In This First-Time Journal Assignment, Go To Section 1.1 ✓ Solved

In this first-time journal assignment, go to Section 1.1 of

In this first-time journal assignment, go to Section 1.1 of your text and watch The Five Functions of Managers video on the five management functions of planning, organizing, staffing, leading, and controlling resources to achieve organizational goals. How are the five management functions currently applied where you work (or did work)? How do you think any could have been applied differently? Write your ideas and experiences as a journal entry. Complete your journal in one page, being mindful of spelling and grammar.

Paper For Above Instructions

Journal Entry: Applying the Five Functions of Management

Today I reflected on how planning, organizing, staffing, leading, and controlling are applied in my workplace. These five functions, originally codified by classical theorists and refined by modern management writers, provide a useful framework for observing managerial practice (Fayol, 1949/1916; Mintzberg, 1973). In my organization— a mid-sized technology services firm—managers use these functions in uneven ways. Describing each function below, I note current application, strengths, and opportunities for improvement.

Planning

Planning at my workplace is typically conducted quarterly. Department leads produce roadmaps aligned with annual goals, and project managers maintain sprint plans. Strategic planning exists but can be reactive: plans often shift when a major client request arrives or when market conditions change (Drucker, 1954). The advantage is agility; the downside is limited long‑term foresight. To improve, leadership could balance short-term responsiveness with scenario planning and risk assessment (Daft, 2015). Introducing formal scenario workshops and clearer linkage between long-term strategy and quarterly roadmaps would reduce last-minute firefighting (Kaplan & Norton, 1992).

Organizing

Organizing is visible in role definitions and team structures. We follow a matrix model: functional specialists (engineering, operations, sales) and project teams. This arrangement enables resource sharing but sometimes creates confusion about reporting lines and accountability, reflecting the classic tension of matrix structures (Gulick & Urwick, 1937). Organizing could be applied differently by clarifying decision rights and creating a lightweight RACI (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) process for cross-functional initiatives (Robbins & Coulter, 2018). Clearer documentation of authority and improved communication channels would reduce duplicated effort and conflicts.

Staffing

Staffing practices combine reactive hiring with internal promotions. HR focuses on technical fit and immediate project needs; long-term talent pipelines are less formalized. This often leads to stretched teams during peak demand and underinvestment in leadership development (Huselid, 1995). Applying staffing more strategically would mean instituting competency mapping, succession planning, and targeted development programs (Bateman & Snell, 2019). Proactive talent forecasting and partnerships with universities or training providers could smooth capacity gaps and build bench strength.

Leading

Leadership in my workplace often emphasizes task completion and technical guidance. Many managers lead by example on technical matters, which builds credibility but sometimes neglects coaching and inspiration. Kotter (1990) distinguishes management from leadership: managers plan and control, while leaders set direction and motivate. Integrating leadership development—communication, vision-setting, and change management—would improve team morale and adaptability. Regular one-on-one coaching and clearer articulation of purpose beyond project deliverables would make leading more transformational rather than purely transactional (Kotter, 1990; Mintzberg, 1973).

Controlling

Controlling mechanisms include weekly status reports, KPIs for delivery, and monthly financial reviews. While controls help track progress, they can feel bureaucratic when overly detailed or poorly tied to outcomes. Effective control systems should measure what matters and provide timely feedback for corrective action (Kaplan & Norton, 1992). Shifting toward outcome-based metrics and using dashboards that highlight trendlines rather than isolated metrics would support better decision-making and reduce administrative overhead (Daft, 2015).

How the Five Functions Could Be Applied Differently

Collectively, the five functions would benefit from greater integration. For example, planning should explicitly inform staffing (forecasted needs drive hiring), organizing should be designed to support planned initiatives, leading should be trained to enact strategy, and controlling should feed learning back into planning (Fayol, 1949/1916). Practically, this could be achieved through a quarterly Strategic Review Forum where leaders align plans, resource commitments, talent pipelines, leadership priorities, and performance metrics. Embedding a culture of continuous improvement—where controls generate insights, not just compliance—would close the loop between measurement and action (Kaplan & Norton, 1992).

Personal Reflection and Lessons Learned

Reflecting on my experience, I see that organizations often excel at immediate, operational functions (organizing and controlling) yet underinvest in strategic planning and people development (planning and staffing). My role as a mid-level manager taught me the value of explicit communication of priorities and the need for structured talent development. If I could change one thing, it would be to champion a simple competency framework and quarterly talent reviews to align staffing with strategic planning (Huselid, 1995; Bateman & Snell, 2019).

Actionable Recommendations

1. Introduce a quarterly Strategic Review Forum to align planning, staffing, organizing, leading, and controlling (Kaplan & Norton, 1992).
2. Adopt a RACI framework for cross-functional projects to clarify organization and accountability (Robbins & Coulter, 2018).
3. Implement competency mapping and succession planning to make staffing proactive (Huselid, 1995).
4. Provide leadership development focused on vision, coaching, and change management (Kotter, 1990).
5. Shift controls to outcome-oriented KPIs and trend dashboards that support learning (Daft, 2015).

Conclusion

The five functions of management remain a practical lens for diagnosing organizational strengths and gaps (Fayol, 1949/1916). In my workplace, applying these functions more deliberately and integratively—especially linking planning to staffing and controls to learning—would improve performance and employee experience. Small, structured changes like a Strategic Review Forum, RACI matrices, and competency-based staffing can make management practices more coherent and strategically aligned (Mintzberg, 1973; Bateman & Snell, 2019).

References

• Bateman, T. S., & Snell, S. A. (2019). Management: Leading & collaborating in a competitive world. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Daft, R. L. (2015). Management. Cengage Learning.
• Drucker, P. F. (1954). The Practice of Management. Harper & Row.
• Fayol, H. (1949/1916). General and Industrial Management. Pitman Publishing.
• Gulick, L., & Urwick, L. (1937). Papers on the Science of Administration. Institute of Public Administration.
• Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635–672.
• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71–79.
• Kotter, J. P. (1990). What leaders really do. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 103–111.
• Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial Work. Harper & Row.
• Robbins, S. P., & Coulter, M. (2018). Management. Pearson Education.