In Discipline and Punish (1977) Foucault feedback that "a stupid despot may constrain his slaves with flat iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more firmly with the chains of their own ideas". How is this comment relevant for a talk of work in contemporary organisations?
French philosopher, Foucault's evaluation and ideas are similarly used in the modern management of companies and organisations. In this article, I'll analyse how his ideas in relation to the changes in the european can be utilized in the contemporary management of institutions and other managerial positions. Through the entire essay, the research will majorly concentrate on how autocrats treat their slaves by subjecting those to iron chains. Enchaining by the iron would, in cases like this, mean the way the current leaders and managers subject their juniors to responsibilities and implementation of procedures and strategies which were not agreed upon by the employees without considering their efforts to the formulation od the obligations, therefore, regarded as enforced by the market leaders and managers. Equally, this article will also examine how true politicians, skilled and good managers, binds their junior in the chains of their ideas. , The chains with their ideas would be studied to make reference to either the insurance policies, strategies and terms and conditions that are exceeded upon the arrangement of all stakeholders or the ideas that might be suggested to the organization by the junior employees.
Michel Foucault in his Self-control and Punish reserve used the term despot to refer to somebody who dictates how things would be done without taking into account the efforts of his or her things. A despot, in this case, is more than simply a dictator, rather, someone who does not value the thoughts of others. In his framework, Foucault posited his ideas with regards to his analysis of mechanised and interpersonal changes which were behind the changes which were posed to the American disciplinary system majorly predicated on the historical French documents that were utilized (Foucault, 1977). His analysis was majorly located in the hospital, university, camps and prisons via an in-depth evaluation of how torture, abuse, imprisonment and self-control. In his analysis, the idea of torture is subjected to the suspects in two ways; one of the major happenings where torture was applied was through the process of investigating the suspect. Through the investigation, the suspect was subjected to torture. Inflicting torture to the suspects compelled him or her to provide information. In the event, torture failed to compel the think to produce facts ascertaining his / her guilty; innocence was pronounced. The second incident where torture was applied was during the punishment of a crime offender with the purpose of correcting him or her (Foucault, 1977).
To begin with, in the modern organisational management, despotic control is bound to decrease the organisation's productivity. Inside the operation of your company, an autocratic manager might not exactly have tactical ideas and insights about how to manage the organisation (Howard, 2007). The employees under him or her may have these strategic ideas about how to operate the organisation in a manner that would boost the productivity and for that reason, growth in the long run. To the downside of the firm's growth and efficiency, the despotic director does not consider the proposals of the junior employees, in simple fact, she or he discourages them from challenging his ideas at all costs. Because of this, he or she imposes the ideas and proposals to his / her junior employees for execution regardless of the account of the impacts, both positive and negative; they would present to the firm (Howard, 2007). The failing of the manager to count on the ideas and the opinions of the junior users of personnel may portions to the execution of wrong strategies on account they are not subjected to scrutiny by the execution team. For example, for a marketing company, the director may impose old-fashioned marketing ideas for implementation by the junior employees. Predicated on the actual fact that the strategies were not at the mercy of questioning or analysis by the necessary stakeholder, the junior participants of personnel would execute the imposed strategy which would provide no purpose for the firm. The administrator should put into consideration the rising trends in management, like a go up of technology. His junior members of staff may be conversant with the technology-based ideas. Thus, their contribution would be good for the organisation. As commented by Foucault, a stupid despot who, in cases like this, make reference to an autocratic administrator constrains his slaves in flat iron chains. In cases like this, imposing foreign ideas to the team of execution without their stake in deciding on which strategy will serve better for the organisation's goals and objectives would be likened by the work of constraining the slaves in iron chains which, they have no knowledge how to unchain themselves. Constraining the slaves into iron chains would serve no better reason behind the despot because they iron chain would weaken their work and potential towards portion their get better at.
Second, autocratic management reduces the morale of the employees in the company. In cases like this, there are two types of employees. To get started with, the employees who are prepared and happy to conform to the directives issued or imposed by the management. To the kind of employees, it does not matter how beneficial the procedures or strategies may be to the firm, therefore; they may be loyal to the company regardless of the path of may be taking related to growth. The second kind of employees will be the employees who are concerned with the businesses of the company. Despite doing work for pay, these kinds of employees are worried about the influences of the strategies that are imposed by the management may present to the company. Therefore, in a situation where in fact the management has suggested strategies which may hurt the reputation and the performance of the organisation, they would test the strategies and propose the alternative strategies that could help the company regarding increasing the production and the growth of the firm. In the context of the autocratic leadership, the concerned employees would make an effort to challenge the procedures and ways of the management and perhaps propose the alternative following their evaluation of the situation. As common, a dictatorial supervisor would reject their concern and proposal and in fact, discourage them from challenging his / her in the future (Depaul, 2008). In some cases, the supervisor may issue sacking or dismissal hazards to them. When this happens, the concerned employees' morale would be lowered. In some instances, they may even resign to seek a much better workplaces that would appreciate their contribution to the firm through encouraging their thoughts whether challenging or promoting the suggested strategies. Working with the employees whose morale is reduced by the organisational culture significantly reduces the production and the reputation of the company. Employees whose morale is low could have no motivation of working towards organisational goals and objectives, rather, they would only conform to the imposed strategies (Depaul, 2008). In cases like this, the employee with low morale would be working for the organisation because they have to earn a living. As commented by the Foucault, a ridiculous despot enchains his slaves to the iron chains which serves him to his disadvantage. The slaves are likely to be demotivated in providing their master, due to the harsh working conditions.
Third, as commented by Foucault, a stupid despot enchains his or her slaves to the iron chains. In cases like this, the slaves are not encouraged to make a proposal on the best ways of enchaining. Communication is thus, is a one-way enter disseminating information. In the contemporary organisational management. The employees and the employer are two important stakeholders that determine the success of the firm. The communication between your two levels ensures that the employees are presented with a system to air their reviews towards the insurance policies or strategies suggested to them by the management. In the context of an dictatorial management, communication is in a one-way framework. Communication applies only when the manager would like to impose or even to give directives to the junior employees. The framework of communication, does not allow the employees to provide their feeling, ideas, and feedbacks towards implementation of the strategies which may have been proposed and generally, the opinions that may appear to challenge your choice made by the management. Therefore, the management manages to lose touch with the junior level or management (Tatnall & Davey, 2015). The management may never learn about the negative impacts of the strategies and possible event of a failure in the management in the foreseeable future. In case, the employees may need to something from the management as an additional requirement for the implementation of the policy or strategy; the management can happen either reluctant or directly reject the demand. There lacks a common relationship between your employees and the management. Instead, the organisation faces a vitality relationship problem that in, this case, skewed towards management. However, the management works towards discouraging a possible equilibrium of the energy relation between the two levels. Over time, the organisation is bound to perpetually suffer from management challenges and perhaps a collapse in the future caused by perpetual deficits.
Contrary to a ridiculous despot, Foucault commented about how a true politician should behave. In his comment, he posited a true politician binds his slaves more firmly with the chains that come with their ideas. In cases like this, enchaining the slaves in their ideas would contemporarily mean taking care of the slaves, according to the management and ideas that they propose. Instead of grilling them with flat iron chains, a true politician should enchain them with their suggestions to ensure they are beneficial to him. Logically, if one manage people according to their ideas, despite being their boss, she or he will benefit from their labour owing to the increment in their morale predicated on the appreciation of their ideas in taking care of various situations. Therefore, both the organisation and the employees would similarly benefit.
Managing people relating to their ideas reduces the communication gap. Through managing folks according with their proposals and ideas in the contemporary organisational management, the organisational supervisor creates an operating environment that promotes the contributions of the employees at any point in the course of management (Iqbal, Anwar & Haider, 2015). Therefore, the employees feel free with the management to add their ideas in the company management whether it opposes or helps the strategies proposes by the management. Logically, the proposals might not always be the best in the organisational management whatever the position of the proposer. The reduction of the communication gap thus, creates a platform that promotes the conversations from all the stakeholder on what's the best for the organization (Tatnall & Davey, 2015). The suggestions of all stakeholders is likely to come up with the best strategy that could ensure organisational growth and boost the reputation and the production of the firm. Additionally, the reduction of the communication gap creates a program where all the employees can simply communicate with their manager no matter their job position. In this case, the management levels would easily learn about the issues that are experienced by the junior level employees, thus, resolving them as soon as they arise. Managing employees in the context of the organisational management, regarding with their ideas and thoughts is, hence, good for the organisational progress.
Similarly, the management that appreciates the contribution of most employees within an company significantly reduces the employee turnover. Within an company, most employees despite working with the aim of earning a paycheck, in addition they work to build up their job (Valcour, 2014). An organisation that appreciates the contributions of the employees regardless of their position at the company motivates the employees towards attempting to develop their employment opportunities. Employees would feel motivated if the organisation has applied his idea within the means to fix a certain problem or as a strategy to maximise their result and minimising the inputs. Over time, appreciating the efforts of the employees and the take action of including them in making critical decisions for the organisation allows them develop commitment towards their employer. For an employee that has been hardworking and has been adding positively about the strategy, formulation may be advertised from one job position to another. In this respect, the employees will have advanced his opportunities at the organization. The commitment reduces the extents of employees resigning and dismissals due to a common relationship between your two degrees of operation.
Notably, handling the employees in their ideas creates a concept of teamwork. One of the ideas where organisations should make an effort to achieve is the culture of teamwork. Through teamwork, the company is in a position to solve sophisticated managerial situations. Through teamwork, the employees can combine their knowledge, skills, techniques no matter their positions in the company and produce the best strategy that would enable the company to solve the problems that are confronted. In the framework where management promotes works within the principles of democracy, staff develop loyalty for the company; therefore, they are prepared to work with other employees no matter their level in the rank of job positions to donate to the ultimate success of the company (Rosen, 2014). Unlike in the management framework where the administrator has the final say, the democratic organisational management motivates the employees to contribute to the suggestions to the management or keep discussions within themselves or alongside the degrees of management to create the best ways of taking care of certain situations. It should be mentioned that in the framework of any dictatorial authority, there is usually a cycle of your dictatorial degree of management. For example, the majority of the degrees of management receive directives from the older management for implementation. Therefore, even if the junior level employees who are anticipated to use that strategy survey negative impacts with their immediate boss, she or he cannot report back again to the senior manager because he or she would not take the task. Therefore, organisational management should encourage democratic command that creates an allowing environment for teamwork.
In conclusion, as commented by Foucault, a stupid despot who, in this case, is the organisational director enchains his slaves with the flat iron chains, therefore, barring them from providing him efficiently. On the other hand, a genuine politician chains his / her employees using their ideas and ideas which, hence imply that he manages them according with their ideas. Within the modern organisational management, there are two types of organisational head just as posited by Foucault in his stupid despots and true politicians analogy. The two types of organisational managers are dictatorial and democratic. Majorly, democratic management is advantageous to dictatorial management. Through democratic management, the employees are empowered to make their efforts to the management about how they consider the organization would achieve the goals and goals. In cases like this, the management creates a system of contribution, therefore, it can be an inclusive kind of management. Dictatorial management, on the other hand, is a situation where one man operates the show. Most of the employees are discouraged from making their contributions which to a more substantial extents impacts their morale adversely, thus, reducing the production of the company over time.
(Sr), B. H. , 2007. A Study of Teacher-perceived Variations in the Command Varieties of African-American and Caucasian Principals. 2nd ed. ProQuest: Michigan.
DePaul, V. C. , 2008. Creating the Intrapreneur: The Search for Leadership Excellence. 1st ed. Texas: BookPros, LLC.
Foucault, M. , 1977. Self-control and Punish. 2nd ed. NY: Vintage Literature.
N, I. & N, A. S. &. H. , 2015. Effect of Management Style on Worker Performance. Arabian J Bus Manag Review open up access journal, 5( 5 1000146), pp. 1-6.
Rosen, N. , 2014. Teamwork and underneath Line: Groups Make A Difference. 1st ed. Abingdon-on-Thames: Mindset Press.
Tatnall, A. & Davey, B. , 2015. Reflections on the annals of Computers in Education: Early Usage of Computers and Coaching about Processing in Schools. 1st ed. Berlin: Springer Knowledge and Business management.
Valcour, M. , 2014. IF YOU ARE Not Supporting People Develop, YOU ARE NOT Management Material. [Online]
Available at: https://hbr. org/2014/01/if-youre-not-helping-people-develop-youre-not-management-material
[Accessed 22 March 2017].