Planning Note: This Course Is Organized Around The Four Basi

Planningnotethis Course Is Organized Around The Four Basic Functions

This course is organized around the four basic functions of management: planning, organizing, leading, and controlling. Your final project for each week in this course will require you to assess the functional performance of a manager (Weeks 1, 2, and 4), organization (Week 3), or team (Week 5) of your choosing in accordance with the prescribed principles of management taught in this class. You will be asked to defend your assessment with academically sound concepts and theories from your assigned reading. Academically credible information from other sound sources will also be encouraged. In this first week, we learned about how management theory has changed over time.

We also briefly examined the four functions of management in preparation for more in-depth study in the weeks to come. Finally, we began an in-depth look at the function of planning including the different types of plans, the planning process, and the importance of planning to effective management. For this assignment: Compare the application of each of the four functions of management in terms of how it might be different 25 years ago, based on the evolution of management theory. Select a manager and assess his or her planning strengths based on assigned reading concepts/theory. Research can also be supplemented from (but not solely based on) other information from academically credible resources.

Assess that same manager's planning weaknesses using the assigned reading concepts/theory. Research can also be supplemented from (but not solely based on) other information from academically credible resources. Defend two or three recommendations for improving the manager's performance in the functional area of planning based on the assessment of both strengths and weaknesses and the use of academically credible sources. Submission Details: Based on your research, write succinct discussions of each of these items. Present your work as a 2–3-page report in a Microsoft Word document formatted in APA style. Support your responses with examples and research. Cite any sources in APA format. Name your document MGT2037_W1_LastName_FirstInitial.doc Submit your document to the Submissions Area by the due date assigned.

Paper For Above instruction

The evolution of management theory over the past 25 years has significantly transformed the application of the four fundamental functions of management: planning, organizing, leading, and controlling. Understanding these changes provides valuable insight into how modern managers operate and adapt to contemporary organizational environments. This essay explores the differences in the application of these functions two and a half decades ago compared to today, assesses a manager’s planning strengths and weaknesses based on established theories, and offers recommendations for improvement grounded in credible academic sources.

Historical Perspective on Management Functions

Twenty-five years ago, management practices were heavily influenced by classical theories such as Taylor’s scientific management, Fayol’s administrative principles, and Weber’s bureaucratic model. These approaches emphasized efficiency, standardization, and hierarchical control, which led to a more rigid and procedure-oriented application of management functions. In terms of planning, traditional management relied on rigid, top-down, and long-term strategic plans with less flexibility to adapt quickly to market changes. The organizing function focused on strict hierarchies and clear divisions of labor, while controlling was heavily dependent on formal rules and supervision (Daft, 2015).

Today, advances in management thought, including cognitive, systems, and contingency theories, have shifted the application of management functions toward more dynamic, participative, and flexible approaches. The planning process now emphasizes agility, innovation, and stakeholder involvement, reflecting a move away from rigidity. Modern organizations often adopt strategic planning and scenario analysis to navigate complex environments (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2014). Organizing has transitioned towards flatter structures, empowerment, and teamwork, while control systems incorporate real-time data and performance metrics facilitated by digital technology (Hammer & Champy, 2000).

Manager’s Assessment: Strengths in Planning

Based on the assigned reading concepts, a current manager I have observed demonstrates significant strengths in strategic and adaptive planning. This manager utilizes SWOT analysis and scenario planning to anticipate potential challenges and opportunities, aligning with Mintzberg’s emergent strategies that adapt to environmental feedback (Mintzberg, 1994). Moreover, the manager encourages participative planning, involving team members in goal setting and decision-making, which aligns with contemporary views on collaborative management (Vroom & Yetton, 1973). Such practices foster innovation, commitment, and flexibility, essential qualities in today’s rapidly changing markets.

Manager’s Weaknesses in Planning

However, despite these strengths, certain weaknesses are evident. The manager sometimes relies heavily on informal, intuition-based decision-making, which can undermine consistency and strategic coherence. This weakness aligns with the critique of over-reliance on intuition noted in management literature (Simon, 1997). Additionally, the manager occasionally neglects formal risk analysis and contingency planning, leaving the organization vulnerable to unforeseen disruptions. This gap reflects a deficiency in comprehensive planning processes that anticipate various future scenarios, as emphasized by Kruger and others (2011).

Recommendations for Improvement

To enhance the manager’s planning capabilities, several recommendations grounded in academic research are pertinent. First, implementing structured scenario planning tools can equip the manager to better anticipate and prepare for potential uncertainties (Schoemaker, 1995). Training in quantitative risk analysis methods could also improve decision quality and organizational resilience (Aven & Zio, 2019). Second, adopting a formal strategic planning framework, such as Balanced Scorecard, can help ensure coherence between short-term actions and long-term goals, thereby increasing consistency and strategic alignment (Kaplan & Norton, 1996). Third, fostering a culture that values data-driven decision-making and continuous learning can improve planning accuracy and adaptability (Senge, 1990). Collectively, these improvements can enable the manager to capitalize on strengths while addressing current weaknesses, aligning organizational practices with modern management theory.

Conclusion

Management functions have evolved substantially over the past 25 years, reflecting broader changes in organizational environments and academic insights. While traditional practices emphasized hierarchical control and rigid planning, contemporary approaches favor agility, participation, and data-informed decision-making. A manager’s effectiveness in planning hinges on balancing strategic foresight with flexibility, governed by sound theoretical principles. Implementing structured scenario planning, strategic frameworks, and data-driven cultures can significantly enhance managerial performance, thus aligning organizational practices with current management theories and practices.

References

• Aven, T., & Zio, E. (2019). Foundations of Risk Analysis and Risk Management. Springer.
• Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. W.W. Norton & Company.
• Daft, R. L. (2015). Management. Cengage Learning.
• Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (2000). Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. Harper Business.
• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75-85.
• Kruger, J., et al. (2011). Strategic risk management and resilience. Journal of Business Strategy, 32(5), 44-55.
• Mintzberg, H. (1994). The rise and fall of strategic planning. Harvard Business Review, 72(1), 107-114.
• Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1995). Scenario planning: A tool for strategic thinking. Sloan Management Review, 36(2), 25-40.
• Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
• Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations. Free Press.