Effective managment is dependent on all organizational members, but particularly those who control the organization. CeOs, as found in the explanatory study of the models, are almost always dominant coalition members. The power and credibility of their office makes their involvement in managment imperative. The CeO generally is the only person capable of speaking for the whole organization; he or she is, literally, the person in charge. "And," as one university president stated, "most donors . . . want the privilege and the opportunity to talk to the person in charge" (Anderson, Hellriegel, and Slocum, 1999).
every gift would be easier to raise if the CeO was involved, but then there would be little reason for top officials to designate a department for effective management tactics. Furthermore, the size and complexity that necessitated a staff function in the first place also demand time and attention from the CeO. evidence suggests that about one third of the CeO's time is spent on management ( P. M. Buchanan, 1993). Staff managers, therefore, are selective in directing the attention of the CeO to those situations and opportunities when the person in charge must speak for the organization. Their involvement primarily is with prospects for major gifts.
On the other hand, CeOs are dependent on their staff managers (i.e., the relationship is interdependent). If the fund-raising manager does not successfully meet set objectives, the CeO is accountable to the board. When unmet objectives negatively impact program services and operations, the CeO bears responsibility. Professional reputations of CeOs increasingly are tied to fund-raising results. And on a personal level, most CeOs are not trained in fund raising and rely on staff managers for counsel, as well as direction.
A chief fund raiser and a CeO interviewed by Cook illustrated the working relationship. The fund raiser said, "My role is to be a manager of the process and a manager of the CeO's time and effort in development" (Anderson, Hellriegel, and Slocum,1999). The CeO stated, "I learn from my own staff. I don't hesitate to follow their advice and determination as to what amount of money should be requested, or when, or how, or who" (Brown, 2002).
To build and maintain such a relationship, the staff manager must develop an affinity with the CeO and earn his or her trust and confidence. If need be, the practitioner must educate the CeO about what it takes to raise money. The head of the function helps instill fund raising as an inherent element in everything the CeO does. Unfortunately, such an emphasis can be detrimental to effective management of the function. CeOs often feel pressured to take credit and shortcuts when it comes to attracting private support. CS's CeO, Gary Sanders, stated his management philosophy as follows:"Businesses baby their employees too much these days. We are here to make money, not to make people feel good. I hate people who come to work looking for a "big happy family." What management needs to do is offer workers good money, show them what to do, and keep them on a tight leash. You can forgive a mistake once; the second time, the guy is out the door. Those who are left quickly learn not to mess up."(Bateman and Snell, 2005)
even big organizations with considerable internal resources have failed to anticipate dramatic outside shifts and have faced the unanticipated checkmate. For example, GM failed to heed signals in the late 1960s of a potential energy crisis, as well as the increasing attractiveness of small, fuel-efficient Japanese cars. Ignoring these signals cost GM almost 30% of its U.S. market share. Sears in the 1970s continued to "fiddle" with self-branded merchandise, monolithic department stores, and catalog delivery systems, while customers asked for name-brand merchandise and for more quality in products and services. (Bateman and Snell, 2005)
It is important to understand how strategic information flows from outside to inside your organization. Otherwise, you may find yourself befuddled by an issue for which ample information already exists somewhere in the organization. A sports trainer may know that the star player has a degenerative back condition, but if he or she does not tell the coach, the team may suffer when the condition becomes serious later on. In the late 1980s, Motorola had an enormous amount of information about the relationship between cellular phones and possible neurological damage. (Anderson, Hellriegel, and Slocum, 1999) But the company did not use the information to manage this potential issue. Instead, an outsider presented the case for a positive link between the two and set off a somewhat hysterical public debate, in which Motorola took a real bashing.
Management relies heavily on processes and responsibilities. The decision process model helps you follow the flow of strategic intelligence through an organization and assign accountability or responsibility for responding to that intelligence. emerging issues may be complicated, but the process by which they are dealt with should not be. Here is a simply structured Management Accountability Model:
- Assign the anticipatory management function. The title of the manager charged with the anticipatory management function varies within organizations - in business, it ranges from issues manager to public affairs manager to vice president for public relations or strategic planning. We'll use the generic term anticipatory manager. The anticipatory manager's duties are to oversee the strategic intelligence system, identify issues from numerous sources, analyze and compile trend information into issue briefs for consideration by a steering committee, and facilitate action and policy teams. (Drucker, 2001)
- Form a steering committee. The steering committee is made up of senior staff or volunteers selected by the leadership to screen and prioritize emerging issues that have already been identified. This team should possess an in -depth knowledge of the organization and have an open mind to the external forces with influence on the organization. Their duties are to review the issue briefs; determine implications and degree of organizational opportunity or vulnerability; rate issues on the basis of probability, impact, and whether the organization can or should influence them; and develop consensus on the degree of organizational involvement. (Anderson, Hellriegel, and Slocum, 1999)
- Manage the issues. If an issue has been given a high priority, the steering committee assigns "ownership" for the issue by determining which person or group could most benefit from or be hurt by it. (Bateman and Snell, 2005) Ownership does not imply that work on the issue should be carried out exclusively by the "owner." The anticipatory manager works with the owner to select an action team, set an agenda, and facilitate team meetings as necessary. When possible, monitoring events and trends on a systematic basis should be the responsibility of a separate issues management staff to ensure that all necessary information will be evaluated.
- Inform the leadership. At this stage, the steering committee reviews the action plan presented by the issue owner, including details of what is to be done, why, by whom, when, how much it will cost, and where the money will come from. Because many action plans involve cross-disciplinary work teams, it is crucial that all parties agree to it. (Anderson, Hellriegel, and Slocum, 1999) The steering committee then forwards the plan to the leadership, who may need to quiz the committee on such issues as the involved parties' positions and technical and operating objectives.
Using the decision process and the accountability models together assures that your organization is linked to its external macroenvironment and ready to act. If your organization spends its time solving problems and resolving crises, it will have little time for innovation. The tendency to race headlong into the future while looking in the rear-view mirror (to see how something was done in the past) and out the side windows (to see how the competition is doing it) has proven unproductive over the long haul. With foresight and anticipation, your organization will be more productive. Anticipatory management provides systematic and formal ways of understanding the world outside the organization. However, anticipatory management only becomes useful when it penetrates the "inner world" or minds of the participants.
The human mind works by using accumulated experience to construct an internal model of the external reality. The tools of anticipation offer important additional information about the outside world. More significantly, they fundamentally alter perceptions, challenge prejudices, and open your mind to new insights so that you and your organization will know what to do, how to do it, and what the outcome might be.
Bibliography
1. Thomas S. Bateman, Scott A Snell. (November 23, 2005)"Management : Leading and Collaborating in the Competitive World with Online Learning Center" McGraw-Hill/Irwin; 7 edition.
2. Peter F. Drucker. (September 1, 2001) "The essential Drucker: In One Volume the Best of Sixty Years of Peter Drucker's essential Writings on Management". Collins; 1st ed edition
3. Thomas L. Brown. (August 5, 2002)"The Anatomy Of Fire - Sparking A New Spirit Of enterprise -- Leadership In The 21st Century", BrownHerron.
