Learning the art of GOAL Setting and Achievement

Objective: Learning the way of setting SMART Goals and their achievement

Dr. Mandi always has a very innovative way of teaching concepts and ideas, and I always find them to be with such an approach that the idea strikes directly into the mind, no need to go deep into the books to understand better. Today again he started in his own way. He wanted to make us understand the importance of setting right goals and their achievement. He gave us cubic blocks of wood and students were asked to build a tower with certain set of conditions- single cube base, no support can be used at any point of time. A student was asked to come and build a tower. The part I loved here that the there was an open bidding process for building it, and a student paid Rs 500 to be there ( the tune of socho socho – beecho beecho rang into my head - a total business approach J). With an objective of around 15 blocks in mind he was able to make a tower with 16 blocks which I considered a good performance.

Continuing on this Mr. Mandi gave us an approach which I will remember throughout my life now. I always thought that goals should be “realistic”, but after his class I realised that goals can only be Low/ Average/ Tough. What is low for one person may be very tough for another person. It all depends on the difference in confidence of a person.

So points to remember while goal setting is that-

·         ALWAYS SET HIGH GOALS; AVOID SETTING AVERAGE/LOW GOALS

·         STEPS SHOULD BE TAKEN TO MAKE TOUGH GOALS TO AVERAGE/LOW OR WHAT YOU SAY POSSIBLE

Goal Achievement should be planned after thinking about how to make goals ‘realistic’.

Here the concept of JUGAAD- Indian innovation, can come to help us and we Indians are considered really excellent in this.  

Goal Setting and Achievement can be better understood with the help of the following diagram—

A= Goal Set

B= Potential

C= Goal Achieved

D= History

So here I should also talk about a new concept I learned which is 

‘Pygmalion Effect’ or ‘Rosenthal Effect’-

low expectations lead to a decrease in performance.
We understood this better when we did this task after understanding the above concept.  With a new set of Goals, a target of 40 blocks ,the team was not only able to break the previously achieved record of 27 but was able to build a tower of 28 blocks.

  Goals achieved are meant to lesser than or equal to the Goals set.

        

When I was working for my company and saw the APP(Annual Performance Plan) targets, I always considered that the targets were to high based on the historical performance, and I felt that under-achievement of the targets brings low confidence. But now I realised that they were meant this way.

So to summarize –

More to follow soon. Keep learning…. :J

How to be a desirable Manager

Objectives: To share my learning on motivation and management styles.

Douglas Mcgregor,  an American famous sociologist proposed the famous  

X- Y theory in his book ‘The Human Side Enterprise’. He made the simple yet powerful observation that managerial practice often expresses some very deep assumptions about the nature of human beings: Two competing theories about human nature-

   Theory X which is more conventional which emphasis that workers just don’t love their work and  harnessing the human energy is the management’s role. One key aspect to Theory X management is that   people are the first to blame, not processes

   Theory Y gives its importance to management by objective and maintains human beings are the shapers of their life. ‘Give them water and let them bloom.’ 

For more details on the theory you can read here and here.

So this leads to 4 different cases:-

1 - Theory X Manager assumes LAZY workers as LAZY and makes them work

            When a Theory X Manager assumes LAZY workers as LAZY and uses close supervision, a greater control of behaviour on workers to work, the use of these forces will create counter forces from the side of workers and he may find it hard to achieve desired output, hatred against the management etc. This style of management will take organizations no-where and therefore should be avoided.

 
2 - Theory X Manager assumes NOT LAZY workers as LAZY and makes them work 

            NOT LAZY workers love their work, are self-motivated and want to contribute towards the organisational goals and objectives. When a Theory X Manager assumes NOT LAZY workers as LAZY and makes them work using greater level of control often problems of trust, lack of innovation arise. The objective and targets of an organization may be achieved partially but organization will find it tough to excel.

3 - Theory Y Manager assumes LAZY workers as NOT LAZY and makes them work 

            When a Theory Y manager assumes LAZY workers as NOT LAZY and makes them work, he should use the tools of proper direction, delegation of jobs and should create a better culture of opportunities and growth with proper guidance among the workers, which in turn will motivate workers to shred the lazy attitude they posses and may take organization to higher levels. The managers need to use the power of conviction and be a true leader.

4 - Theory Y Manager assumes NOT LAZY workers as NOT LAZY and makes them work 

                        This is real WIN-WIN situation for any organization as the culture is very positive and achievement of organizations goals and vision is easier as the alignment of the two forces is in the same direction.  

My Understanding and experiences:

'You can't command people to do their best; they can only command that of themselves'- Bob Nelson

The human behaviour in an organization is approximately what management perceives it to be and is considered tough to manage. It is how they generally behave and this behaviour is not a consequence of man’s inherent nature. It rather depends on a no. of factors like the nature of organization, their management philosophy, policy, and practices. My experiences in my company gave some insight into it- some workers were perceived by the management as lazy and lacking ambition and therefore managerial approach emphasised total control even though their behaviour was affected because of tougher working conditions and lack of incentives in the industry. So managers need to be more open in their approach and should primarily try of creating opportunities, releasing potential, removing obstacles, encouraging growth, providing guidance. My experience with my manager taught me that if we create such a culture even a person from whom we expect zero contribution gives his level best and definitely plays his part in the job. But there will be some conditions and cases where you have to lead in theory X style because in industry people are accustomed to proper direction, strict guidance and greater control.

So, the key to being an effective manager is not to cling to one style over another in all situations but to learn to analyze a situation and adapt your style of management accordingly.

Liked the Post?  Do give your feedback and comments.

Evolution of Management

Objectives: I will try to cover my understanding of ‘The Evolution of Management’ from ‘Craftsman ship’ and '3E' model for Organizations.

The Industrial revolution happened in 1770s in England and then spread to other parts of Europe and to the United States of America in 1990s. In its earliest days, manufacturing the production of goods and services was done on a very small scale by craftsmen and their apprentices in their small shops. The craftsmen who were very skilled in their field used simple tools and techniques and produced the goods as per the need and requirement of the customers. The responsibly of the complete production process was with a single craftsman (sometimes a few), and he only did all the activities involved in it(from start to finish).

       A craftsman making boxes in the manner of the 19th century                               

There were several shortcomings involved with the craftsman model of production. Because the products were hand-made (or with minimum machine), the process was slow. The problem of economy of scale didn't allow higher margins, which could have allowed the businesses to expand.

The factory model of production, a product of industrial revolution, brought some changes in terms of dividing the craftsman’s roles and job into smaller and specialized roles. This forced the craftsmen to join factories and the owners as production supervisors, which caused a decline in the autonomy and control of craftsmen.

Ford assembly line, 1913

The scientific management era brought a paradigm shift in the managing of organizations. Frederick W. Taylor, who believed in the ‘science of management’ based on observation, measurement, analysis and improvement of work methods, and economic incentives. Taylor believed that it’s the role of management to plan, to carefully select workers, train them and then find the best way to perform each job.  Henry Ford introduced the concept of ‘moving assembly line’ which increased the efficiency of the processes by leaps and bounds. A second concept used by him was division of labour, under which he divided the operation process into a series of small tasks, and individual workers were assigned for each task, which led to ‘de-skilling’. Unlike craft production, where each worker was responsible for doing many tasks, and thus required skill, with division of labour the tasks were so narrow that virtually no skill was required. 

A modern day 'Assembly line'

This made the organisations lesser dependent on the skill-level of the the workers and in turn more dependent on the skill set of managers like- Planning, Organizing, Coordinating, Controlling and Executing.

The Management of Organizations made managers aware of the need of continuous improvement and organizations started striving towards EXCELLENCE. 

While EXCELLENCE is a function of EFFECTIVENESS and EFFICIENCY , and mathematically can be written as Excellence= Effectiveness X Efficiency. This principle can be better termed as 3E's model of Organizations and in today's scenario (of a very high competition) this makes sense for managers to achieve it. The competitive advantage gained through Excellence model can make Organizations sustainable and add value to their processes.

In my next blog, I will try sharing my learning on setting SMART Goals and their achievement. KEEP FOLLOWING.