The state of technology is an important factor in the environment of management. Overall, the United States has been very successful in pushing back limits to economic growth through continued technological advancements. We can observe the results in new attitudes toward leisure and recreation, improved communications, the development of a broad-based educational system, improved health care, and many other areas. At the same time, technological advancements have caused various problems; for example, technology has contributed to the development of more complex, technology has contributed to the development of more rapid managerial obsolescence, uncertainty in decision making, overcrowding of highways and cities, and less clean air and water. Thus, technology has both positive and negative results.
Technological advancements come from many sources, and it is impossible to group them into one single category. The Wankel engine, birth control pills, computers, high-yield grains, television, and off-shore oil drilling rigs are all technological developments; but each plays a distinct role and has its own impact on the environment of management. In a broader sense, the question facing management of the future is whether modern technology can continue to provide economic growth for all nations. The answer depends clearly upon management's ability to advance technology in the areas of (1) additional food production, (2) new energy sources, (3) recyclable resources, (4) reduced pollution, (5) population control, and (6) medical advancements.
Casual observation should make it clear that technological advancement requires good management. Above all, this means that future managers must be flexible and adaptive to change. With each new technological development, managers must determine the physical and social effects of the development as well as the managerial changes that will be necessary before it can be implemented properly. More research will have to be conducted to find out what turns employees on to their jobs and how to get the most out of their efforts. A greater investment in equipment will also be required, and thus, a closer coordination between human and material resources. In general, then, challenges of the future will require that managers improve their skills in perceiving, analyzing, and adapting to the barriers and opportunities produced by technological changes.
Productivity has various meanings. It can be used as a measure of a system's total output of goods and services. More often, however, it refers to the relationship between the output of a system and its inputs. Here, productivity is the ratio of wanted output to scarce input. In this ratio, output represents the products and services of a system, while inputs are measured in terms of labor-hours worked and materials used.
As a ratio of output to input, productivity provides an indication of a system's efficiency. Productivity gains reflect increased output per unit of input. In technologically advanced nations, productivity is usually high, while the reverse is true in less-developed countries.
The United States has always been known for its high levels of productivity, but smaller increases and declines have been of concern for the last several years. As recently as 1980, for example, productivity growth in the United States was the lowest among all major industrial nations of the world. If this trend is not reversed, we can expect continued periods of stagflation where conditions of inflation and recession exist simultaneously in the economy.
When declines in productivity are discussed, it should also be noted that fingers of blame are pointed in several directions. The government is blamed for failing to provide a tax structure that stimulates capital formation and investment. Various laws and regulation are attacked as being only costly masses of red tape. Unions are seen as culprits tat push labor costs too high while providing workers with so much security that they are no longer motivated to increase their productivity. Employees are blamed for poor attitudes toward the quantity and quality of their work. Finally, management groups are blamed for a number of things ranging from failure to replace obsolete industrial equipment soon enough to that of passing on too many costs to customers.
The task for future managers is that of moving beyond discussions of who is to blame for declines in productivity to viable programs of advancing productivity. Action, not blame, will be required to meet this challenge. While such action will require the cooperation of various groups, managers must provide the leadership that will pull these groups together.
0 komentar:
Post a Comment