As A Manager, You Will Have To Control Work Processes And Mo

As A Manager You Will Have To Control Work Processes And Monitor Perf

As a manager, you will have to control work processes and monitor performance. There are three types of controls which occur in organizations: feedforward control, concurrent control, and feedback control. Feedforward control prevents future problems by identifying potential issues before they happen. Concurrent control collects performance data in real time, allowing immediate correction. Feedback control gathers performance information after a task or project is completed, enabling organizational learning and improvement.

In my previous organization, a project management system was used for monitoring performance. This system primarily employed feedback control, as performance reviews were conducted after project completion to evaluate outcomes and identify areas for improvement. While feedback control facilitates learning, incorporating concurrent control could enhance real-time adjustments during projects, reducing errors and increasing efficiency. Therefore, adopting more concurrent controls would benefit the organization by enabling timely interventions, ultimately improving overall performance and project success rates.

Paper For Above instruction

In organizational management, control systems are essential for ensuring that operations are aligned with strategic objectives and for maintaining high performance standards. The choice of control type significantly influences organizational responsiveness, efficiency, and effectiveness. In this analysis, I will examine the control system used in my previous organization, identify which control type it falls under, and discuss whether a different control approach would be advantageous.

The organization primarily relied on feedback control mechanisms. Feedback control involves collecting performance data after completing a task or project with the intent of evaluating outcomes and implementing improvements. This approach is common in many organizations because it provides comprehensive insights into what occurred and why. However, it also has limitations, primarily the delay between performance and evaluation, potentially allowing issues to persist longer than necessary before corrective action is taken.

Feedback controls are valuable for strategic review and long-term improvement, but they are less effective for immediate problem-solving. In the organization I worked for, performance reviews, client feedback, and post-project evaluations constituted the core feedback mechanisms. These allowed management to identify systemic issues and inform policy updates. Nonetheless, reliance solely on feedback control often means organizations are reactive rather than proactive, missing opportunities for real-time correction.

In contrast, concurrent control involves monitoring ongoing processes as they occur. This type of control enables managers to detect deviations and make immediate adjustments, reducing waste and preventing errors from escalating. For example, in manufacturing, real-time quality control checks ensure that defects are corrected before products leave the production line. Implementing concurrent control in my previous organization could have facilitated faster responses to project deviations, resulting in improved efficiency and client satisfaction.

Feedforward control, on the other hand, focuses on preventing problems before they arise by identifying potential issues early in the planning or execution phases. It involves proactive measures, such as risk assessments and strategic planning, to circumvent future problems. While my organization did conduct some risk assessments at the project initiation stage, there was minimal emphasis on ongoing preventive controls during execution. Strengthening feedforward mechanisms could further improve outcomes by reducing unforeseen issues and streamlining processes from the outset.

Considering the nature of the organization’s operations, integrating more concurrent controls alongside the existing feedback systems could offer significant benefits. Real-time monitoring tools, such as project dashboards and performance tracking software, could enable managers to detect issues promptly and implement corrections during implementation. This approach would lead to increased agility, reduce the cost of late corrections, and enhance overall organizational performance.

In conclusion, my previous organization’s reliance on feedback control was appropriate for reflective learning and long-term improvement. However, incorporating more concurrent control mechanisms would provide a balanced approach, combining proactive prevention with real-time correction. Such integration would optimize performance management, enable quicker response times, and foster a culture of continuous improvement, ultimately supporting organizational resilience and competitiveness.

References

1. Anthony, R. N., & Govindarajan, V. (2007). Management Control Systems. McGraw-Hill Education.
2. Simons, R. (1995). Levers of Control: How Managers Use Innovative Control Systems to Drive Strategic Renewal. Harvard Business School Press.
3. Merchant, K. A., & Van der Stede, W. A. (2012). Management Control Systems: Performance Measurement, Evaluation, and Incentives. Pearson Education.
4. Otley, D. (1999). Performance Measurement of Organizations: A Critical Perspective. British Journal of Management, 10(3), 229-246.
5. Simons, R. (2000). Performance Measurement & Control Systems for Implementing Strategy. Prentice Hall.
6. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard—Measures That Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71-79.
7. Bourne, M., & Bourne, P. (2003). How Do Performance Measures Change Lives? Measuring Business Excellence, 7(3), 3-12.
8. Anthony, R. N. (1965). Planning and Control Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration.
9. Payne, A. C., & Frow, P. (2005). A Strategic Framework for Customer Relationship Management. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 167-176.
10. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2006). Alignment: Using the Balanced Scorecard to Create Corporate Synergies. Harvard Business Review Press.