MANAGEMENT AND INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS - CRITICAL MANAGEMENT THINKING

University Degree Business and Administrative studies

M A MANAGEMENT AND INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS

CRITICAL MANAGEMENT THINKING

ASSIGNMENT

The article “Working@Llife” by Helen Wilkinson aims to reflect on the transition of the 21st century leaders from technocrats to evangelists and from managers to visionaries. In the article, the author tries to convince the reader that there is a sharp contrast in the skills possessed by the old managers as compared to the new managers. The author indicates that modern managers are softer and there is reduced use of hard leadership skills. Guiding and advising are the skills taken up by them.

There are several reasons stated by the author supporting this conclusion.

One of the reasons stated is that the present economy is one that is credited for knowledge, innovation, creativity and also where prime importance is attached to people. This results in the need for the new managers to possess set of skills that differentiate from the old managers.
The author also draws an intermediate conclusion, which states that the age of control and command no longer exists.
Another reason stated by Helen is that the new leaders adopt skills of guiding, advising and coaching in place of the controlling and dictating. She also indicates that this makes the birth of a new kind of Corporate Leader who is suited for the knowledge economy.
The transformation in technology in the work place has also been mentioned as a reason for the change of leaders from managers to visionaries. She states that change in nature/style of work has resulted from the way in which work is organised as a result of modification in technology used.
Another reason stated by the author to support the conclusion is the shift from masculine values to a more feminine style of management. This has cost the change in the skills possessed by the leaders thus changing them from technocrats to evangelists.
Leadership having taken a spiritual dimension has also been mentioned as factor contributing to the change in the image of leaders in the 21st century.
One another reason to support the conclusion is that to take appropriate decisions, leaders must evolve away from an executive style and learn to empower the team.
Another intermediate conclusion drawn by the author is that, to be able to effectively lead, the leader must develop and make use of four inner directed qualities: presence, wisdom, intention and compassion.

All the above-mentioned reasons have been used by Helen Wilkinson to support her conclusion.

On critically evaluating the above mentioned reasons the following may be noticed :

The first reason stated in support of the conclusion is true. But this is based on the assumption that modern managers do not command and control. Author has not provided any evidence supporting this assumption. Moreover, the fact that modern economy gives priority to people, innovation and knowledge does not necessarily indicate the need for managers to develop a different set of skills.
The author mentions that the ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

All the above-mentioned reasons have been used by Helen Wilkinson to support her conclusion.

On critically evaluating the above mentioned reasons the following may be noticed :

The first reason stated in support of the conclusion is true. But this is based on the assumption that modern managers do not command and control. Author has not provided any evidence supporting this assumption. Moreover, the fact that modern economy gives priority to people, innovation and knowledge does not necessarily indicate the need for managers to develop a different set of skills.
The author mentions that the new bottom line is that people’s potential should be harnessed. For harnessing potential, the mangers have to maintain control over the activities of the people, but this does not support the assumption made by the author. Helen has failed to consider all the important reasons. Details on how people’s potential should be harnessed and what exactly is the need for a new kind of leader has not been clearly mentioned.
In the subsequent point of support the reason is not true. Here again the author has just assumed that the modern leader is softer. She has stated that the most admired and successful CEO’s are those who mange there employees by understanding their work ethics and well used rather than directing through hierarchical management. The author has not supported this statement with any facts or examples. Therefore the conclusion cannot be drawn on this basis. Rather the author could have concluded that modern managers understand the requirements and needs of employees instead of simply commanding terms and controlling performance.

The arguments stated by the author supporting the third reason is that large number of businesses are outsourcing less important function to smaller companies, consultant ants and e-lancers. This reason is true. But the general conclusion cannot be drawn on this basis. A very small part of the organisations activities are outsourced. Another point to be noted is that e-lancentric organisations are those whose activities are primarily internet based. As a result they are more flexible in comparison to other organisations. Whereas in other organisations the use of internet is limited to certain activities only. The author, here, is trying to draw a general conclusion on the basis of a small section of the society. Clearly, all important factors have not been taken into consideration.
The change of masculine values to more feminine styles of management is a reason drawn on the assumption that there has occurred a shift from hierarchy to wirearchy. The author has again failed to provide enough evidence supporting this. But the argument that inter-personal and communication skills are of vital importance and that emphasis is on teamwork, co-operation and openers is true. Further down in the article the author contradicts herself by saying that a mix of feminine and masculine characteristics is vital. She also mentions that to retain a competitive edge hard leadership skills or masculine skills are essential. But the author’s conclusion is that leaders have become evangelists rather than technocrats and visionaries instead of managers follow the reason.

The next reason is itself an assumption the author has not given any evidence supporting her statement that leadership has taken a more spiritual dimension.
She asserts that innovation, integrity, inspiration and intention, which are the values of the pioneering businesses in the present economy, are all routed in intuition. This reason is not entirely true, nor does the conclusion stated follow these reasons.
The author has drawn her conclusion from the assumption that the CEO’s rotate in the old organisational set up and values have a working culture wherein there existed a gap between their work life and private life. She also claims that this gap hindered the human potential and creativity Helen Wilkinson does not support her argument with appropriate evidence. Therefore the assumption cannot be taken into confidence and conclusion cannot be drawn on its basis.

On the basis of the analysis done above, it can inferred that the article ‘Working@Life’ is not well focused. Most of the conclusions are drawn on the basis of the assumptions. These assumptions have not been supported by enough evidence to prove their credibility. Most of the reasons mentioned in the article that supports the conclusion failed to satisfy all the four tests.

The first part of the article discusses on the need for modern managers to possess a new set of skills in comparison to the managers of the industrial age. She also mentions about the various skills adopted by new managers for managing employees, which are characteristically different from those employed by managers of the industrial age. The article also mentions several factors like transformation in technology, shift from hierarchy to wirerarchy etc as factors that have resulted in the adoption of new skills by the modern managers.

In the second part of the article more emphasis has been given to leadership and its new spiritual dimension. Here again the author draws conclusions based on unjustified assumptions. The author also tries to draw a clear line of distinction between a new age leader and an old one, which is rather, quite impossible.

The author could have presented her conclusion in a better manner if she had based it on certain proved facts and data rather than on assumptions. She could have attempted to express her reasons in a logical manner, thus creating a link between every point. The author failed to give reasonable and a rational nexus between her arguments and her conclusion with some irrelevant comments. The author has also attached undue importance to certain points, which are not of vital importance to support her conclusion.