You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Miscellaneous

    Should managers only manage?

    From the very beginning, the word "Manager" in professional word implies that a person is hired to manage the work and people in an organization and he or she is not directly doing the actual work. We must have heard many people wishing to get promoted to managerial positions just because they think that they will not need to work after being a manager. So there is always a notion that a manager enjoys and the actual workers work hard.

    But these days this notion is getting changed and some organizations are expecting even the managers to be hands-on in the technical work and they should also be able to contribute individually when required. Hence the days of the manager doing plain old management work are slowly getting over. Now managers are also needed to pull up their socks and understand what the team is doing.

    It is always better for managers to not only do management work but also get involved in day to day technical hands-on work done by the team and understand it completely. There are many merits to it. A pure manager can never understand the technical problems actually faced by the team and hence unable to guide them. A pure manager can easily be fooled by the team by giving wrong inflated time estimates for completing their work and giving some false technical reasons as to why the work got delayed. Hence a hands-on manager will always add value to the organization.
  • #654974
    The concept of a Supervisor is getting replaced by a working supervisor concept. So one should concentrate not only on knowing managerial techniques but also on work-related technical knowledge also. Then only they can move on a fast track in their career, Another issue cropping up these days is multitasking. One should be able to manage multiple works. He should plan his work in such a way that simultaneously four or five works will be happening at one time.
    drrao
    always confident

  • #654976
    A manager who knows the jobs of his subordinates because he had done it earlier or he has learned it recently will have a better output performance then the one who does not know anything except that he has to manage it in any way.

    In technical and scientific organisations it matters much otherwise the progress will not be adequate in the desired direction.

    There are some places where routine jobs are done and nothing sort of specialization is required. There, any good manager with common sense and managerial and administrative capabities will be successful.

    Knowledge is power.

  • #654979
    No, they need to plan the work that has to be undertaken by the field workers and help them to execute it properly. Now when the managers are helping the workers to execute any task, they must have hands-on experience of the job. Joining as a Manager without the proper knowledge about the execution process will not help the person to progress further and she/has to seek help every time from the seniors.

    Generally, those who are promoted to the managerial level after certain years of experience in the field can efficiently handle the situation if they have managerial capabilities. An organization always looks for a person who can take up many challenges at a time. Nowadays, every organization is thinking of cost-cutting measures and when they can manage a number of tasks by employing only a few numbers of persons then they will always look for those who can carry out field works as well as managerial tasks.

    Sankalan

    "Life is easier when you enjoy what you do"

  • #655001
    Yes, the concept is changing these days. I myself being a manager has to guide the team and have to work along with the team to know what problems do they face while working. Moreover, the management to expects us to do like what we do.
    Sanjeev

    " It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for what you are not" ... Andre Gide

  • #655014
    Manager, by definition is – someone who gets the work done from others. This is right. Yet, what the point you have highlighted is very much true. The Manager should have deep understanding of the work his subordinates are in association with. But, what is optional is – whether the Manager has to get involved in the field work or not.

    Why I am calling it as an option is since, a manager who knows how to manage the people and get the complete work done by them may not need to involve in field work rather he shall be a resource to company to plan improvement and productivity out of the existing work force and prevailing process. Such Managers are ideal for the company and those are the efficient Managers. Whereas, other set of Managers struggle to manage the people and end up not able to achieve the target and forcefully involve themselves in the work force making their employees panic and stressed a such Managers shall exert pressure on the employees to do more.

    In a nutshell, a Manager who knows how to influence people may get termed as efficient manager and he may no need to understand what his subordinates are doing in a micro manner. However, if he knows the concept in deep, he shall have one more factor to his advantage - that is - Controller, so much costlier to be now a days.

    "Whatever may be the situation of the forest,
    a Lion would never eat Grass!"


  • Sign In to post your comments