MANAGEMENT

Management is defined as an act of managing people and their work, for

achieving a common goal by using the organization’s resources. It
creates an environment under which the manager and his subordinates
can work together for the attainment of group objective. It is a group of
people who use their skills and talent in running the complete system of
the organization. It is an activity, a function, a process, a discipline and
much more.

Planning, organizing, leading, motivating, controlling, coordination and

decision making are the major activities performed by the management.
Management brings together 5M’s of the organization, i.e. Men,
Material, Machines, Methods, and Money. It is a result oriented activity,
which focuses on achieving the desired output.

The expression "management" started from the expression "manes"

which signifies "to control by hand". Management centers around
inspiring and controlling capacities just as specialized abilities and HR
aptitudes. It's a specialty of overseeing representatives and their work.

The management consists of the top, middle and lower levels of the
organization :

(i) Top management—in charge of strategy plan.

(ii) Middle or practical management—in charge of arranging, sorting out,
coordinating and controlling, and;
(iii) Lower management—in charge of supervision.
Definition of Administration

The administration is a systematic process of administering the

management of a business organization, an educational
institution like school or college, government office or any
nonprofit organization. The main function of administration is the
formation of plans, policies, and procedures, setting up of goals
and objectives, enforcing rules and regulations, etc

Administration lays down the fundamental framework of an

organization, within which the management of the organization
functions.The nature of administration is bureaucratic. It is a
broader term as it involves forecasting, planning, organizing and
decision-making functions at the highest level of the enterprise.
Administration represents the top layer of the management
hierarchy of the organization. These top level authorities are the
either owners or business partners who invest their capital in
starting the business. They get their returns in the form of profits
or as a dividend.

The expression "administration" began from term "minor" and

"ministrare" which implies " to serve" and " to oversee" in like manner.
The administration includes the people that are proprietors of their
organization. They normally put resources into the organization's assets
and procure profits or benefits for their venture. The key regulatory
intention is dealing with the business parts of the organization, for
example, financing. Other managerial purposes typically incorporate
arranging, sorting out, staffing, coordinating, planning and controlling.
The administration must join vision and initiative, to organize the assets
and individuals, to achieve shared objectives and objectives for the
organization.
Management vs Administration

The major differences between management and administration are given below:

1. Management is an activity of business and functional level, whereas

Administration is a high-level activity.
2. While management focuses on policy implementation, policy formulation
is performed by the administration.
3. Functions of administration include legislation and determination.
Conversely, functions of management are executive and governing.
4. Administration takes all the important decisions of the organization while
management makes decisions under the boundaries set by
the administration.
5. A group of persons, who are employees of the organization is collectively
known as management. On the other hand, administration represents
the owners of the organization.
6. Management can be seen in the profit making organization like business
enterprises. Conversely, the Administration is found in government and
military offices, clubs, hospitals, religious organizations and all the non-
profit making enterprises.
7. Management is all about plans and actions, but the administration is
concerned with framing policies and setting objectives.
8. Management plays an executive role in the organization. Unlike
administration, whose role is decisive in nature.
9. The manager looks after the management of the organization, whereas
administrator is responsible for the administration of the organization.
10.Management focuses on managing people and their work. On the other
hand, administration focuses on making the best possible utilization of
the organization’s resources.
Project Oxygen
In an environment where the conventional is always challenged, Google’s People
Innovation Lab started Project Oxygen trying to prove that manager quality does not
have an impact on performance. To prove this point they hired a group of statisticians to
evaluate the differences between the highest and lowest rated managers. Data was
collected using past performance appraisals, employee surveys, interviews and other
sources of employee feedback.

However, instead they proved that good management actually makes a difference. To
better define what makes a good manager they came up with a list of 8 qualities based
on the data received.
 

Google’s Project Oxygen findings:

1 They're good coaches.

2. They empower their team and don't micro-manage.

3. They express interest in their team members' success and personal well-
being.

4. They productive and results-oriented.

5. They're good communicators and they listen to the team.

6. They help employees with career development.

7. They have a clear vision and strategy for the team.

8. They have key technical skills that help them advise the team.

While this list seems obvious there were three reasons why it had such a big impact on
management at Google. First, it was based on people analytics. At Google scientific
evidence is key, therefore using people analytics gave the project greater credibility.
The fact that it was based on employee feedback encouraged wider employee buy in
and trust. Similarly, the hard data helped to convince managers why they needed to
improve their management style.

Second, the interesting thing is that technical skills came in last. While it’s important that
managers have the needed technical level to guide employees, soft skills such as
coaching and communication are absolutely essential. This proves that being a great
developer doesn’t necessarily make you a great manager.

Third, it provided a checklist of management qualities.

As a result, Google changed its feedback surveys to mirror these qualities. Instead of
simply measuring how much output a manager achieves, the surveys now focus on how
much time they spend coaching their team, whether or not they communicate a clear
vision, etc. They also developed new management training programs centered around
these skills.

Management theorists who consider management and

administration as different hold two viewpoints. According to one
viewpoint, administration is above management and management is
part of administration and according to the other, management is
above administration and administration is part of management.

i. Administration is above Management:

This view is advocated by the American authors viz, Oliver Sheldon,
Spriegal, Theo Haimann, Mc Farland etc. According to them,
administration is a higher level function of framing policies, plans,
objectives, etc. and management is a lower level function that deals
with implementation of the policies. Management proper is concerned
with the execution of policy, within the limits set up by administration
and employment of the organisation in the particular objects set
before it. Administration determines the organisation; management
uses it. Administration defines the goal, management strives towards
it.”

ADVERTISEMENTS:

According to this viewpoint, thus, administration is a top-level

function concerned with framing the organisational plans and policies.
Management is a lower-level function concerned with implementation
of plans framed by the top-level administrators. Administration deals
with policy formulation and management deals with policy execution.
Administration is, therefore, broad and conceptual and management
is narrow and operational.

ii. Management is above Administration:

This viewpoint is advocated by the British authors, viz., Breech,
Kimball and Kimball, Richman etc. This view is opposite to the one
advocated by the American authors.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Thus, management is a top-level function concerned with framing

organisational plans and policies. Administration is a lower-level
function concerned with implementing the plans and policies.

EXAMPLES

Shell’s tough love

Royal Dutch Shell plc, commonly known as Shell, is a British-Dutch oil and
gas company headquartered in the Netherlands and incorporated in the
United Kingdom.

In 2004 Shell was facing an oil reserves crisis that hammered its share price.
The situation was compounded by the abrupt departure of the oil group’s
chairman, Philip Watts. The new group chairman, Jeroen van der Veer,
believed that in order to survive, the corporation had to transform its structure
and processes.
A series of global, standardised processes were identified. These, if
introduced, would impact more than 80 Shell operating units. While the
changes were vital to survival, they proved unpopular in the short term as
some countries stood to lose market share.

However, for a change programme of this scale to be successful, everyone

had to adhere to the new systems and processes. The leadership of Shell
Downstream-One, as the transformation was known, needed unflinching
determination and to focus on gaining adoption from everyone involved.

Those leading the change had to ensure that the major players in all their
markets knew what was required and why. They needed to be aligned with
the change requirement.

The main message of the change team, led by van der Veer, was that simpler,
standard processes across all countries and regions that benefited Shell
globally trumped local, individual needs. That meant everything from common
invoicing and finance systems to bigger more centralised distribution
networks. By identifying and rapidly addressing the many areas of resistance
that emerged – such as that some influential stakeholders stood to lose
control or market share – adoption was accelerated.

The team of experts – made up of senior leaders, in-house subject matter

experts, implementation consultants and external change experts – who
delivered the change programme were crucial in this phase. They’d been
picked because they had both technical understanding and could provide
change leadership. They both modelled and drove the new behaviours
needed for the change to succeed. They briefed the people who would be
impacted by the change; risks and potential problem areas were discussed–
before any real change was even delivered.

Shell is in a significantly healthier position than when the transformation

started, and by that measure the programme has been deemed a success.
And the ramifications of Downstream-One continue to result in ongoing
change…  

Royal Dutch Shell is the seventh-largest company in the world by revenue

($240,033 million USD), according to Fortune Global 500. It is one of the
six oil and gas "supermajors" and the fifth-largest company in the world
measured by 2018 revenues

Santander: pulling down to build back up

Santander UK plc (/ˌsɑːntɑːnˈdɛər/) is a British bank,

wholly owned by the Spanish Santander Group.
Santander UK plc manages its affairs autonomously,
with its own local management team, responsible
solely for its performance.
When in 2008 Santander wanted to establish a stronghold in the UK banking
sector, its strategy was to acquire a portfolio of heritage-centric UK financial
institutions.

Santander chairman felt, however, that the legacy in these UK financial

institutions, dating as far back as 1849, had left them incapable of change
and, therefore, unable to evolve and grow.

In buying these traditional UK financial institutions and unifying them under

the Santander brand, Santander aimed to break down their engrained
processes and turn them into a formidable retail bank.

To do this, they would need a fast-track, systems-led banking model. Only this
could bring clarity, efficiency and best practice to institutions that had become
totally entrenched in ‘their way’ of doing things

Counter-intuitively, this can be particularly noticeable when national or

linguistic similarities give a false illusion of commonality. In fact, the cultures of
the UK acquisitions were very different, they had developed as regional
building societies and their footprints, portfolios and client bases were each
unique. This meant that forceful and careful management would be needed to
integrate the systems, processes and people in the different organisations.

Those who were going to be impacted by the change were fully briefed; risks
and issues were discussed and mitigated. In-branch teams, for example, were
prepared for a variety of customer responses through the transition phase.
Even those who weren’t likely to be impacted by consolidations were given
clear messages about the future. The aim of this process was to make sure
they didn’t just understand the change, but that they embrace it.

. By 2013, it had become one the country’s leading retail banks and one of the
largest providers of savings

Direct Line: disruption brings opportunity

Following the 2008 financial crisis, royal bank of scotland Group was ordered
to sell its insurance business by European Union regulators, as a condition of
RBS receiving £45bn in state aid. RBS’s insurance business, led by Paul
Geddes, was tasked with separating its operations from RBS Group into a
standalone company, in order to be ready for either a trade sale to a
competitor, or listing on the stock market.

It’s a testament to Geddes, and the insurance business’s leadership at the

time, that they turned the opportunity into a positive exercise and used the
separation process to create a viable, standalone, rebranded insurance
organisation, now known as Direct Line Group. It took 18 months to separate
out every single strand of the business, from customer data, to independent
functions and governance. This was very much a case of operating from a
burning platform.

The entire approach had to be one of controlled urgency, there was no plan B
and the leadership teams embraced the need to shift their people on to the
next step as rapidly and as efficiently as possible. Once the separation had
been effected, the focus was on creating a new brand and rapidly building the
business into a viable standalone operation.

In 2012 the board went for an IPO that turned out to be the biggest and most
successful London stock market listing that year. Its success heralded the
start of a new, post-crisis IPO era. The Direct Line Group’s share price has
continued to climb since it floated.