What is management 4

management

History of ideas and history of institutions

There are a large number of definitions in economics and social sciences, but no universal definition of the term management, because - depending on the research perspective - there are different research subjects and different levels of interest. First of all, however, two main perspectives of business linguistic usage can be identified: (1) a functional perspective that views and describes management as a managerial activity, and (2) an institutional perspective that observes the managerial body of different organizational forms as management.

Etymologically, the stem meaning of the term is on the one hand based on the Latin term for hand (manus) or Lend a hand (manu agere) returned. However, more recent derivation of the history of ideas see more of a connection with the Italian verb maneggiare for "lead by the hand" or "lead a horse in the ring", from which the English verb to manage (accomplish, handle, lead or direct) derive.

An alternative etymological derivation results from the Latin term mansionem agere (house or order the house (for the owner)). This term is related to the history of philosophy with the economics developed in Greek philosophy as a doctrine of household management (Greek: oikos). The Oikos is to be understood as the central microeconomic organization of antiquity, in which business operations are not yet factually and legally separated from private households.

Already the Greek philosopher Xenophon (about 430-355 BC) had in his work Oikonomikos the enlargement of the domestic property as the goal of the management of the landlord Oikos - which was in the functional sense an "agricultural enterprise" - defined. Thus, at Xenophon, the first models and recommendations for the function and tasks of the management of a microeconomic unit can already be found. However, these are more ethical (value-rational) than purposeful: Xenophon does not develop a system of purposeful operational management, but rather value-rational management recommendations, the goals of which are the realization of ethical values ​​and not the increase in economic benefit.

Aristotle (384-322 BC) also developed an ethics of economic activity in his writings on ethics, which is also not based on standards of success. For Aristotle, economic action means ethically correct action in the context of housekeeping. Accordingly, he also differentiates between ethically correct and incorrect forms of economic activity. He contrasts the chrematistics (commercial art) with economics as a positive target image. Chrematistics as the art of earning money differs from economics (property management art) in that it strives for limitless money accumulation through trade beyond the satisfaction of basic needs - the need to meet in the sense of a good, self-limiting life. On the other hand, economics aims at the procurement and preservation of the goods for the management of a bourgeois-virtuous, common good-oriented life in the polis (civil society of the Greek city-states). Accordingly, Aristotle weights the value idea of ​​an action higher than its economic success, so that Aristotle ultimately designs an economic ethics that makes a value-rational distinction between different forms of economic activity. With this, Aristotle provided a typology of different economic activities based on their goals and also made some statements about the "applied acquisition art" and the management of people in the context of property management, but without systematic business management recommendations beyond the virtue-oriented management of members of the household (family members, slaves and Day laborers).

Columella (around 4-70 AD) wrote a first systematic work on rational management using the example of a farm (De re rustica). Using the example of a large farm, he developed calculatory optimization examples for the Use of production factors and thus an ideal-typical decision-making theory for profit-oriented, i.e. rational management.

But it was only the commercial economy and the emergence of trading companies in the late Middle Ages and the early modern period that led to the first works of a systematic, decision-oriented and purposeful management theory. The Italian monk L. Paciolo (1445-1517) not only documented the state of mathematical knowledge from the Orient and Occident (arithmetic, algebra and geometry). He also wrote manuals for mathematical-practical problems such as B. for the game of chess and accounting in the commercial business and financial management. Paciolo was not only the first to systematically present double-entry bookkeeping (Dopik), but at the same time integrated it as an instrument in the context of rational operational management. Ultimately, he created the modern idea of ​​a profit-oriented company in which the increase - no longer as in antiquity - was a coincidental result, but could be documented and thus empirically verified. At the same time, Paciolo created the basis for external corporate accounting, which was the basis for the first regulations of stock corporations to secure shareholder capital in the middle of the 19th century and thus for the rise of management capitalism.

In the centuries that followed, other handbook-like works were created that summarized individual aspects of the tradesman's activities from merchandise to business management and financial management. By the end of the 18th century, a large number of small documents had been created in the private sector, dealing with the practical activities of the management of trading companies. However, the first approaches to a scientifically systematized teaching of operational management only developed in the area of ​​sovereign administration. A direct precursor science to a teaching of scientific management can be found in cameralism - the doctrine of the sovereign administration and its affiliated companies such as B. princely estates (domains or chamber estates) or manufactories. Here, preliminary forms of today's management theory have already been formulated and conceived in the context of the expansion of sovereign-bureaucratic rule. In the course of the Enlightenment, the first scientific works were created here, which brought together the financial-mathematical as well as the formal-organizational and planning aspects of administrative activity into a uniform teaching of economic administration.

The approaches that arose in the princely administration and were later transferred to public administration and companies already conceived important elements of purposeful organization and management such as (1) the establishment of an administrative staff, (2) the introduction of professional principles such as the separation of office and person, the compliance with the rules of the Administrative activity and the development of a functional hierarchy, functional division of labor according to functional sub-areas as well as (3) clear definition of areas of responsibility and positions, remuneration according to rank and control of the activities of the operating activity and financial success.

M. Weber (1921) derives the concept of bureaucratic rule as a core element of the emergence of modern capitalism in the western world from the models and concepts of administration and economic management that emerged in the 18th century in cameral studies. The form of bureaucratic rationality in the form of systematic means-ends calculation that emerged during the Enlightenment is the ideal type of formal-rational organization and decision is the basis for the emergence of capitalism. Instead of value- and virtue-oriented instructions for action, methods were created in this context for the systematic determination of optimal ends-means ratios that measure action against economic success standards. Ethics and value orientation were subordinated to the economic principle and value orientation and no longer reflected in the emerging management doctrine.

The industrialization of the 19th century and the need to finance large-scale industrial projects led to the establishment of joint-stock companies, which were increasingly run less by owner-entrepreneurs and more by salaried managers. It is in this historical context that the institution emerges that is now called management and marks the separation of ownership and management. Although the sovereign administration already knew an administrative staff separate from the owner (the sovereign), which gradually institutionalized itself as a public administration, this financially induced institutional change in the private sector (especially in the area of ​​the railway companies) marked an actual social change in the form of the emergence of a "manager" -Class "by separating property and management. Although there was already a certain separation between management and property in antiquity with the administrator, who was often a slave, the separation of property and management, which is typical today, and with it the problem that has existed since then, only developed with the emergence of the stock corporation In the 1930s, the principal-agent theory addressed the issue: Management used information asymmetries about the status of the company for its benefit at the expense of the owners, especially under the conditions of a dispersed ownership structure, as is typical for stock corporations.

P. Drucker, the founder of management theory, pointed out that it was only through the emergence of large industrial companies that a profession developed that was to prove to be an immaterial core innovation of modernity: management as an institution and function of goal-oriented organizations (management as a profession). This innovation has contributed to the fact that modern societies have developed instruments that allow a growing number of workers to be integrated and organized in a decentralized manner in a value chain. An initial functional definition of management as an institution is made by F. W. Taylor (1911). He introduced the distinction between factual and managerial tasks. Management activities no longer relate only to material tasks. These are mainly delegated, while the management is responsible for planning and coordinating the various technical tasks. From a functional perspective, it is the task of management to develop a company in such a way that the apparently antagonistic interests of the owners in long-term earnings and the employees in the highest possible wages through rational management (scientific management) to increase the overall success of the company . Scientific management means in this context that management should no longer be carried out intuitively, but rather systematically and with scientific methods. The distinction between leadership competence and implementation competence became the basis of the emerging management theory as a sub-discipline of business administration. H. Fayol (1916) refined the definition of leadership tasks and leadership skills. Planning, organization, coordination and control are the essential tasks of "industrial administration" (administration industrial). These activities and the necessary competencies can be systematized, conveyed and taught or learned.

P. Drucker (1946; 1954) can be regarded as the actual founder of management theory. He first examined the organization and management of a large industrial company (General Motors) and initially compared its management system with the federal structure of the USA. As one of the first social science field studies on management and management systems, Drucker developed the terminology for the description of coordination systems for decentralized decision-making and leadership and developed the basis for the first systematic management theory (The Practice of Management; 1954), which completely excludes operational tasks and deals exclusively with management tasks . In contrast to his predecessors in Scientific Management, Drucker introduces the difference between effectiveness and efficiency. While efficiency is only the relationship between effort and result in the area of ​​operational material tasks and a measure of profitability (economic principle), effectiveness is the actual goal of management. This is not expressed in the ratio of effort and result, but in the ratio of result and goal, i.e. the degree of goal achievement. The original task of management from a functional point of view is the organization of the target formation and target achievement process. That is why the aim of management is not to maximize profits, i.e. to optimize the relationship between result and effort. Profit maximization is a result of management action, but serves to achieve corporate goals beyond the current business activity of a company. Management is therefore also more formulated than E. Gutenberg (1929; 1951), the founder of modern German business administration, for example. According to Gutenberg, management is a part of the operational production factors in the form of the dispositive factor (management, planning, organization and monitoring), i.e. an order function for the organization of the elementary function (work, operating resources and materials) subject to economic efficiency and profitability.

In this respect, Drucker's management theory also tends towards a theory of "correct" action, the starting point of which, however, is not normative-ethical provisions, but functional requirements, which are not, however, derived solely from the economic principle (profitability, profitability). F. Malik (2011), following P. Drucker, formulated that correct, i.e. effective action in the sense of target achievement is derived from the company's purpose - transforming resources into customer value. In this respect, the company's goal is to increase customer value instead of shareholder value (increase in value), which ultimately results from the provision of customer benefit.

Management as a function

The subject of business research from the functional perspective examines all activities of executives that are to be performed in the functional areas of the company (procurement, production, sales, financing, human resources, administration). The so-called management cycle has established itself as the standard model for these activities. According to this, (1) analysis, (2) goal setting, (3) planning, (4) decision, (5) organization, (6) delegation, (7) coordination, (8) leadership and (9) control belong to the tasks of management . The management

  • analyzes the company's situation in several dimensions (situation analysis),
  • defines the objectives of the company's activities in coordination with the supervisory board or the owners (target setting),
  • plans the use as well as the procurement and provision of the necessary resources (corporate planning),
  • decides on the action program to achieve the goals with the given resources (operationalization of the goals),
  • defines the basis for the further development of the structural and process organization for the most efficient achievement of goals (organizational development),
  • delegates strategically important activities to specially created project teams as well as the implementation of measures within the framework of the action program and the definition of sub-goals to the middle management level,
  • coordinates the cooperation between the various functional areas of the company,
  • leads the directly assigned middle management staff and defines the framework (principles) of staff management at the level of the company as a whole (management model),
  • controls the degree of target achievement in relation to corporate planning using information from normative, strategic and operational controlling.

Larger organizations have i. d. Usually three management levels pronounced. The executive board (top management) has overall responsibility for the company and its strategic development, formulates the strategic goals, makes fundamental decisions about how these should be achieved in the overall organization and provides individual functional areas with resources for the achievement of sub-goals. The middle management level, in interaction with top management, defines the sub-goals for their respective area of ​​responsibility, is responsible for the achievement of the sub-goals (individual decisions in "day-to-day business") and reports to the top management on the progress made in achieving the goals. The lower management coordinates the activities of the employees with executive activities in coordination with the middle management and is responsible for the efficiency and quality in the service process.

Management as an institution and an academic discipline

The management of a company includes - in the broadest sense - all people who perform managerial tasks in the company.In a narrower sense, however, the term refers to the executive body of the company, which - in the case of larger companies - is led and represented by the CEO or the managing director, who in turn is appointed to manage the company by the owners or the supervisory board. This form of separation of ownership and management as a constitutive feature of management as an institution has established itself with the development of larger trading companies, banks and the first industrial joint-stock companies as well as the beginning of public administration. Corresponding laws of commercial law regulate the constitution, rights and duties of management as an organ.

With the very different socio-economic circumstances of managers, management is not a uniform professional group. At the same time, more and more professional roles or positions are declared as management tasks. However, this change in linguistic usage indicates an important social change. P. Drucker has pointed out that with the emergence of large industrial companies, a profession has developed that has proven to be an immaterial core innovation of modernity: Management is becoming a widespread profession for the management of target-oriented organizations of various sizes. F. Malik points out that management is a mass occupation and as such a craft that can be learned with a corresponding portfolio of tools. In contrast to this, however, a high degree of scientification has also developed. Management has established itself as an academic discipline of the social sciences in various forms at universities, the aim of which is to teach leadership in a wide variety of organizational forms. Management theory has also established itself as an extension of business administration to a science of corporate management as an independent real science, which is based on findings from business administration, economics, sociology, engineering, law, psychology, computer science and other sciences and corresponding academic degrees such as Master of Business Administration (MBA) or the Doctor of Business Administration (DBA).

As an institution and profession, management has also become a socially prestigious function due to the growing professionalism, the prestige of which was even higher than that of the entrepreneur for a long time. P. Drucker points out that with the rise of the manager in the social hierarchy from the administrator (private or industrial civil servant) to the model, a social group with generally above-average income has formed (managerial class), which is characterized by specific mentalities and dispositions (industrial man), which are used in the context of the rationalization of all areas of economic and social life typical of modern society for the management of rational organizations. However, even in the last few decades there has been an increasing skepticism towards purely rational action, which is also criticized as managerism, i.e. as an ideology. At the same time there was a renewed revival of ethical-value-rational discussions in the field of management as well as in the field of business administration and practice. B. in the new institutional economics (principal agent theory), in the introduction of corporate governance codes, the development and introduction of management systems in the areas of corporate social responsibility, sustainability, etc. show.