The Definition of Organizational

Management
 Small Business

 Managing Employees

 Managers

ByKimberlee LeonardUpdated August 27, 2018


RELATED
 Objectives of Industry Benchmarking
 Five Approaches to Organizational Design
 Advantages & Disadvantages of People-Oriented Leadership Styles
 Corporate Organizational Structure for a Project Manager
 Five Functions of Management & Leading

Business success requires thoughtful strategy developed into a plan that is executed effectively.
Organizational management is the process of leading a company and effectively using or
controlling its assets and resources. Organizational management goes well beyond a corporate
structure; it requires leaders to have methods in place to resolve issues and develop solutions
that help the business move closer to its desired goals and vision.

Organization Management Definition

Organizational management is a combination of many components of leadership within a
company. The actual structure of the company is utilized to gather information to analyze it.
This analysis is then used to develop strategies that are then implemented and executed via
meetings, training and promotion. Every business utilizes organizational management in a
different way contingent on the unique needs of the business.

Once a plan is implemented, organizational management must monitor and adjust activities
depending on results. If a company is not nimble to change based on feedback, it's
organizational management is not complete. There must be a complete loop of feedback that
sets the fluid strategies set from the top and delegated to the deepest channels of the company
where performance results must let leadership know if strategies are succeeding.

The goal of organizational management is to use the various levels of company leadership in
the leadership hierarchy to set goals, monitor results and build a stronger company. Strategies
might involve employee training, promotional strategies, operations efficiency or any other
aspect of the company.
Organizational Structure vs. Organizational Design
Organizational structure and organizational design are similar but not interchangeable terms.
Both as components of overall organizational management. Organizational structure is the way
the company hierarchy is laid out. This might look like a flow chart with the CEO at the top
and various vice-presidents and operational directors under him. Under that may be branch
managers and other department leaders with the people who do the work underneath. While
there are derivatives to this standard type of linear organizational structure, the idea remains:
structure refers to who is reporting to whom. It is the chain of command.

Organizational design describes how the chain of command functions with processes and
procedures. It is a plan. The organization might execute the flow of information based on email
or memo correspondence. Information might go to one superior to then be summarized and
disseminated while another organizational design might have the same report go to four or five
people in the chain above him. It reviews and catalogs all tasks and functions of all positions at
every level of the organizational structure, then groups these items and sets a workflow for the
efficiency of the entire company.

Lower level managers often have specific methods of design for their departments that work
within that department. An accounting department might design a checks and balances feature
where team members share the report in a team before submitting to get feedback and a review
of accuracy. There could also be a higher level design that is implemented from top to bottom.
This could be something as simple as payroll timecards need to be submitted by a certain
deadline in order to be processed timely.

Importance of Organizational Management

A business should place a priority on establishing solid organizational management to create a
company that clearly pursues goal achievement. Business leaders need to be clear on the goals
of the company and implement processes and procedures and are willing to monitor and adjust
based on critical feedback. When this happens, subordinates are clear on how to complete
tasks. This creates equilibrium in the company allowing it to adapt as needed in changing
environments. It also gives company workers the ability to present ideas from the baseline
level of production or service that gives senior executives the raw data needed to improve
things.

Companies emphasizing the details and how to execute them properly but willing to accept
feedback is a company positioned for success because it uses resources optimally. Senior level
managers that live in a bubble without considering what the layperson on the assembly line
knows is leaving the company vulnerable to errors and problems. It also means the company
may miss opportunities for innovation that leaves it exposed to innovative competitors.
Mismanagement leads to mistakes, missed opportunities and ultimately higher costs. Proper
management effectively uses financial resources and reduces overall costs.
Investment brokerages are a good example. The organizational design of a company two
decades ago had much less emphasis on online systems that empower clients. Today's market
is completely transformed with the largest advisors offering online services to clients.
Brokerages not cognizant of the consumer feedback because of poor organizational
management had leaders who felt that they knew better from their penthouse corner office.
Many of those companies lost market share and even closed because they refused to implement
designs including customer feedback from advisors.

Management vs. Development

An organization and management are a unit. Managers are the leaders of an organization. They
motivate and inspire as well as keep teams accountable to get work done. Management is
tasked with the responsibility of setting regular activities, developing specific action plans and
ensuring that a team or department succeeds with their part of the company's success. This
could be a production manager making sure the line gets the products out without a high
percentage of breakage. It could be a sales manager defining sales goals and the activities that
must happen to achieve them.

Development addresses issues or works to improve existing things. Issues might be

deficiencies in the process or skill gaps among workers. Improving things might consist of
identifying employees who can be trained or developed for more responsibility and even
leadership. Development seeks to find areas to improve. It is the foundation of innovation at
every level of an organization. Innovation goes well beyond some new scientific breakthrough.
It includes finding a faster or more efficient way of doing something. If a manager is able to
develop his team and innovate a process to save time on every order, the manager could
improve department efficiency tremendously.

Organizational Structure and Management

Organizational structure is the relationship of power, teamwork and accountability. Without
accountability, the direction of the company can veer off course and lose sight of the goals that
are pertinent to success. For example, if a company's sales force veers from focusing on
business to consumer sales to business to business sales, profitability might decline. The sales
team is the team of strategy implementers and the higher-level managers may not want to
sacrifice sales to consumers which is a faster process for a slower sales process.

This is why management is important. Manager review strategies and goals filtered down from
the top management teams and then delegate duties to subordinates to implement them. The
structure says who reports to who. Management defines how that communication is delivered,
when and provides insights for analysis. Just having an organizational structure does not
guarantee successful organizational management. Quite the contrary, a poorly structured
company still has the opportunity to succeed if managers are able to effectively delegate and
relate information. But bad organizational management leaves a company with no one taking
charge even though the structure may say certain people are in charge.
A ship has a captain and a crew. Within the crew, there are department heads to ensure the ship
functions properly. There may be a manager in the engine room delegating tasks to make sure
all machinery in the engine room is maintained and operating properly. There could be a doctor
as the medical advisor in charge of a team who care for sick and injured crew members. There
is a mess hall with a manager in charge of making sure the entire ship's crew gets fed. All of
these departments work toward one goal: getting the ship to the next port. If the crew in the
engine room decided they preferred to be on the deck, there would be no one to run the
engines. The structure starts with the captain and works down a chain of command with
department leaders, team leaders and ultimately down to crew members. A business
organizational structure functions similarly.

Corporate Management Leadership Styles

There are various styles of leadership any business manager can utilize. Most business leaders
have a dominant leadership style but may incorporate other styles as deemed necessary by
presented situations. There are six commonly recognized leadership styles and top
management should consider how these styles affect different departments. It may be that a
company employs leaders of one primary style consistent with the CEO's vision or it may be
that a company finds managers with styles more effective for specific departments.

The six common leadership styles are:

1. Directive
2. Visionary
3. Affiliative
4. Participative
5. Pacesetting
6. Coaching

Each of these styles has advantages and disadvantages. Some are more effective in some
organization's departments than others.

A directive leadership style is the order-giver. This leader says what you should do, and
expects it to be done without question. It is authoritarian and is considered in many modern
business environments to be a little outdated. However, it has merit when needing to hold
people accountable in areas such as compliance or safety issues.

The visionary leadership style has been emulated by organizational leaders seeking to create
the magic that Steve Jobs created at Apple. A visionary leader inspires people from the highest
levels of management to the lowest janitor, drawing them to work together for a common
purpose.

An affiliative leadership style is relationship-driven. This leader spends time developing trust
among employees, and is often in the trenches of a work day with his sleeves rolled up, along
with his staff. The problem with this style is that the leader is less concerned with results and is
more concerned with being liked and trusted. Positions requiring a lot of negotiations could
benefit from this style of leadership.

The participative leadership style functions like a democracy; everyone has input into the
process and goals. While this helps to engage the team in the overall goal, it could dilute a
manager's authority. The team must be competent and self-aware enough to maintain focus on
the company vision for this strategy to be effective.

A pacesetting leadership style is the true lead-by-example model. This model works well in
new departments or departments that have inexperienced workers who might not have the
belief that certain goals are attainable. The pacesetter is always at the front of every report, as
the employee who has the greatest number of sales, the biggest production numbers or the most
lucrative financial negotiations.

A coaching leadership style seeks to build up a team's skill level and confidence. Like a
sports coach, this leader looks for team member's strengths and weaknesses, and works with
them to set action plans to build on strengths and to improve weaknesses.

A top-level organizational leader needs to look at the styles when hiring people for a specific
department. A pacesetter might work well in a highly competitive sales department, but this
leader might burn out an assembly team. Coaches are effective in areas in which development
is critical to employee success. Key leaders should be able to inspire with their passion for the
vision, thus making this style ideal for those creating the strategies and relaying them to the
public and internal members of the organization.