing, understandable without
complex interpretation or philosophical discussion.
Each manager should have the information he needs to measure his own
performance and should receive it soon enough to make any changes necessary for
the desired results, and this information should go to the manager himself, and
not to his superior. It should be the means of self-control, not a tool of
control from above.
This needs particular focus today, when our ability to obtain such information
is growing rapidly as a result of technological progress in information
gathering, analysis and synthesis. Up till now information on important facts
was either not obtainable at all, or could be assembled only so late as to be
of little but historical interest. This former inability to produce measuring
information was not an unmixed curse. For while it made difficult effective
control of a manager from above; in the absence of information with which to
control him, the manager had to be allowed to work as he saw fit.
Our new ability to produce measuring information will make possible effective
self-control; and if so used, it will lead to a tremendous advance in the
effectiveness and performance of management; but if this new ability is abused
to impose control on managers from above, the new technology will inflict
incalculable harm by demoralizing management, and by seriously lowering the
effectiveness of managers.
That information can be effectively used for self-control is shown by the
example of General Electric:
General Electric has a special control service - the traveling auditors. The
auditors study every one of the managerial units of the company thoroughly at
least once a year - but their report goes to the manager of the unit studied.
There can be little doubt that the feeling of confidence and trust in the
company that even casual contact with General Electric managers reveals, is
directly traceable to this practice of using information or self-control rather
than for control from above.
But the General Electric practice is by no means common or generally
understood. Typical management thinking is much closer to the practice
exemplified by a large chemical company:
In this company a control section audits every one of the managerial units
of the company. The results of the audits do not go, however, to the managers
audited. They go only to the director who then calls in the managers to
confront them with the audit of their operations. What this has done to morale
is shown by the nickname the company's managers have given the control system:
'the management's secret service'. Indeed, more and more managers are not
running their units to obtain the best performance but to obtain the best
showing on the control section audits.
This should not be misunderstood as advocacy of low performance standards in of
absence of control. On the contrary, management by objectives and self-control
is primarily a means to obtain standards higher than are to be found in most
companies today, and every manager should be held strictly accountable for the
results of his performance.
What he does to reach these results he - and only he - should control. It
should be clearly understood what behavior and methods the company bars as
unethical, unprofessional or unsound. Albeit within these limits every manager
must be free to decide what he has to do, and only if he has all the
information regarding his operations can he fully be held accountable for
results.
6. MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES
Management by self-control requires complete rethinking concerning use of
reports, procedures and forms.
Reports and procedures are necessary tools, yet few tools can be so easily
misused, and few can do as much damage. For reports and procedures, when
misused, cease to be servants and become malignant masters.
There are three common misuses of reports and procedures.
1) The first is the all too common belief that procedures are instruments of
morality. They are not; their principle is exclusively that of economy. They
never decide what should be done, only how it might be done more expeditiously.
Problems of right conduct can never be 'procedurals' (indeed the most odious
work in the bureaucrat's jargon); conversely, right conduct can never be
established by procedure.
2) The second misuse is to consider procedures a substitute for judgment.
Procedures can work only where judgment is no longer required, that is, in the
repetitive situation for whose handling the judgment has already been supplied
and tested. Businesses suffer from a superstitious belief in the magical effect
of printed forms and the superstition is most dangerous when it leads one into
trying to handle the exceptional, non-routine situation by procedure. In fact,
it is the test of a good procedure that it quickly identifies the situations
which, even in the most routine of processes, do not fit the pattern but
require special handling and decision based on judgment.
But the most common misuse of reports and procedures is as an instrument of
control from above. This is particularly true of those that aim at supplying
information to higher management - the 'forms' of everyday business life. The
common case of the manager who has to fill out twenty forms to supply
accountants, engineers or staff people at H.Q. with information he himself does
not need, is only one of thousands of examples. As a result the manager's
attention is directed away from his own job. The things he is asked about or
required to do for control purposes, tend to appear to him as reflections of
what the company wants of him, become to him the essence of his job; while
resenting them, he tends to put effort into these things rather than into his
own job. Eventually, his boss, too, is misdirected, if not hypnotized by the
procedure.
Reports and procedures should be kept to a minimum, and used only when they
save time and labor. They should be as simple as possible.
Every business should regularly find out whether it needs all the reports and
procedures it uses. At least once every five years every form should be put on
trial for its life.
Reports and procedures should focus only on the performance needed to achieve
results in the key areas. To 'control' everything is to control nothing and to
attempt to control the irrelevant always misdirects.
3) Finally, reports and procedures should be the tool of the man who fills them
out. They must never themselves become the measure of his performance and he
must never be judged by the quality of the forms filled out - unless he be the
clerk in charge of these forms. He must always be judged by his production
performance and the only way to make sure of this is by having him fill out no
forms, make no reports, except those he needs himself to achieve performance.
7. MANAGEMENT ETHIC
What the business enterprise needs is a principle of management that will give
full scope to individual strength and responsibility, and at the same time give
common direction of vision and effort, establish team work and harmonies the
goals of the individual with the common good.
The only principle that can do this is management by objectives and
self-control. It makes the common weal the aim of every manager. It substitutes
for control from outside the stricter, more exacting and more effective control
from the inside. It motivates the manager into action not because somebody
tells him to do something or talks him into doing it, but because the objective
needs of his task demand it. He acts not because somebody wants him to, but
because he himself decides that he has to - he acts, in other words, as a free
man.
The word 'philosophy' is tossed around with happy abandon these days in
management circles. One has even seen a dissertation, signed by a manager, on
the 'philosophy of handling purchase requisitions' (as far as one could figure
out 'philosophy' here meant that purchase requisitions had to be in triplicate).
But management by objectives and self-control may legitimately be called a
'philosophy' of management. It rests on a concept of the job of management. It
rests on an analysis of the specific needs of the management group and the
obstacles it faces. It rests on a concept of human action, human behavior and
human motivation. Finally, it applies to every manager, whatever his level and
function, and to any business enterprise whether large or small. It ensures
performance by converting objective needs into personal goals and this is
genuine freedom, freedom under the law.
8. MANAGEMENT TASKS
A manager's job should be based on a task to be performed in order to attain
the company's objectives. It should always be a real job - one that makes a
visible and, if possible, clearly measurable contribution to the success of the
enterprise. It should have the broadest rather than the narrowest scope and
authority; everything not expressly excluded should be deemed to be within the
manager's authority. Finally, the manager should be directed and controlled by
the objectives of performance rather than by his boss.
What managerial jobs are needed and what each of them is should always be
determined by the activities that have to be performed, that is, the contributions
that have to be made to attain the company's objectives. A manager's job exists
because of the task facing the enterprise, and the job must have sufficient
depth. It should always embody the maximum challenge, carry the maximum
responsibility and make the maximum contribution, and that contribution should
be visible and measurable. The manager should be able to point at the final
results of the entire business and say: 'This part is my contribution.'
There are some tasks which are too big for one man and which can still not be
cut up into a number of integrated, finite jobs. These should be organized as
team tasks.
Outside of business, team organization is widely recognized. Almost any
scientific paper, for instance, bears the names of three or four men; each one
of the four (the biochemist, the physiologist, the pediatrician and the
surgeon) does a specific kind of work. Yet, though each contributes only his
own skill, each is responsible for the entire job. There is, of course, always
a leader to the team; but though his authority is great, it is guidance rather
than supervision or command. It derives from knowledge rather than from rank.
In business, teams are used a good deal more than the literature indicates.
They are regularly employed for short term assignments in every large company.
They are common in research work. Team organization, rather than the hierarchy
of rank shown on the organization chart, is the reality in the well-run plant,
especially in respect to the liaison between the manager and the heads of the
technical functions reporting to him. For many tasks in process manufacturing
or production new projects can only be done if organized on a team bases.
Essentially the most important team task in any business is the top management
task. In scope, as well as in its requirements of skills, temperaments and
functionality, it exceeds any one man's capacity. No matter what the textbooks
and the organization charts say, well-managed firms do not have a one-man
'chief executive'. They have an executive team.
It is therefore of genuine importance that management understand the team
organization, when to use it and how. Above all, it is important that
management realize that in any real team each member has a clearly signed and
clearly defined role. A team is not just chaos made into a virtue. Team-work
requires more internal organization, more co-operation and greater definiteness
of individual assignments than work organized in individual jobs.
9. MANAGER RESPONSIBILITIES
In discussing how big a manager's job should be, the textbooks start out with
the observation that one man can supervise only a very small number of people -
the so called 'span of control' - and this in turn leads to that deformation of
management: levels upon levels, which impede co-operation and communication,
stifle the fostering of new managers and erode the meaning of the management
job.
If the manager, however, is controlled by the objective requirements of his own
job and measured by his results, there is no need for the kind of supervision
that consists of telling a subordinate what to do and then making sure that he
does it. There is no span of control. A superior could theoretically have any
number of subordinates reporting to him. There is, indeed, a limit set by the span
of managerial responsibility: the number of people that one superior can
assist, teach and help to reach the objectives of their own jobs. This is a
real limit; but it is not fixed.
The span of control, we are told, cannot exceed six or eight subordinates. The
span of managerial responsibility, however, is determined by the extent to
which assistance and teaching are needed. It can only be set by a study of the
concrete situation, where unlike the span of control, the span of managerial
responsibility broadens as we move upward in the organization. Junior managers
need the most assistance; their objectives are least easy to define sharply,
their performance least easy to measure correctly. Senior men, on the other
hand, have supposedly learned how to do their jobs; and their objectives can be
defined as directly contributing to the business, their performance measured by
the yardsticks of business results.
The span of managerial responsibility is therefore wider than the span of control.
Further, where good practice would counsel against stretching the span of
control, a manager should always have responsibility for a few more men than he
can really take care of. Otherwise the temptation is to supervise them, that
is, to take over their jobs or, at least, to breathe down their necks.
Whether a manager's subordinates are individuals or teams makes no difference
in the span of managerial responsibility; however, a team should always have a
small number of members. Teams should normally not exceed five or six members;
and they are best if they have three or four members.
A team does not normally make a good superior manager. It should, in other
words, have no subordinate managers - though individual members of the team may
well have them. Assisting and teaching, the elements of managerial
responsibility, are best performed by an individual.
10. MANAGEMENT DELEGATION
That each manager's job be given the broadest possible scope and authority is
nothing but a rephrasing of the rule that decisions be pushed down as far as
possible and be taken as close as possible to the action to which they apply.
In its effects however, this requirement leads to sharp deviations from the
traditional concept of delegation from above.
What activities and tasks (the enterprise requires) is indeed worked out, in
effect, from the top down. The analysis has to begin with the desired end
product: the objectives of business performance and business results. From this
the analysis determines step by step what work has to be performed. But in
organizing the manager's job we have to work from the bottom up. We have to
begin with the activities on the 'firing line' - the jobs responsible for the
actual output of goods and services, the final sale to the customer, for the
production of blueprints and engineering drawings.
The managers on the firing line have the basic management jobs - the ones on
whose performance everything else ultimately rests. Seen this way, the jobs of
higher management are derivative; are, in the last analysis, aimed at helping
the firing-line manager do his job. Viewed structurally and organically, it is
the firing-line manager in whom all authority and responsibility centre; only
what he cannot do himself passes up to higher management. He is, so to speak,
the gene of organization in which all the higher organs are prefigured and out
of which they are developed.
Quite obviously there are real limits to the decisions the firing-line manager
can or should make, and within these limits, to the authority and
responsibility he should have.
He is limited as to the extent of his authority. A process foreman has no
business changing a salesman's compensation. A regional sales manager has no
authority in somebody else's region, and he is also limited as to the kind of
decision he can make. Clearly he should not make decisions that affect other
managers. He should not make decisions that affect the whole business and its
spirit. It is only elementary prudence, for instance, not to allow any manager
to make by himself and without review a decision on the career and future of
one of his subordinates.
The firing-line manager should not be expected to make decisions which he
cannot make. A man responsible for immediate performance does not have the
time, for instance, to make long-range decisions. A production man lacks the
knowledge and competence to work out a pension plan or a medical programme.
These decisions certainly affect him and his operations; he should know them,
understand them, indeed participate as much as is humanly possible in their
preparation and formulation, but he cannot make them; hence he cannot have the
authority and responsibility for them; for authority and responsibility should
always be task-focused. This applies all the way up the management hierarchy to
the chief executive job itself.
There is one simple rule for setting the limitations on the decisions a manager
is authorized to make, being: All authority not expressly and in writing
reserved to higher management is granted to lower management. This is the
opposite of the old Prussian idea of a citizen's rights: 'Everything that is
not expressly allowed is forbidden'. In other words, the decisions which a
manager is not entitled to make within the extent of his task should always be
spelled out; for all other decisions, he should presupposedly have authority
and responsibility.
11. MANAGEMENT CHANNELS
What then is the job of the manager's superior? What is his authority? What is
his responsibility?
If only for aesthetic reasons, one is not over-fond of the term 'Bottom-up
Management'. What it means, however, is important. The relationship between
higher and lower manager is not just the downward relationship expressed in the
term 'supervision'. Indeed, it is not even a two-way, up-and-down relationship.
It has three dimensions: a relationship of up from the lower to the higher
manager; a relationship of every manager to enterprise; and a relationship down
from the higher to the lower manager. Each one of the three is essentially a
responsibility - a duty rather than a right. Every manager has the task of
contributing what his superior's unit needs to attain the objectives of his own
job.
He has secondly a duty towards the enterprise; being to analyze the task of his
own unit, and define the activities needed to attain its objectives. He has to
establish the management jobs these activities require, and he has to help his
managers to work together and to integrate their own interests with those of
the enterprise. He has to put men in these jobs. He has to remove managers in
his unit who fail to perform, reward those who perform well and see to it that
those who perform superbly receive extraordinary return or promotion. He has to
help the managers in his unit to develop to the limit of their capabilities and
prepare themselves for the management tasks of tomorrow.
These are heavy responsibilities, but they are not responsibilities for what
somebody else - a subordinate - is doing. They are, as all responsibilities should
be, responsibilities for what the manager himself is doing. They are inherent
in his own job, not in those of his subordinates.
Finally, the manager has responsibilities downward, to his subordinate
managers. He has first to make sure that they know and understand what is
demanded of them. He has to help them set their own objectives. Then he has to
help them to reach these objectives. He is therefore responsible for their
getting the tools, the staff, the information they need. He has to help them with
advice and counsel. He has, if need be, to teach them to do better.
If a one-word definition of this downward relationship be needed, 'assistance'
would come closest. Indeed, several arguably successful companies (notably IBM)
have defined the manager's job in relation to his subordinates as that of an
'assistant' to them. Their jobs are theirs - by objective necessity. Their
performance and results are theirs, and so is the responsibility. But it is the
duty of the superior manager to help them all he can to attain their
objectives.
The objectives of a managerial unit should always and exclusively consist of
the performance and results it has to contribute to the success of the
enterprise. They should always and exclusively focus upward. But the objectives
of the manager who heads the unit include what he himself has to do to help his
subordinate managers attain their objectives. The vision of a manager should
always be upward - towards the enterprise as a whole. But his responsibility
runs downward as well - to the managers on his team. That his relationship
towards them be clearly understood as duty rather than as supervision is
perhaps the central requirement for organizing the manager's job effectively.
This section analyses the relative aptitudes and effectiveness of the managers
of the various Company operating units, when compared with the competitors.
The management levels covered are as follows:-
- Supervisory or Boardroom Management
- Executive Supervisory Team
- Senior Marketing Management Performance
- Senior Product & Process Management Performance
- Senior Financial Management Performance
- Senior Administrative Management Performance
- Middle Marketing & Sales Management Performance
- Middle Sourcing, Process & Distribution Management Performance
- Middle Financial & Accounting Management Performance
- Middle Administrative & Personnel Management Performance
- Sales & Customer Service Personnel Performance
- Buying, Process & Distribution Staff Performance
- Credit & Accounting Staff Performance
- Administrative & Secretarial Staff Performance
Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
Management Planning & Procedures |
|
Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
Manager Performance & Efficiency |
H16
Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
Management Planning & Procedures |
|
Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
Manager Performance & Efficiency |
H17
Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
Management Planning & Procedures |
|
Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
Manager Performance & Efficiency |
H18
Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
Management Planning & Procedures |
|
Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
Manager Performance & Efficiency |
H19
Direction & Delegation Rating |
|
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
Management Planning & Procedures |
|
Manager Control & Monitoring |
|
Manager Performance & Efficiency |
H20
H21
Direction & Delegation Effectiveness |
|
Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
Activity Planning & Procedures |
|
Sub-ordinate Control & Monitoring |
|
Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency |
H22
Direction & Delegation Effectiveness |
|
Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
Activity Planning & Procedures |
|
Sub-ordinate Control & Monitoring |
|
Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency |
H23
Direction & Delegation Effectiveness |
|
Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility |
|
Activity Planning & Procedures |
|
Subordinate Control & Monitoring |
|
Subordinate Performance & Efficiency |
H24
H25
Direction & Supervision Effectiveness |
|
Supervisory Effectiveness |
|
Activity Planning |
|
Activity Control & Monitoring |
|
Activity Performance & Efficiency |
Direction & Supervision Effectiveness |
|
Supervisory Effectiveness |
|
Activity Planning |
|
Activity Control & Monitoring |
|
Activity Performance & Efficiency |
H27
Direction & Supervision Effectiveness |
|
Supervisory Effectiveness |
|
Activity Planning |
|
Activity Control & Monitoring |
|
Activity Performance & Efficiency |
H28
Supervisory Effectiveness |
|
Activity Planning |
|
H29 Grid Definition
F_H - FIN_HIST.HTM HISTORIC FINANCIAL DATA
The PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT BALANCE SHEET FORECASTS section gives a series of
Balance Sheet Forecasts for the industry using a number of assumptions relating
to the financial decisions available to the management of the industry.
The Balance sheet forecast given shows the effects of financial improvements
which any Financial Management is likely to recommend:
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT SCENARIOS
- Base Forecast
: Median Market Scenario
- Personnel + Staff Improvement
- Sales Personnel + Staff Improvement
- Payroll & Staff Cost Scenarios
- Administration Cost Scenarios
- Profit Impact From Payroll Cost Reduction
Managers in the industry will, in both the short-term and the long-term, have
vital decisions to make regarding the financial improvements, margins and
profitability and these decisions will need to be evaluated in light of the
customers, markets, competitors, products, industry and internal factors. The
scenarios given isolate a number of the most important factors and provide
balance sheet forecasts for each of the scenarios.
The data provides a short and medium term forecast covering the next 6 years
for each of Forecast Financial and Operational items. The Financial and
Operational Data sections show each of the items listed below in terms of
forecast data and covers a period of the next 6 years.
F0M| MEDIAN FORECAST : Financials
G0M| MEDIAN FORECAST : Margins & Ratios
F12| PERSONNEL + STAFF IMPROVEMENT : Financials
G12| PERSONNEL + STAFF IMPROVEMENT : Margins & Ratios
F48| SALES PERSONNEL + STAFF IMPROVEMENT : Financials
G48| SALES PERSONNEL + STAFF IMPROVEMENT : Margins & Ratios
F50| PAYROLL & STAFF COST SCENARIOS : Financials
G50| PAYROLL & STAFF COST SCENARIOS : Margins & Ratios
F51| ADMINISTRATION COST SCENARIOS : Financials
G51| ADMINISTRATION COST SCENARIOS : Margins & Ratios
F62| PROFIT IMPACT FROM PAYROLL COST REDUCTION : Financials
G62| PROFIT IMPACT FROM PAYROLL COST REDUCTION : Margins & Ratios
FIN_DEFI.HTM Financial Definitions
Activity Control & Monitoring, 51, 55, 59, 63
Activity Performance & Efficiency, 51, 55, 59, 63
Activity Planning, 51, 55, 59, 63
Activity Planning & Procedures, 35, 39, 43, 47
ADMINISTRATIVE + SECRETARIAL STAFF, 63
Balance Sheet Administration Cost Scenarios, 90
Balance Sheet Base Forecast : Median Market Scenario, 74
Balance Sheet Historic, 68
Balance Sheet Payroll & Staff Cost Scenarios, 86
Balance Sheet Personnel + Staff Improvement, 78
Balance Sheet Profit Impact From Payroll Cost Reduction, 94
Balance Sheet Sales Personnel + Staff Improvement, 82
BUYING / PROCESS / DISTRIBUTION STAFF, 55
Costs & Margins Historic, 69
CREDIT + ACCOUNTING STAFF, 59
Direction & Delegation Effectiveness, 35, 39, 43, 47
Direction & Delegation Rating, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31
Direction & Supervision Effectiveness, 51, 55, 59, 63
EXECUTIVE SUPERVISORY TEAM, 15
Financial data definitions, 99
Financial forecast notes, 72
Financial Ratios Administration Cost Scenarios, 92
Financial Ratios Base Forecast : Median Market, 76
Financial Ratios Payroll & Staff Cost Scenarios, 88
Financial Ratios Personnel + Staff Improvement, 80
Financial Ratios Profit Impact From Payroll Cost Reduction, 96
Financial Ratios Sales Personnel + Staff Improvements, 84
Financial Ratios & Margins Historic, 70
HISTORIC FINANCIAL PERSONNEL ISSUES, 67
MANAGEMENT CHANNELS, 9
MANAGEMENT CONTROL MEASUREMENT, 5
MANAGEMENT DELEGATION, 8
MANAGEMENT DIRECTION, 2
MANAGEMENT ETHIC, 7
MANAGEMENT LEVELS, 2
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31
MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES, 1
Management Planning & Procedures, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31
MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES, 6
MANAGEMENT RATINGS, 10
MANAGEMENT TASKS, 7
MANAGER CONTROL, 3
Manager Control & Monitoring, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31
MANAGER OBJECTIVES, 3
Manager Performance & Efficiency, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31
MANAGER RESPONSIBILITIES, 7
MIDDLE ADMINISTRATION + PERSONNEL MANAGERS, 47
MIDDLE FINANCIAL + ACCOUNTING MANAGERS, 43
MIDDLE SALES + MARKETING MANAGERS, 35
MIDDLE SOURCING / PROCESS / DISTRIBUTION MANAGERS, 39
Operational Costs Administration Cost Scenarios, 91
Operational Costs Base Forecast : Median Market, 75
Operational Costs Payroll & Staff Cost Scenarios, 87
Operational Costs Personnel + Staff Improvement, 79
Operational Costs Profit Impact From Payroll Cost, 95
Operational Costs Sales Personnel + Staff Improvement, 83
Operational Margins Administration Cost Scenarios, 93
Operational Margins Base Forecast : Median Market, 77
Operational Margins Payroll & Staff Cost Scenarios, 89
Operational Margins Personnel + Staff Improvement, 81
Operational Margins Profit Impact From Payroll Cost, 97
Operational Margins Sales Personnel + Staff Improvement, 85
Operational Ratios & Margins Historic, 71
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, 1
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT FORECASTS, 73
SALES + CUSTOMER SERVICE PERSONNEL, 51
SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT, 31
SENIOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 27
SENIOR MARKETING MANAGEMENT, 19
SENIOR PRODUCT + PROCESS MANAGEMENT, 23
Sub-ordinate Control & Monitoring, 35, 39, 43, 47
Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency, 35, 39, 43, 47
Supervisory Effectiveness, 51, 55, 59, 63
Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility, 35, 39, 43, 47
SUPERVISORY / BOARDROOM MANAGEMENT, 11
THE
INDUSTRY OPERATIONS
Activity
Control & Monitoring
Activity
Performance & Efficiency
Activity
Planning & Procedures
Activity
Planning
Administration
Cost Scenarios
ADMINISTRATIVE
+ SECRETARIAL STAFF
Base Forecast : Median Market Scenario
BUYING
/ PROCESS / DISTRIBUTION STAFF
CREDIT
+ ACCOUNTING STAFF
Direction & Delegation Effectiveness
Direction
& Delegation Rating
Direction & Supervision Effectiveness
EXECUTIVE
SUPERVISORY TEAM
HISTORIC
FINANCIAL PERSONNEL ISSUES
MANAGEMENT
CHANNELS
MANAGEMENT
CONTROL MEASUREMENT
MANAGEMENT
DELEGATION
MANAGEMENT
DIRECTION
MANAGEMENT
ETHIC
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility
MANAGEMENT
LEVELS
MANAGEMENT
OBJECTIVES
Management
Planning & Procedures
MANAGEMENT
PROCEDURES
MANAGEMENT
RATINGS
MANAGEMENT
TASKS
Manager
Control & Monitoring
MANAGER
CONTROL
MANAGER
OBJECTIVES
Manager
Performance & Efficiency
MANAGER
RESPONSIBILITIES
MIDDLE ADMINISTRATION + PERSONNEL MANAGERS
MIDDLE FINANCIAL + ACCOUNTING MANAGERS
MIDDLE
SALES + MARKETING MANAGERS
MIDDLE SOURCING / PROCESS / DISTRIBUTION MANAGERS
Payroll
& Staff Cost Scenarios
Personnel
+ Staff Improvement
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT FORECASTS
Profit Impact From Payroll Cost Reduction
SALES
+ CUSTOMER SERVICE PERSONNEL
Sales
Personnel + Staff Improvement
SENIOR
ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT
SENIOR
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
SENIOR
MARKETING MANAGEMENT
SENIOR
PRODUCT + PROCESS MANAGEMENT
Sub-ordinate
Control & Monitoring
Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency
SUPERVISORY
/ BOARDROOM MANAGEMENT
Supervisory
Effectiveness
Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility
PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
MANAGEMENT
OBJECTIVES
MANAGEMENT
DIRECTION
MANAGEMENT
LEVELS
MANAGER
OBJECTIVES
MANAGER
CONTROL
MANAGEMENT
CONTROL MEASUREMENT
MANAGEMENT
PROCEDURES
MANAGEMENT
ETHIC
MANAGEMENT
TASKS
MANAGER
RESPONSIBILITIES
MANAGEMENT
DELEGATION
MANAGEMENT
CHANNELS
MANAGEMENT
RATINGS
HISTORIC
FINANCIAL PERSONNEL ISSUES
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT FORECASTS
SUPERVISORY
/ BOARDROOM MANAGEMENT
Direction
& Delegation Rating
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Management
Planning & Procedures
Manager
Control & Monitoring
Manager
Performance & Efficiency
EXECUTIVE
SUPERVISORY TEAM
Direction
& Delegation Rating
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Management
Planning & Procedures
Manager
Control & Monitoring
Manager
Performance & Efficiency
SENIOR
MARKETING MANAGEMENT
Direction
& Delegation Rating
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Management
Planning & Procedures
Manager
Control & Monitoring
Manager
Performance & Efficiency
SENIOR
PRODUCT + PROCESS MANAGEMENT
Direction
& Delegation Rating
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Management
Planning & Procedures
Manager
Control & Monitoring
Manager
Performance & Efficiency
SENIOR
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
Direction
& Delegation Rating
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Management
Planning & Procedures
Manager
Control & Monitoring
Manager
Performance & Efficiency
SENIOR
ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT
Direction
& Delegation Rating
Management Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Management
Planning & Procedures
Manager
Control & Monitoring
Manager
Performance & Efficiency
THE
INDUSTRY OPERATIONS
MIDDLE
SALES + MARKETING MANAGERS
Direction & Delegation Effectiveness
Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Activity
Planning & Procedures
Sub-ordinate
Control & Monitoring
Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency
MIDDLE SOURCING / PROCESS / DISTRIBUTION MANAGERS
Direction & Delegation Effectiveness
Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Activity
Planning & Procedures
Sub-ordinate
Control & Monitoring
Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency
MIDDLE FINANCIAL + ACCOUNTING MANAGERS
Direction & Delegation Effectiveness
Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Activity
Planning & Procedures
Sub-ordinate
Control & Monitoring
Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency
MIDDLE ADMINISTRATION + PERSONNEL MANAGERS
Direction & Delegation Effectiveness
Supervisory Levels & Degree of Responsibility
Activity
Planning & Procedures
Sub-ordinate
Control & Monitoring
Sub-ordinate Performance & Efficiency
SALES
+ CUSTOMER SERVICE PERSONNEL
Direction & Supervision Effectiveness
Supervisory
Effectiveness
Activity
Planning
Activity
Control & Monitoring
Activity
Performance & Efficiency
THE
INDUSTRY OPERATIONS
BUYING
/ PROCESS / DISTRIBUTION STAFF
Direction & Supervision Effectiveness
Supervisory
Effectiveness
Activity
Planning
Activity
Control & Monitoring
Activity
Performance & Efficiency
CREDIT
+ ACCOUNTING STAFF
Direction & Supervision Effectiveness
Supervisory
Effectiveness
Activity
Planning
Activity
Control & Monitoring
Activity
Performance & Efficiency
ADMINISTRATIVE
+ SECRETARIAL STAFF
Direction & Supervision Effectiveness
Supervisory
Effectiveness
Activity
Planning
Activity
Control & Monitoring
Activity
Performance & Efficiency
Base Forecast : Median Market Scenario
Personnel
+ Staff Improvement
Sales
Personnel + Staff Improvement
Payroll
& Staff Cost Scenarios
Administration
Cost Scenarios
Profit Impact From Payroll Cost Reduction