‘4'. .

 

 

APPLYING QRGANEZAHONAL PRNCYPLES TO
THE SUPERMARKE? GP’ERATEON

Fhué: fur the Dem elf M. A.
MECHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Lynn H. Carma
1960

 

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

 

 

 

 

 

—-.——.__.__,_.~ .. __

APPLYING ORGANIZATIONAL PRINCIPLES

TO THE SUPERMARKET OPERATION

by

Lynn H. Corson

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of-

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Marketing and Transportation Administration
Curriculum in Food Distribution

1960

$27953
EAQAQJ

ABSTRACT

APPLYING ORGANIZATIONAL PRINCIPLES
TO THE SUPERMARKET OPERATION

by Lynn H. Corson

Interest in the formal organizational structures of
business enterprises began in the early part of the twen-
tieth century. Many writers in the field borrowed heavily
from the military in setting forth a series of so-called
"principles of organization” which helped serve as criteria
for relationships within a business organization. There
is no such thing, however, as a perfectly organized company,
since any enterprise must constantly be changing its organ—
ization to prepare for a changing environment. The varying
abilities of individuals also creates a need for a flexible
formal organization, since the structure must change with
the capabilities of the members of the organization.

In the supermarket industry there is a need for a
'better understanding and appreciation of organizational
principles, since the rapid expansion of the business has
outrun the suitability of the organizational structure.
This is particularly true in the individual market where
increased market size and the accompanying increase in per-
sonnel has created the need for market managers of greater
organizational ability. More careful attention must be

given to the assignment of responsibility and authority to

 

‘ |I.I..II.1 I ll:

. .I- v JIII‘IIII}. I

 

2

Lynn H. Corson

the employees within a supermarket. The manner of assigning
their work and scheduling their time is often the difference
between the success or failure of a store.

Today's store manager must be selected on the basis
of his ability and desire to organize his market and handle
the human relations involved in such an organization. The
modern supermarket manager must be given every aid in under-

standing and applying sound organizational principles.

INTRODUCTION

Interest in the organization structure and organiza-
tional methods applied to industrial management first took
shape in the early part of this century. Some of the
pioneers——such as Russell Robb, Harrington Emerson, Henri
Fayol, and M. P. Follett-—were greatly concerned with
formulating principles of organization, patterned primarily
after the military, and in applying these principles to busi-
ness management. Since the writing of these pioneers, the
discussion of organization has gone slightly out of date.
It is no longer a fad. Today managements are interested in
such things as motivation and management by consultation.

There is, however, much to be gained from a re-evalu-
ation of these principles of organization. This is partic-
ularly true in an industry such as food distribution. There
has been a rapid expansion in the size and number of retail
outlets in recent years that has placed additional burdens
on the store manager. Often a man was forced to make a
transition from managing a small store with one or two
employees to managing a supermarket with upwards of fifty
employees. This placed him in an executive—type position
With little or no formal training on how to efficiently
organize his working force.

It is the purpose of this thesis to discuss first the

general "principles of organization" that might in any way

ii
be pertinent to managing a supermarket. The first part of
this thesis deals with these general principles. In the
second part a more pragmatic approach is used. These prin-
ciples are brought to specific store level operation. The
third part of the thesis will attempt to point out ways in
which the "organizational skills" of the manager can be

increased.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER
Part I -- The Principles
I. THE MEANING OF ORGANIZATION.
What is organization
Purpose of organization
Organization as a State or a Process

Organization as a framework for
communication

Organizational structure defines
authority and responsibility

Organization as a placement of functions
in their logical relationship. .

Organization is an expression of human
limitations. . . .

Change and its effect on organization.
:EI. CRITERIA FOR A SOUND ORGANIZATION.
III[. THE NEED FOR ORGANIZATIONAL PLANNING.

QIIT. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY AND THE
ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE . . .

Part II -- The Application

V7. APPLYING ORGANIZATIONAL PRINCIPLES IN A
SUPERMARKET . . . . . . .

Store layout

Backroom organization .

PAGE

11

U" JI'UO h.)

13
28

3A

AA
50
51

iv

CHAPTER PAGE
VI. SCHEDULING OF EMPLOYEES . . . . . . . 54

Part III —- Getting Better Organization
at Store Level

VII. SELECTING A GOOD ORGANIZER . . . . . . 62
VIII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . 67
BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

PART I

THE PRINCIPLES

CHAPTER I
THE MEANING OF ORGANIZATION

Throughout recorded history man has accomplished his
purposes through group activity. Alone he cannot hope to
accomplish what is possible through coordinate group action.
However, there is a certain paradox in the fact that men do
not by nature spontaneously coordinate their efforts. Before
any group endeavor occurs there is usually a period of experi-
mentation before the individual efforts can be adequately
coordinated. This changing and experimenting with the effort
of individuals in the group is typical of successful dynamic
organization.

The environment and purposes of an organization are
(unistantly in flux. New methods arise and old ones become
outdated and useless. People's wants change. The organiz-
ation grows or shrinks and new personalities replace old. If
‘mua organization is to survive and be useful to its members,
itlnust made adjustments and changes to meet changing condi-
tions. When a new environment and purposes make old organi-
zation.forms inadequate, the organization must be changed to
provide for this. The same is true when new individual per-
sQualities replace old ones in the group.

It seems only logical that each enterprise and group

can bestzbe served by an organization uniquely fitted to its

own situation. It is reasonable to assume that the organi-
zation of a retail store would not be suitable for a manu-
facturing company. Likewise, the organization of one retail
store might be quite inadequate for another. Carrying this
further, the organization of a corporation one year might

be quite unsuitable for the same corporation a year or so
later. If this is true, and the environment and purposes of
an organization are constantly in change, it seems only
logical that the organization itself must constantly undergo
change. If there is one best organization form for each
enterprise, then organizational changes must be consciously
directed with that in mind. Before any discussion of the
direction of organizational changes, it is in order to con-

sider the various aspects of organization itself.

:What Is Organization

The word "organization" as applied to business groups
or enterprises has many shades of meaning. The definitions
depend on each author's conception of the relative importance
Of Jobs and personalities in the business structure. When
considering personalities in business, organization may be
defined as "the provision and maintenance of the physical
facilities and mental faculties in their proper relationship."
An0theraspect of organization was defined by an author con-
shflaring the relationship of Jobs as "the process of defining

and grouping the activities of the enterprise so that they

may be most logically assigned and effectively executed."l

Another writer on the subject broadly defines organi-
zation as "the state or manner of being arranged or consti-
tuted in interdependent parts, each having a special function,
act, office, or relation with respect to the whole.”2 A

fkyurth source says, "Organization may be defined as the act

oIT'bringing together related or interdependent parts into
"3

one organic whole.

Several factors are common to these various definitions.
Ffiirst, to have an organization there must be a number of
peyrts and secondly, these parts must be grouped together in
scnne logical manner to form an integrated whole. Whenever
we: speak of organization, we are referring to the inter-
rmalatedness of parts. Whether considering individuals, Jobs,
organs of the biological body, atoms or molecules, these
paJTts must be linked or coordinated in some manner so as,

together, to form a whole that is separate from, but composed

Of: parts .

Epose of Organization

Another important aspect of an organization of individ-

uals :is that it must be formed with some specific or general

' K
S 1Ernest Dale, Planning and Developing the Organization
~EEEEJZE£E (New York: American Management Assoc., 1952), p.13.

(N 2Alvin Brown, Organization, A Formulation of Principles
eW Sfork: Hibbert Printing Co., l§35), p. 3.

Zat 3Samuel E- Sparling, Introduction to Business Organi-
‘-1£EE (New York: The Macmillian Co.,’I906).

end in View. Organization implies purposive arrangement.
Organizations usually do not exist for their own sake, but
are rather formed to provide a means to a desired goal.

This goal may range from selling groceries to the worship

of God, but its presence is necessary to provide meaning to
the organization. Man has many goals and wants that cannot
be accomplished by himself alone. Individual endeavor by
itself does not suffice in most cases. The organization is,
then, the coordination of the endeavors of a number of
individuals. The differentiation of the individual endeavors,
or the manner of their organization, determines the nature
of concerted endeavor. If this is true, the result of the
endeavor is in some part dependent upon the manner of
organization. According to Alvin Brown, "Endeavor will be
more effective if organization is well adapted thereto.
Endeavor may be ineffective if organization is poorly adapted
thereto.“ It then appears that organization is a means to
the accomplishment of an endeavor, and that endeavor is a
means of accomplishing individual purpose expressed as

group goals .

QPSanization as a State or a Process

So far in our discussion of organization we have been
talking about it as if it were a static condition. However,

for our future purposes, it is more accurate to think of

\

 

4Brown, op. cit., p. A.

6

organization as a continuing process or system. It was men-
tioned earlier that there is a period of experimentation
before a workable organization can develop. It was also
mentioned that the environment and purposes are constantly
subject to change. Therefore, the organization is continu-
ously undergoing experimentation and is more a process than
a static condition. At any instant in time the organization
may be viewed as static with some advantage. However, it
must always be kept in mind that this approach, while useful,
is merely a convenient way of looking at something that
otherwise cannot be looked at. The process aspect of organ-
ization seems to the writer to be a closer approximation of

its real state .

Organization as a Framework for Communication

The importance of communication in the successful
operation of an enterprise is becoming understood. It is
necessary for the very survival of any cooperative effort.
Organization structure has a great part to play in the com-
munication system. The two are mutually interdependent, for
the requirements of communication also, to a large part,

determine the nature of an organization. In the words of

Chester I . Bernard,

This system of communication, or its maintenance, is
a primary or essential continuing problem of a formal
Organization. Every other practical question of ef—
fectiveness or efficiency, that is of the factors of
Survival, depends upon it. In technical language the
S.Yfi’atem is often known as the "lines of authority."

\

( 5Chester I. Bernard, The Functions of the Executive
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1938), p. 208.

Communication needs shape the organization by deter-
nuning the unit of organization, the grouping of units, and
the grouping of numbers of unit groups. Conversely, organi-
zation, and especially formal organization, aids communication
primarily by outlining channels through which to communicate.
When lines of authority or communication are made known
officially, a communication can have the presumption of
authority when it originates at an appropriate level within
the formal structure. Also, the formal organization structures
provide for executive levels at communication centers within
the organization. The executive can, therefore, have better
sources of information than others at less advantageous
positions in the organization and be more likely to have his
communiques accepted as authoritative.

The formal organization provides for a definite two-
way channel of communications for every member of the ideal
enterprise. In terms of commonly accepted organizational

principles, communication in one direction is provided by

the rule that "everyone must report to someone,‘ and communi-

cation in the other direction is expressed as "everyone must
be subordinate to someone."6 In this sense the formal
organizational framework fulfills the function of telling

each member the logical senders and recepients of his com-

munications.

 

6Ibid., p. 209.

Organizational Structure Defines Authority
and Reaponsibility

Closely linked to the communication function of an
organizational pattern is the necessity of a formal organi-
zational structure to provide for the delegation of authority
and responsibility. In this case we recognize that authority
can be given only by those commonly thought to be subject to
it, but for convenience we will speak of it as if it were
delegated from "superior authority.”

Even in the most informal groups no cooperative action
can occur, unless by mutual acceptance, the group delegates
the responsibility for the action or part thereof to a
specific person. This rudimentary type of organization
becomes increasingly necessary as the group becomes larger
and more formal. How often has a particular job been left
undone or improperly completed because of the lack of
organizational structure to place responsibility? Because
of the inadequate placement of responsibility in some com-
panies, it is this aspect of organization that has come in
for considerable emphasis and attention. It is somewhat
more easily recognized than other functions of the organi-
zational system, and therefore, considered of primary impor-
tance. In speaking of the role of organization in the
delegation of authority, Alvin Brown says:

The organizer will endeavor to identify all the

various parts of the administrative task, breaking
it up into as many elements as are necessary for his
purpose. Then, having exposed his problem by analysis,

he will solve it by synthesis. He will group the
elements into the desirable number of responsibilities

to be delegated.

This process does not, of course, require the initial
identification of every individual job. or even of
every element of administration. It does commend
identification to such extent as will give a comprehen-
sive understanding of the administrative task, an 7
essential for partition of responsibility at any stage.

Organization as a Placement gngunctions in
Their LogICal‘RelationsHip
In every aspect of organization discussed so far there
has been inherent a situation where two or more functions of
the group are in relationship with each other. It is a func-
tion of organization to determine the logical separation of
group functions. This separation is in terms of the individ-
ual's part in the enterprise. Alvin Brown says,
The first duty of organization, as it has been defined,
is to determine the part which each member of an enter-
prise is expected to perform. In rudimentary enter-
prise the membership is usually predetermined; the duty
of organization is thereforg to apportion the required
endeavor among the members.
Organization is an Expression of Human Limitations
Formal charts of company organizations arrange execu-
tives of varying ranks and duties in a series of strata or
levels ranging from those with the highest authority at the
top down to those who supervise the workers at the bottom.

These levels exist primarily because of the limitation of

human capabilities. Various limitations have their expression

7Brown, op. cit., p. 62.

8Ibid., p. 8.

IO

in the span of control or the number of persons who can be
adequately supervised by an individual executive. The span
of control is determined by other Spans. These include the
span of knowledge, which is the extent an executive's knowl-
edge and experience can cover various functions. The Span
of time is determined by just how much a man can do in a day.
The span of energy is the physical energy and effort an
individual can contribute to the enterprise. The span of
personality is the character of the executive to influence
other people. Another span is the span of attention or the
capacity of the individual to focus his complete attention
on his job. It is a common human failing for the mind to
wander after too long a time spent in the consideration of
details.9

The human limitations of knowledge, time, energy,
personality, and ability to concentrate also help determine
the manner of separation of functions within the organization.
This separation of functions or departmentation can be carried
out to favor the most limiting human weakness. If time or
energy is at a premium, territorial departmentation can be
used. If knowledge is limited, commodity departmentation
might be installed.

The mere existence of an organization implies human
weakness, since it is formed to satisfy human needs that

cannot be satisfied as well by individual effort.

 

9Elmore Paterson and E. Grosvenor Plowman, Business
Organization and Management (Chicago, Ill.: RichardID. Irwin,

Inc., 1941??

11

Change and Its Effect on Organization

A management consultant has estimated that over three-
fourths of the problems brought to him for consultation arise
from defects in the organizations' structures.10 The reasons
for this may be varied. When a group or enterprise is first
originated, there is usually little attention paid to formal
organizational principles. As the enterprise grows, a formal
organization becomes necessary, but this is usually built
around the personalities of founders or dominant figures.
When these men retire from the enterprise, they are replaced
by different individuals who do not necessarily have the same
traits or objectives. .The existing organizational structure
then becomes obsolete.

In other cases the functions of the enterprise might
change. In this manner the organizational structure of a
corner grocery store might not be suitable if more stores
are added and a chain is formed. Likewise, if the stores
are changed from service "Mom and Pop" stores to large volume
supermarkets, the organizational structure may well be com-
pletely inadequate.

Because it is inevitable that changes will occur and

because it is logical that changes will render ineffective

certain organizational forms and procedures, it seems only

 

loFranklin G. Moore, Manufacturing Management (Homewood,
Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1954).

12

wise to purposely plan organizational changes that will best

meet the needs of the enterprise. To allow the process of

<Irganization to proceed undirected seems an amazing lack of

foresight.

CHAPTER II
CRITERIA FOR A SOUND ORGANIZATION

In the previous chapter we have indicated that one type
of organizational scheme might well be better for a company
in a particular environment than another type. By this, we
do not mean to say that there is any such phenomenon in
organization as "the one best way." However, it appears
obvious that all methods can not be equally as good for a
particular company at a particular moment. Likewise, it is
obvious that every attempt should be made by the persons
directing the enterprise to find the method or methods that
will give the best results for that enterprise. A search
for such methods would be merely groping in the dark unless
some criteria are available and used as a guidepost to a
sound organization. These guideposts consist largely of
"principles of organization" developed through the years by
managers seeking the key to an ideal organization. These
so-called "principles" are not to be held rigid and inviolate
in the sense that they are necessarily applicable to every
situation. Human behavior is not that easily predicted. The
nature of organizational principles was described by Henri
Fayol when he said that business success:

Depends on a certain number of conditions termed

indiscriminately principles, laws, rules. For preference

I shall adopt the term "principles" whilst dissociating

14

it from any suggestion of rigidity, for there is nothing
rigid or absolute in management affairs; it is all a
question of proportion. Seldom do we have to apply the
same principle twice in identical conditions; allowance
must be made for different changing circumstances, for
men just as different and changing, and for many other
variable elements. Therefore, principles are flexible
and capable of adaption to every need: it is a matter of
knowing how to make use of them, which is a difficult
art requiring intelligence, experience, decision, and

proportion.1

These principles of a sound organization differ in
number and complexity from author to author. Alvin Brown,

in his book Organization, A Formulation 9: Principles, devel-

 

ops over a hundred so-called "principles." Other writers
elect to rely on fewer, more general criteria. Ernest Dale,
reporting on an American Management Association survey on
organization, lists criteria that have been most frequently
used in evaluating an organization.

The first of Dale's criteria is called effectiveness.
Effectiveness, as described by Chester I. Bernard,3 refers
to the broad ability of an enterprise to accomplish its
organizational purpose. As such, it is social in nature and
not directly personal.

In discussing the corporation as an organization, Neil

‘W. Chamberlin postulates the thesis that the prime organization

 

1Henri Fayol, General and Industrial Management (London:
Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons, Ltd.,‘I9A97, p{II9.

2Dale, op. cit.

3Bernard, op. cit., p. 60.

15
goal of a corporation is continuity which is enhanced by the
secondary goal of profitability.“ Effectiveness is a measure
cfi'hOW'well the enterprise achieves these goals. It is con-
cerned with the success of the enterprise in supplying goods
and services. The most discernable standard of effectiveness,
is, of course, the profit or net income as a percentage of
sales and capital investment. The former figure is an indi-
cation of short run performance while the latter measures
long run performance. The profit standard is applicable in
measuring the effectiveness of subsidiary groups in the
enterprise. These groups include such things as plants,
products, divisions, and so on. Likewise, the effectiveness
of an individual function may be roughtly measured by deter-
mining the number of employees in the company and the output
per employee performing that function or the dollar expendi-
ture per employee.

Effectiveness of an enterprise cannot be measured with-
out some consideration of the social efforts of the company
in the community in which it operates. By this we are
referring to the income the community gains. from the presence
of the organization as compared to the expense to the com-
munity. Organizational changes can have a profound effect
on the community. For example, a decision to discontinue

or relocate a manufacturing plant can have the effect of

creating a local depression.

 

LLKornhauser, Dubin and Ross, Industrial Conflict (New
York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1954), pp. 153-163.

.4

16

Personal satisfaction is another criterion of sound
organization described by Chester I Bernard and Ernest Dale.
Satisfaction requires that the personal individual goals and
objectives of the members of the organization be fulfilled.
This goal is, therefore, closely related to effectiveness in
that its fulfillment presupposes that the criterion of
effectiveness has been met. In other words, if the organi-
zational goals are derived from individual goals and individ-
ual goals are expressed in terms of group goals, personal
goals cannot be met unless the group goals are first accom-
plished. Therefore, effectiveness and personal satisfaction
as used here are closely interrelated, the latter being
improbable without the former.

The satisfaction gained by members of an organization
is quite difficult to measure emperically since standards
for measurement have not as yet been developed to a point
where they yield accurate results. Dale cites a statement

5
by J. M. Clark. Clark says,

Clearly, proper attention to the organization structure
is essential to the fulfillment of the personal and
individual objectives of all who are connected with the
enterprise. In the case of executives, for example, a
.proper organization structure means clear-cut lines of
authority and responsibility, participation in policy—
making, the right to be heard, the opportunity to
develop to the full measure of their potentialities

and other conditions which contribute directly to their
personal satisfaction as well as their individual effec-

tiveness.

 

5J. M Clark, Social Control of Business (New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1939), p. 220.

17

The criteria of personal satisfaction and effectiveness
are open to a great deal of personal interpretation. One
executive may have a different goal of effectiveness than
another. Also, one person may have personal values that
are not favorable to his associates. For instance, one com-
pany president might aim at large dividends while another
might minimize dividends in favor of maximum expansion.

The two criteria, however, are mutually interdependent.
One cannot reach fulfillment without the other. Given a
total organizational goal, it is not possible to achieve it
with total effectiveness unless individual goals are obtained.
Conversely, there can be no efficiency in obtaining personal
goals unless the effectiveness attainment of organizational
goals is possible.

Effectiveness of the group and fulfillment of personal
goals are the crux of any successful organization. There
are, however, a number of sub-criteria which in a formal
way aid in the realization of the two prime criteria.

The ideal scheme for a sound organization must provide

for some division 9: work. In the preceding chapter we men—

 

tioned that a division of labor is inherent in the very
definition of organization. This takes such a form that the
outcome of the individual efforts is indivisable among the
contributors. In this case we consider the division of the
basic functions. H. A. Hopf states that, "The primary step
in organization is to determine and to establish as separate

entities the smallest number of dissimilar functions into

18

which the work of an institution may be divided."6

These functions naturally are dependent upon the nature
of the enterprise. For example, in a manufacturing business

sales and production are two of the basic functions. In a

retailing concern the functions might be buying, merchan-

dis ing, and store operations. Other functions are added to

these depending upon the size of the operation. These addi-

tional functions are such things as finance, personnel,

advertising , et cetera.

The division of work folloWs the determined goals or

purposes of the organization. In this sense Hopf is not

quite accurate when he places division of work as the primary

step in organization. The more detailed and clear the organ-

izational goals, the more logical and clear is the division

of work. Should an enterprise have as one of its goals the

enlargement of the body of knowledge in its field, the
eStablishment of a research department might be forthcoming.
Likewise, an objective of product diversification could have
organizational consequences in a departmentalization along
product lines. A goal of employee welfare could lead to the
establishment of a personnel department.

The re are many alternative methods for the division of
Work within a company. They are determined by the nature

of the company goals and the abilities and limitations of

\\

 

6
Pro re H- A. Hopf, Organization, Executive Capacity and
W (fissining,Wew York: Hopp Institute of Management,

19
the personalities within the organization. Usually division
may be made along the line of function, location, product,
customers, time, process, and equipment.7 One method alone
usually does not exist throughout a company, but generally
there is one basic subdivision of the company activities
made by the board of directors or the chief executive. This
first breakdown is made according to the purpose of the enter-
prise and the major functions necessary to accomplish that
purpose. For instance, in food retailing the primary func—
tunns are buying, merchandising, and store operation. These
mflxiivisions may then be divided into a number of different
ways as mentioned above.

Division by function usually takes place at the top
lewel.within a company. At lower levels other bases are
used. In the buying operation the division of work is along
pmmhact lines. In operations the activities performed in a
particular location are brought together and is termed terri—
tmria1.division or division by location. If both a wholesale
and retail operation are carried on, the division of work
m1Sht‘well be along the lines of the type of customer served.

The fact remains that no matter how the division of
work is made, it must be done in such a way to enhance the
attainment of efficiency and effectiveness.

The fourth criterion of sound organization is the

"functional definitionwith authority and responsibility."8

‘—

7Dale, op. cit., p. 25. 8Ibid., p. 141.

20

This means that the contents of a particular job or its

functions must be defined in relationship to the organizational

objectives. Dale bases this step on two precepts developed

by other authors. The first is "define duties clearly";9

the second, "the work of each man in the management should

be confined to the performance of a single leading function."lO

Henri Fayol further defines and elaborates this point

as fo 1 lows:

Authority is the right to give orders and the power
to exact obedience. Distinction must be made between
a manager's official authority deriving from office and
personal authority, compounded of intelligence, experi-
ence, moral worth, ability to lead, past services, etc.
In the make up of a good head, personal authority is
the indispensable complement of official authority.
Anithority is not to be conceived of apart from respon-
sibility, that is apart from sanction-~(or "account-
ability for the performance of duties" as Mary Parket
Follett expresses it)--Responsibility is a corollary
of authority, it is its natural consequence and essential
counterpart and wheresoever authority is exercised
responsibility arises. The best safeguard against
weakness on the part of a higher manager is personal
integrity and particularly high moral character of
Such a manager, and this integrity, it is well known,
is conferred neither by election nor ownership.

lklvin Brown sums up the criterion in developing the

"'princ ipleS"

Responsibilities should be defined by identifying and
hen grouping the elements of administration.

Each responsibility should be as homogeneous as
practicable.

The criteria of partition of responsibility depend
upon the requirements of administration.

\
9Fayol, op. cit., p. 144. lolbid., pp. 34-35-

 

1
1Ibid . , pp. 314—35.

21

No responsibility should have to depend for effective
performance upon another which may have a contrary

interest.

Definition of responsibility must be clear and precise.
A chain of command is also a criterion for a sound

organization. Whether authority is thought to originate in

the highest position in the organization or be delegated up—

ward from the bottom, as in Bernard's views, some chain of

command or authority is necessary to give formal notice of

those communications originating at levels in the chain which

can be thought of as for the good of the organization. There

is not much argument over the time-honored principle of
organization that each man should have one boss or receive

communication that presumes to be authoritative through one

channel. This need is met by the formal chain of command.

Alvin Brown describes the nature of the authority chain and

the relationship of its members as follows:

This examination of organization has disclosed it to
consist in the delegation of mutually-exclusive respon-
Sibilities, beginning at the first stage with a more or
less complete delegation by the author of the enterprise
and continuing through subsequent stages of delegation
until the whole requirement of administration has been
provided for. Each act of delegation creates a rela-
t321.c3nship between the principal and his deputy. Subse-
quent redelegations create additional relationships
Which are linked thereto. Thus, there is caused a
Series of such relationships extending from the first

principal through persons who receive delegations and
in their turn make them to the last stages of delegation

033‘ tasks which are capable of complete performance by
individuals. This series of relationships has often
been called a "line" of organization. Since the links

\

 

12Brown, op. cit., p. 71.

22
represented by the several stages of delegation are its
characteristics, the term chain of organization is,
perhaps, more allusive.

Fayol also defines the chain of command in similar
terms when he writes that it is:
The chain of superiors ranging from the ultimate
authority to the lowest ranks. The line of authority
in the route followed via every link in the chain by
all communications which start from or go to the ultimate
authority. This path is dictated both by the need for
sometransaission and by the principle of unity of
command.1
As necessary as this formal chain of command is, it
poses one serious problem. If the formal channel is fol-
lowed for all communications, the process could become
urwwieldy and time consuming, especially in a large organi-
zaixLon.with many levels. Also, there is a great danger that
the: communication could become distorted or lost in the long
process of vertical transmission up and down the chain of
ccnnnuand. For instance, in a retail food store operating
Iridexr a system of separate supervision for the meat depart-
merit aind the grocery department, if there is to be communi-
catZlcui between the meat and grocery managers using the formal
(”Elirl of command, the process would involve the grocery
manaégexr, his superior (the superintendent), the general
superintendent, the operations head, the branch manager, the

head of the meat operations, the meat superintendent, and

finally the meat manager. It is obvious that such contact

\

1431b19-, pp- 56-57. lLlFayol, op. cit., p. 3A.

23
would be extremely time consuming. Many endeavors require
great swiftness of decision and execution for their success.
Ihcause the formal chain of command does not provide this
swiftness, any sound organizational plan will provide for

additional channels of contact outside the formal chain of

 

command where necessary. The establishment of these channels
does not violate the unity of command principle if the super-
iors of those engaged in contact have authorized their sub-
ordinates to deal directly with each other, and if the
supervisors are kept informed on the outcome of these contacts.
In the example above it is much more logical that the grocery
and meat managers should deal directly with each other. This
results in savings of time and effort for all concerned and
achieves a speedy and probably better decision.

There are a great many instances in any organization
where an individual is faced with the problem of choosing
between the formal line of authority and a direct channel
of contact. The choice should rest on the line dictated by
the general interest. To needlessly depart from the line of
authority is a mistake, but it is a bigger mistake to keep
in that line when it is to the detriment of achieving the
organizational goals.

Companies are well aware of the necessity for channels
of contact apart from the formal chain of command and recog-
nize the fact in their organizational plans. The organization

manual of the Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation reads as

follows:

2A

21. The plan of organization should permit and require
the exercise of common sense and good judgment, at
all levels, in determining the best channels of
contact to expediate the work. These channels of
contact are not described or limited by the lines of
responsibility and authority of the organization
structure as shown on the organization chart.

‘b. Contacts between all units of the organization should
be carried out in the most direct way consistant with
good sense. In making contacts beyond the lines in
responsibility and authority on the chart, it should
be the duty of each member of the organization to
keep his senior informed on:

1. Any matters on which his senior may be held
accountable by those senior to him.

2. Any matters in disagreement or likely to cause
controversy within or between any units of the
organization.

3. Matters requiring advice by the senior, or his
coordination with other organization units.

A. Any matters involving recommendations for changes
in, or variance from, established policies.

c3. Staff instructions to units under supervision of
others should be channeled through that supervision
if the instructions are of direct concern to and
require personal attention of that supervision.
Such channeling can be minimized by the routing of

copies to the supervision with the action papers
going direct.15

CDhis system serves the two-fold purpose of maintaining
the cflaeain.of command and at the same time allowing rapid
cxmmniriixeation to take place without an undue amount of red
tape .

Ikrlother necessity for a healthy organization is utili-

zaticuq c>f the principle of balance. Balance in this sense

\

 

1.
(pitt; 5Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp., Organization Manual
June 53 Ilrgh, Pennsylvania: Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp.,
’ 1950) pp. 4—5.

25

implies that there should be a reasonable relationship between
the strength of a function in terms of manpower and appro—

priation and its importance in achieving the goals of the

enterprise. Balance also requires that there be proper

proportions between the amount of centralization and decen-

tralization and the power of an enterprise to spontaneously

react to changes in the environment. In the words of Urwich,

an enterprise should be able "to wring the maximum possible
advantage standardization and simplification, and at the

sunne time to retain always the full measure of flexibility

postulated by the circumstances."16

Currently the balance between centralization and de—

ceritralization has swung toward decentralization. However,

true basic problem remains, allowing decisions to be made at
the: level in the organization that is closest to where the
neexi for decision and action originates, and at the same
tinma maintain enough central control to insure that these
decijsions are made within a general framework of policy so
as to contribute to the attainment of the over-all goal of
the to tal organization .

Another principle of an "ideal" organization is that

Ofcuoritrol. In brief, "A well designed plan of control

Governing each major administrative activity permits top

management to delegate responsibility and authority, freeing

_\

Sir l6L. Urwich, The Elements of Administration (London:
Ikeaac Pitman andISon, 1943), p. 31,

 

26

itself of unnecessary detail, yet retaining the means for

assuring that results will be satisfactory."17
There are many various plans for control, but each has

several elements in common. First, there must be an estab-

lished objective or purpose which indicates what is to be

accomplished. Secondly, there must be an outline of the

procedure which specifies how, when, and by whom the action

is to take place. There must be some basis to judge the

action or criteria as to what constitutes good performance;
and lastly, there must be means provided for an appraisal of

tkme action to judge whether or not it has led toward the

deerired goal. This last step is mainly a process of com-

paacison of the results with the criteria for a good perfor-

mance.
The proper function of control is tied in closely with

the: exception principle. In the words of Taylor:

The manager should receive only condensed, summarized,
.and invariably comparative reports covering, however,
£111 of the elements entering into the management. They
£3hou1d have all the exceptions to the past averages or
tn) the standards pointed out--thus giving him in a few
Htinutes a fulé View of progress which is being made or

'tkie reverse.l
A final general criterion of a sound organizational

plan, and perhaps the most important, is that the organization

will Iprovide for its own perpetuation by providing an

\

T 17Paul E. Holden, Lounsbury S. Fish, and Hubert L.Smith,
op 1vIanagement Organization and Control (Stanford University,
(Drnia: StanfordTUniversity‘Press, 1941), p. 9.

Sho l8Frederick Taylor, Scientific Management; Comprising
p Imanagement, Principles of Scientific Management, and

___~g“_;fi __
QQEEEEfifiigion Testimony (New York: Harper and Brow., 1947), p.126.

 

27
amnosphere conducive to the development of executives to
reIXLace those now in office. It is well summed up by the
fo 1 lowing s tatement:

The plan of organization should provide a "ladder"
of positions of increasing scope of responsibility,
authority, and accountability so related to each other
that at all times there are replacements in training
for each higher position. One of the most important
responsibilities of top management is the successful
perpetuation of the corporation through making available
qualified personnel for future management needs. These
needs must be filled by executives with a breadth of

experience gained from a variety of management respon-
siblities as well as depth of training in a specialized

management area.

Throughout this chapter criteria have been presented
for' developing a sound organizational plan. These should
nots'be construed as infallible "principles" since in the
writer's opinion there are no such things in this area.
Hovnaver, while many organizational schemes lead to effective
resnilts, it is our feeling that an organizational plan
utidxizing the outlined criteria would have less change of
being unsuccessful than one that did not.

In order to plan successfully, it is necessary to have
a Clear idea of the means at one's disposal for the accom-

pliJSkunent of the plan. In order to experience any benefits
from; cyrganizational planning, it is certainly necessary to

haVe some understanding of the organizational criteria.

\

1.
9Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp., op. cit., p. 7.

CHAPTER III
THE NEED FOR ORGANIZATIONAL PLANNING

.After considering at some length the meaning and nature

of organization purpose and. also discussing criteria for a

so-called sound organization, there is always the danger of

thinking of "organization" as static. To overcome this

though, we will now consider what is meant by organizational
planning and how it will aid in securing for each enterprise
the values accepted as sound organizational criteria.
Organizational planning is the process of developing,

setting up, and maintaining through time a workable pattern
Of‘ relationships of the individuals within an enterprise. As
a process, it is a dynamic, continuous maintenance of a
Structure that is static only in the sense that it reflects

the organization at a given moment of time. It is the

asSigning of responsibility to individuals and integrating
the 1P efforts in the light of the current environment and

organizational purpose as a means toward the attainment of

that purpose.

It might be said that organizational planning is unnec-
essary and that the enterprise will react to its environment
in Such a way as to naturally evolve a satisfactory organiz—
ation. However, this is not always the case. For example,

8
tudebaker was the one carriage manufacturer that altered

29
its organization and objectives sufficiently to stay alive
in the face of the automotive age. We cannot rely on unguided
evolution to produce an entirely satisfactory organizational
structure.

It might also be argued that success in the future
limes not so much in planning the company‘s organizational
stznicture, but in developing new executives who can capably
scuzceed the present management. This is indeed important,
but is by no means the total answer.

Top executives, no matter how competent, cannot func—
tion to full effectiveness without a sound plan of
organization. A well conceived, long-range organization
progranpermits changes to be made in the right direction
as opportunities arise. In the absence of such a plan
changes must be made on the basis of expediency, organ-
ization errors are often perpetuated and fundamental
improvements are seldom realized.

There is nothing more important in any enterprise than
the: constructive attitude of the individual, and it is the
fidcsi: function of management to create the kind of atmosphere
irlifiknich such an attitude can grow and develop. The organi-
Zetional structure can contribute materially to such an
atmoEl‘phere. If there are clear-cut duties and responsibili-
ties and definite chains of command; if the division of work
is 1C>Sically made; if the structure has good balance and
adequate control, then the individual is better able to con-
Captua-lize his part in the total organization and will better

gain personal satisfaction by seeing how his efforts contri-

bute ‘tc> the success of the group endeavor.
\

lHolden, Fish, and Smith, op. cit., p. 5.

 

30

In defining organization planning, Ernest Dale relates

a number of concrete advantages to the process. First, it

is of considerable value in reviewing and defining the objec-

tives of the company. The location of responsibilities is

clearly indicated in easily understood terms. The organi-

zational charts and manuals developed through organizational

planning allow the executive to grasp at a glance, with

little effort, the total company structure and his relation

to it.

As a direct result of organization planning, executives
may be able to relinquish overloads of responsibility and be

able to devote more time to the important work of long-range

planning, reviewing, coordination, and innovation. The heads

of ciifferent departments within the enterprise may be able
to vwork more closely together toward the accomplishment of
Use <2ompany's over-all objectives.

A greater opportunity is provided by organization
eLaruiing for executives to utilize better their abilities
to plan their own work and to develop and train themselves
and others. Organization planning may provide the basis for
esirinuiting manpower resources and requirements and thus enable
a company to improve its system of executive succession and
Pap-"-<'=3-<‘:ement, and in the process, offer better promotional
Opportunities to its younger men.

lknproved human relations can result from organization
planning. The personalities of individuals can be integrated

\ I
2Dale, op. cit., p. 16.

 

31
wiflu the objectives of the enterprise and make for better
personal satisfaction. In the words of a sociologist:

There is no reason why . . . the labor of supplying
society with all the material goods needed for its
general comfort should not become both agreeable and
attractive. There is no necessity of waiting for the
slow action of evolution in transforming human charac—
ter. The result can easily be brought about by the
'transformation of human institutions.3

Many of the faults prevalent in many business enter-

prises can be partially or completely eliminated by sound
orgardzational planning. Goals to shoot for in planning
are the reduction or elimination of duplication of effort

H

(resulting in executive manpower saving); eliminating red
tape" (by shortening lines of communication and assigning
definite responsibility and authority); improving coordin-
ation between different functions (such as manufacturing and
marketing); eliminating unnecessary functions (checking the
tendency of empire building through a manpower budget or,
better still, through financial audits); elimination friction
(through reduction of the number of levels of management and
clearer, more logical and more definite allocation of respon-
sibilities). Good organizational planning tends to reduce
mistakes by placing decision making nearer to the problems,
improves Specialization, and properly balances the expansion
of various management functions.

In the most basic terms organization planning provides

for the adaption of the organizational structure and

 

3Lester F. Ward, Applied Sociology (Boston, Mass.:
Ginn and Company, 1906), p. 336.

 

32

procedures to changes in personnel, material resources, and
the external environment. The inevitability of change is one
fact that cannot be denied. It is also certain that to be
successful, an enterprise must be able to adapt to that change.
This can be done in many ways, but in general, there are

both orderly and disorderly adaptations.It is the prime job
of an organization planning program to foresee the need for
adapting to specific changes and to initiate steps to adapt
to that change. Thus adaptations are made in a predictable,
orderly manner rather than haphazardly. Changes are so
planned that an enterprise is not caught napping and is pre-
pared for every foreseeable eventuality.

It cannot be said that a business using formal organi-
zation planning will always succeed while one without such
a program is doomed to failure. It is logical, however,
that a company using such a plan is more likely to succeed
than one that does not.

Most enterprises would not think of having lack of
control of their monetary expenditures. However, the organi-
zation of a company is often one of its most valuable assets
and in many cases uncontrolled. Organization planning, by
indicating the present stage of the company's organization
and pointing the way to future developments, helps to provide
some cOntrol over this most important asset.

The virtues of organization planning are aptly summed

up in the words of Dr. H. A. Hopf:

Lil |.D 3....rt .‘iwllv'... 1*

33

That a business cannot permanently occupy levels of
eaffectiveness higher than those clearly determined by
‘bhe capacity of its executives is self-evident, but
:it is not generally understood that the influence of
ssuperior organization upon the accomplishments of
Inediocre executives can raise the enterprise to heights
riot otherwise attainable.

(D “Ti- A” Hopf, Engineering Journal (Canada), xx, No. 12
ecember. 1937).

CHAPTER IV

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY
AND THE ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE

Thus far we have been considering organization planning
as a mechanistic process somewhat apart from the individual
personalities of the members of the enterprise. This is a
rather unrealistic approach. Any organization is merely the
working relationship among individuals, each with particular
strengths and weaknesses. Quite naturally the personalities
and abilities of these various individuals will have an
effect on the organizational structure. However, there is
Quite a-wide range of opinion on the ideal extent of the
influence of personalities on the structure of an enterprise.
These go from one extreme that holds the ideal organizational
pattern based on so-called organizational principles is
paramount and that individuals should be selected and trained
to Conform to the job as outlined on an organizational chart.
The Other extreme argues that the personal abilities of the
indiVidual are the most important consideration. The formal
organizational structure is not necessary, but if present,
the Jobs should be built around personalities.

An example of an argument supporting the former extreme

i
S Seen in several of Alvin Brown's principles of organization:

35

Organization should determine the selection of personnel
rather than personnel determine the nature of organization.

Each responsibility should be defined with regard to the
natural abilities of men.

No responsibility may exceed the capacity of the person
who will perform it.

Definition of responsibility should deal with capacity
quantitatively as well as qualitatively.

The larger the enterprise the less occasion is there
for organization to be influenced by personalities.1

In developing these principles Mr. Brown admits that
personalities do play a large part in the organization of a
small enterprise such as a partnership. He also stresses
that human capacity should be considered in so far that no
job shall require abilities not humanly available. However,
he states that even in a small enterprise the prescription
Of' organization will determine in some part the membership.
For example, the outline of responsibilities for a secretary
or a salesman will precede and govern their selection.

In the ideal situation the purpose of the enterprise
Will indicate one best form, or at least discard most forms,
0‘3 OPganization as being best suited for the attainment of
that purpose. That is, a certain distribution of individual
responsibilities will be preferable to another. If it is
then possible to locate and employ individuals who are
exactly suited to the prearranged responsibilities, there
can be no question that this is certainly the logical thing

to do for a well ordered organization. Accordingly, in such

\
lBI’own, op. cit., p. 80.

36
caseas organization should determine the selection of members,
so fkar as possible, rather than membership determine organi-
zation.

Organization does, however, deal with individuals and
thernafore it should be constructed in terms of individuals.
Thus does not mean that the capacities of only one man should
beczonsidered, but rather that the definition of responsibi—
lities be guided by an awareness of the capacities of men in
general” This must be done to forestall the prescribing of
responsibilities to which no person could be found suited.

For instance, if the greatest economy of operation could be
theoretically'affordedby the performance of a simple extremely
repetitive act, the monotony and boredom might not agree with
any available individual and so the operation capacity might
be impaired and economy lost.

The capacity of an individual to fit to a job should
be defined in two ways. The first, termed qualitative,deter-
mines whether a person is able to do a job. The second aspect
is quantitative, which is a measure of how well he can do it.
If'axlzindividual were desired to lay bricks, for example, the
qualitative capacity would be his ability to do the work and
the quantitative capacity the number of bricks he is able to
lay in a day. Therefore, the organization should not only
deternfllue the nature of the responsibility, but should deter-
mine what quantity is most economical in terms of the remuner-

ation the capacity commands.

37

Brown does concede, however, that in many cases individ-
uals are‘not available who are exactly suited to the ideal
responsibilities. In such a case an instance might arise
where a choice was necessary between an individual who was
capable of performing all the responsibilities in a mediocre
manner and a man who could perform most of it well and the
rest not at all. In this situation the latter man should be
selected and the organization pattern adjusted by reassigning
the excess responsibilities.

As an organization grows in size, individuals lose
more and more of their relative importance and influence
in the organization. This is a result of the greater dif—
ferentiation in jobs, and the fact that a larger part of
the Jobs become homogeneous. There is a better chance to
hire persons of more narrow technical capacity.

Brown points out what he considers great danger in being
too closely guided by personality in planning an organization.
First, an enterprise may have a life greatly exceeding the
life of any of its present members. If the organization
structure has been formed around the personal abilities of
a Single or a few individuals, their successors may overlook
their special influence on the organization and so fail to
I'eeopportion responsibilities. In such a case the organization‘s
effectiveness might suffer from an ill that should have been
corrected originally. Secondly, if an organization is moulded
to the Capacities of particular persons, there is no assurance

that these capacities have been properly utilized. In other

Ely! I-.. 1;..L.,A«|:P
, .. .4 1w

38

words, the starting point should be, "What is there to be
done?" rather than, "What can this man do?“

Summing up, Brown says:

Personnel, however competent, loses much of its worth
in the absence of effective organization; and, given the
same personnel, its performance is better or poorer in
proportion to the character of organization. Often;
it is true, personnel is capable of rising above poor
organization. But this triumph of personnel over organi-
zation affords no guarantee of endurance; protection
should be sought behind the armor of effective organi-
zation regardless of present fortuitous escape from

hurt.2

At the other extrement of the dilemma are those who in
some cases deny the value of a formal organization. They
insist that each individual is different in the manner in
which he performs his job. Therefore, the enterprise should
have a very flexible organization built around the individuals
currently employed. As an example of this type of thinking,
Dale cites a statement by an executive of a large company:

We are traditionally opposed to the use of organization
charts. Our reason is that no two individuals handle a
given job in the same manner. In our view, it is unreal-
istic to create a well-defined spot on an organization
chart simply because the individual placed in that spot
probably would not function in accordance with the
specifications, or if he did so function he would not
be effective. Moreover, we are committed importantly
to the position that business cannot be conducted ef-
fectively through the lines of authority, but must be
conducted via lines of communication. As an illustration,
our factory and branch house managers deal directly
with each other rather than through the general office,
and generally throughout the organization individuals
within a factory or a branch house communicate directly
with individuals in the various central office depart-
ments and in the factories and branch houses without

going through managers.

 

21231” pp. 79-90 3Dale, op. cit., p. 47.

39

A similar view was expressed more briefly by Robert E.
Wood of Sears, Roebuck and Company, when he said,

While systems are important, our main reliance must
always be put on men rather than on systems. If we
devise too elaborate a system of checks and balances,
it will only be a matter of time before the self-
reliance and initiative of our managers will be
destroyed and our organization will gradually be con-
verted into a large bureaucracy.

The argument for this point of view stresses that an
organization structure that is too formal and too confining
will stifle individual initiative and spontaneity. The really
important thing is to create an atmosphere that encourages
creative thinking. If too much stress is laid on formal
structure, there is an ever-present danger that individuals
will become so immersed in red tape that any creative work
' will be an impossibility. There is also a possibility that
over-organization may be economically wasteful because there
is no assurance that the full capacities of each individual
within the enterprise has been utilized.

It is our view that both these extremes have points
in their favor. There seems to be much that can be gained
from utilizing organizational principles. There is also
little doubt that the individuality of each person in an
organization should certainly be taken into consideration.
It is wise to have some foundations in principle, but if
these foundations are applied too rigidly, there is an ever-

present danger that the resulting organization may become

inflexible and unable to adjust to changing conditions.

40

There is a middle road that can be taken where the

organization structure provides only a rough framework
which is adjusted to use the capabilities of individuals.
In such instances, there is a short- and long-run plan of

organization. The long—run plan is the "ideal" organizational

structure for that enterprise. It is envisioned with an

awareness that it may never be totally applied. The short-

run plan of organization is an adjustment of the ideal plan -5 a

to the supply of the current personalities. An ideal plan

of organization cannot be put into effect at any given moment
because of the difficulty of securing the suitable personnel. _,
However, such a plan may be drawn up and the specifications I
for the various positions and their relationships be estab-
lished. When the problem of implementing the plan arises,

there must be a consideration of the qualities of the individ-

uals to be fitted into the plan. Since it is not likely that

there can ever be the ideal man for every job, the long-run

plan must be changed to fit the available men.
Joseph B. Hall, president of The Kroger Company, relates

such an example of balancing personalities and jobs. A

basic change occurred in the organization structure of The
Kroger Company when a shift in emphasis was made from buying
to Selling. Prior to that time one man was reSponsible for

buying and another for selling. This setup created many

\

 

(C Marvin Brown, The Development of Executive Leadership
ambr‘Ildge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 19517, p. 108.

.‘P‘i L . o 14"!!! viii ’ur

A1

occasions for friction between the two men. If merchandise
did not sell, the buyer blamed the salesman, while the sales-
man accused the buyer of securing inferior merchandise.
Because of this, one man was put in charge of both the buying
and sales functions and is called a merchandiser. When it
came time to implement the new plan, it was necessary to
utilize the capable men within the organization. Some men
were quite able sales promotion men, while others were excel-
lent buyers. Very few men were capable individuals in both
fields. The strongest men were, naturally, selected for the
jobs. If a man's abilities lay in the sales promotion field,
he was balanced with an assistant who was strong on buying.
Likewise, when a man's strength was in market and product
knowledge, his skill was supplemented with an assistant with
a background of sales promotion. In these instances the
organization structure served as a foundation for outlining
the duties and responsibilities of the job. However, this
foundation was completed with a superstructure determined by
individual personality.

In other words, what is needed is a compromise between
the principles of organization and the needs of personality.
The first step would be to isolate the two. Then an ideal
plan Of formal organization may be drawn up. After an inven-
tory of the available personnel is made stressing their
informal contributions, the. formal organization structure
may be modified in the light of personality. In this way it
is possible to insure the greatest growth of the individual

and his maximum contribution to the enterprise.

42
therefore, essential to consider the best aspects

It is,
of the formal organization structure and the living personal-

ities in shaping an organization. Too little attention to

personalities can help create a rigid organization that

:stifles initiative and spontaneity. Too little attention to

ftnmnal organization can create an anarchy of empire building.

line nature of the reanonsibilities_of a job will change with __fi1

eatni man who undertakes that position. The organizational , .

strnlcture should only outline the job; the individual person- ;

alixty should fill in the outline.

.JI ..

PART II

THE APPLICATION

.’l

in

l

i

l

I

r .~
!

t i
= '3
i ., e"
hr

CHAPTER V

APPLYING ORGANIZATIONAL PRINCIPLES IN A

SUPERMARKET

After seven years‘ experience working at all levels of
store operation and visiting hundreds of different markets,
it is apparent that some stores are well operated while
others are not. This fact becomes obvious at once to the
practiced observer and soon becomes evident to the customer.
The net result is lost sales and profit.

Although the symptoms of a poor operation are evident,
the cause is not always so easy to locate. Just what are
the differences that are credited with causing a store to
show signs of poor management?

1. The physical facilities of the building might

have some effect. However, it is not uncommon to
see stores in a chain with identical physical
setups that are worlds apart in the effectiveness
of the operation.

2. The available equipment is sometimes given as an
excuse, but all stores in a chain usually have the
same-~or almost the same-~tools to work with.

3. The manager‘s ability to get along with customers
is another possibility. It is not unusual for a

good "customers' man" to hold customers with the

in

I I .....\...v!|. .a' Li I
is. . "I . IV

a

a

45
strength of his personality; however, the same
man might be losing many more customers because
of bad store conditions.
More help in one store than another is a frequently
offered explanation. Yet all stores in a chain
usually work on the same man—hour allowance or
have the same standards of sales per man-hour or
wage percentage. Regardless, this explanation
is getting close to the cause because some stores
aggm to have enough people to get the jobs done
that others leave unfinished. It must be that some
men have found a way to get more done with the
manpower available.
The manager's merchandising knowledge is another
factor which must be considered. The store manager
certainly must have some knowledge of the products
he sells and how to display and promote these
products. This is necessary, but many men with
the merchandising knowledge are unable to impli-
ment their ideas.
Knowledge of store operations is also very neces-
sary, but again implimenting that knowledge is
the dividing line between a good and a poor
operation.
Ability to "handle" people is another basic require-
ment of the job of store manager. This does not

mean that the manager must necessarily be a ”nice

A6
guy," but he must know how to get work done
through people. This is done either by constant
follow—up--or nagging--or by knowing and following
the principles of good human relations. However,
this is not the whole answer to a good operation.
It is not possible to run a good operation with
an aimless collection of individuals, no matter
how well motivated they are to do a good job.
This ability "to handle" people must be combined
with an over-all purpose and plan in which the
people operate.

8. This total concept can be called "the organiza-
tional ability" of the manager. This calls for
his use of the organization principle discussed
in the first part of this thesis.

The good manager must first place functions in their
proper relationship. He must have a knowledge of the func-
tions in store operation and then clearly outline each
7ndividual's part in the enterprise. The manager who fails
to do this never has enough help to get all jobs done. He
must set up his organization with an awareness of human
limitations--first, his own (how many people can be person-
ally supervised),and secondly, the limitations of his help.
A disregard of human limitations leads to assignments which
his employees are unable to complete because of time or
ability. This is dangerous to individual development, and

also is bad organization. The employee must be able

47
to accomplish the work assignment, but it must also repre—
sent a challenge. As an individual improves, constantly
higher standards must be set. His place in the organization
must change.

When the entire job ofoperatbmga store is analyzed and
broken down according to the necessary functions, the func-
tions must be delegated to subordinates. This process of
delegation is something that is not quite understood by the
poor organizer. This does not mean handing out a job and
forgetting about it from then on. Neither does it mean
giving a person a job and not allowing them the necessary
authority to carry out responsibilities. Delegation must
be done with an awareness of how much freedom of action is
necessary for the accomplishment of the given job.

Before any job is delegated, the manager must know
that the worker fully understands what is expected of him.
Ike must also make sure that the worker has the necessary
Lnuowledge to do the job. A process of gradual delegation
:might be followed to insure this. For example, a clerk
Inight be given the responsibility of stocking an aisle. When
rue has mastered the first step, he might be delegated the
euhiitional responsibility of ordering for this aisle. Then
rue could be given decision-making powers in so far as sales
prwnnotions and extra displays of his merchandise are con-

ceruued. Finally, he could be given responsibility for and

ainfliority over one or more assistants who will assist him.

#8

A good example of the difference in the ability to
delegate is seen in the use the manager makes of his assis-
tant manager. In some,cases, in less successful operations,
the assistant manager is such in name only. The manager
makes no effort to give his assistant the necessary knowledge
to manage the market. The assistant becomes a glorified
grocery clerk with responsibility over only a few details
of the store, such as ordering and building displays. He
is supposed to have charge of the crew in the store, but the
manager had not given him the authority by making this clear
to the remainder of the crew and backing up his instructions.
As a result, the assistant manager rarely, if ever, gives
any instructions to the produce manager or the head checker.
On the other hand, if the manager supports the assistant and
makes sure his training progresses to a point where he is
able to manage the store, the manager can leave most of the
operating to the assistant and be free himself to supervise
the operation without being bogged down with the many every-
day details of store operation. The same would apply to the
produce manager, the head checker, or any other person who
would best do ‘his- Job with the delegation of the necessary
responsibility to do what a good organization calls for.

One way this type of delegation is done is with definite
assignments and schedules. One of the best operators the
writer has met once told him that in his store he could go
all day without anyone needing to ask him a question. This

is one measure of a successful organization.

J1,

..v._ via 1.; J.—

"I~

49

No matter how well thought out are the breakdowns of
function in the store and no matter how well delegated is
the authority and responsibility to do the various Jobs,
the organization of a store can be quite ineffective if the
manager does not follow—up and make sure that his organiza-
tional plan is working as he intended. An organization can
be drawn up on a beautiful chart or on elaborate work sched-
ules and assignment. It can be on the back of a paper bag,
or it can be in the mind of the manager. The important
thing is not the fineness but how well the organization works
to accomplish the goal of a well run market. This is largely
decided by how well the manager follows up a basic assignment. ;i:
It is one thing to tell the assistant manager and the rest
of the store crew that he (the assistant) is in charge of
running the store. This breaks down entirely if the manager
in following up on some part of the work bypasses the assis-
tant and deals with the subordinate himself. For example,
the assistant manager will have very little authority over
the produce manager if the store manager in discussing pro-
duce always deals directly with the produce manager without
ever consulting the assistant manager.

The organizational scheme may call for a clerk to do
a particular Job, but if no one checks to make sure that the
Job is done as planned, the organization in effect does
not exist.

The manager may give certain responsibilities to a

clerk, but make requirements on all the clerk's time for

Ix...

other jabs. Again in this case there is no organization.

It is exceedingly important in organizing a market
to make sure that there is effective follow—up through the
established channels. It is also important to see that, if
Job assignments are reasonable, then the time is allowed for
each task to be completed.

We have been discussing the importance of organizing
individuals into a functioning group. There is, however,
another type of organizational task that goes hand in hand
or perhaps precedes the organization of individuals and
that is the physical organization of the market. It is then
pertinent to our discussion to consider briefly some of the

necessities of physical organization.

Store Layout

The arrangement of the departments within the store
and the arrangement of merchandise within these departments
is usually made on the basis of merchandising considerations
rather than on the criteria of the most effective arrange-
‘ment for productive work. However, the physical arrangement
of the store sales area does greatly affect the manner in
'which the manager forms his work assignments and organization.
IFor example, stocking assignments are usually made on the
basis of aisles or gondolas rather than strictly by family
groups of merchandise. It might make sense for several
:neasons to have someone responsible for all canned fruits

axui vegetables as a department, but because these might be

51

in different parts of the market, they are assigned to dif-
ferent clerks. The store layout then creates a situation
where it becomes more difficult to appraise individual pro—
duction rates because the individual may be stocking many
different kinds of merchandise that have many different
package sizes or container shapes which affect ease of
handling. mm

The store layout must be carefully considered in making ;
work assignments. If a checker is given assignments other 2
than checking, they should logically be near the front end
so she is readily available in case of emergency. The store
layout enters the organizational picture in the example of
the checker whose stand is closest to the produce department
having the extra Job of bagging or packaging produce when she

is not busy with a customers.

Backroom Organization

It is in the backroom that real physical organizational
skill is needed. Stores with the same physical facilities
Imay have the backrooms lined up in many different manners.
Obserwations soon reveal that some of the backroom arrange-
nmnits are good and others poor. The poor arrangements create
tflue necessity for several handlings of merchandise, require
much stepping over and around cases, takes many extra steps,
aJui in general creates much extra work, and creates bottle-
rmnflcs. In a well—planned and organized backroom, a smooth

flovrcof merchandise is evident. Of course, the actual back-

rmxnn layout will have to be different in different markets

52
because of different facilities, volume, manpower, et cetera.
Yet there are several principles which seem to apply in all
cases. These might be called "principles of physical organ--
ization."

l. A place for everything and everything in its place.
Unless a place is assigned to each type of merchandise, each
tool, and each supply item, et cetera, in the store, every-
thing is soon lost and confused. It is also important that
the place be well chosen. It was my personal experience
that many hours were wasted in looking for equipment and
tools that were needed for the job but had not been returned
to their proper place when last used. Merchandise that is
not put in its proper place may quite easily become lost
and may either create an out-of-stock condition on the
shelves or an over—stocked condition in the backroom. If
there is no pre-arranged place set aside for each delivery,
much valuable time is lost in finding room and in walking
around piles of merchandise in the way. Cleanliness comes
with.orderliness, for there is no appointed place for dirt.

There is sometimes a danger, however, that the appear—
ance of order may be taken for real order. This can some-
times be seen in a backroom where every case of merchandise
is neatly piled on another to create a pleasing impression
(If orderliness. Closer inspection might reveal that the

cnases were not in the proper storage area.

 

lFayol, op. cit., p. 38.

 

\H
to

Keeping each thing in its place sounds like an easy
thing to accomplish. However, it takes constant follow-up.
It is always easier to drop something down in the first con-
venient place with every good intention of putting it away
later. This habit soon creates numerous bottlenecks and

may ruin the smooth running organization.

2. Backroom organization should be closely related to
store arrangement. Certainly if Job assignments are made
on the basis of aisles to stock, it is a time-saving feature

if merchandise is kept in the backroom in the same order.

3. The backroom should be organized with an eye to

saving steps. Items that need frequent attention should be

 

near the door to the sales floor. Items for return (empty
bottles) should be near the out door. The physical organi-
zation must precede the organization of people. Without

physical organization, social organization becomes much more

difficult.

‘ “ ”I.

ET”

CHAPTER VI
SCHEDULING OF EMPLOYEES

In most writings on organization there is usually some
mention of an organizational chart as a tool to reflect
organizational planning. While the organizational chart is
of questionable value, a formal one may not always be in use
in a market. There is, however, almost always an organiza-
tion chart in the form of a schedule which outlines the
responsibilities of each employee and tells when these
responsibilities should be performed. One of the activities
which clearly indicates the manager's ability to organize is
in the making up and maintaining of work schedules.

‘In today's era of rising wage costs and the necessity
for increased dollar per man hour production, the importance
of thoughtful scheduling has come into the limelight.

In many stores with no formal organization chart, the
posted time and work schedule is the only written expression

of the store organization. All too frequently, however,

the making of the work schedule becomes a routine Job without

the proper amount of consideration. Other times a "regular
schedule" is posted which is almost permanent and unvarying.
Almost every store has weekly fluctuation in sales and cer-
tainly every store has a variance in the Jobs that have to

be done one week to the next.

55

Another common error in scheduling is to let the wishes
of employees or their availability determine their work times.
An attempt to give a favorite checker her choice of a day
off can create a bottleneck at the front end on busy days.
A part-time worker may give his available hours as uzOO P.M.
to closing every day and all day Saturday. Many times he
will be told that these work hours are satisfactory. It
might have been much more desirable for that store operation
to schedule him for the busiest nights only, and with the
hours saves, hire another part-timer to work a schedule
that fits the store traffic demands.

What, then, is the best way to arrive at a good work
schedule? Of course, the needs will be different in each
store, but there are some guides that all stores can use.

A schedule should be based on a forecast of anticipated

 

needs.

The manpower needs of the store are based on the store
volume. The first Job in scheduling, then, is to forecast
the sales for the week. From the estimate of total business
a breakdown can be made by departments. The sales dollar
per man hour, or wage percentage standard, can then be
applied to the sales estimates to arrive at the man hours
that can be used. Example Number I shows a simple form
that can be of help in this calculation.

After the allowed hours are anticipated, the next con-
sideration that must be made is how this fits into the Jobs

that must be done in order to move merchandise from the

receiving door through the checkstands.

56

EXAMPLE NUMBER I
ANTICIPATED ALLOWED MAN HOURS

A conservative estimate of next week‘s sales is:

a. Total $

 

b. Grocery $

 

c. Meat $

 

d. Produce $

 

e. Other $

 

The sales-per-man-hour standards are: j a

a. Total $ *4"

 

b. Grocery

 

c. Meat

 

 

$
$
d. Produce $
$

e. Other

 

The allowed man hours are:

a. Total

 

b. Grocery

 

c. Meat

 

d. Produce

 

e. Other

 

ll

57

A schedule should allow for the uninterrupted flow of

merchandise to the customer. To accomplish this within the

 

 

allowed man hours usually takes considerable planning. First,
the ordering of merchandise should be considered by the
manager. How many orders must be made out? When written?

By whom? When is the deadline for submitting? How long

should it take to complete the Job?

Next, the schedule must plan for the receiving of LIL
merchandise. The schedule must take into account when goods
are received. Who receives? How many men should be on
hand to do the most efficient Job? What processing must be
done in conjunction with receiving? How long will it take? a.*

Shelf stocking must also be allowed time on the
schedule. The manager must ask: When and by whom is shelf
stocking done? When is the merchandise available to stock?
When is the most work on the shelves necessary? Who does
fill-in stocking? When?

Another big Job that must be considered is price
changing. What is the paper work involved? When and by whom
are changes made on shelf merchandise? What changes must

‘be made in backroom stock?

A schedule should allow for service to the customer.

 

131 order to properly consider this in the schedule, the
rmxnager must be fully aware of the daily and weekly fluc-
tuations in store traffic. Of obvious importance in serving
the customeris the front end operation. A big challenge in

sckmaiuling is to have enough people available to man the

checkstands needed to avoid long lines. Too many stands
open means wasted man hours and probably a pinch somewhere
else in the store. Too few checkstands open means customer
dissatisfaction. To achieve the desired balance, the
manager should know first the day-by—day requirements and,
secondly, the hourly volume of traffic during each day.
With this knowledge, he can schedule man hours to coincide
with traffic needs. Also of importance in scheduling are
questions such as: What other Jobs can the checker do if she
is not busy at the front? Who is available for emergency
service in case of an unexpected rush? In what order will
the help be called up front?

Plans must be made to have persons available in other
areas in the store to serve the customer. Does the schedule
allow for someone on the store floor to help customers locate
items that they cannot find? Is someone on hand to operate
scales for weighing customer purchases? Who will cash cus-
tomers' checks?

In scheduling to meet the customers' rightful expecta-
tion of service, good use can often be made of part—time
help. Often people can be found who are available to work
during the hours when they are most needed.

A schedule should call for the right person 22 do the

right Job at the right time. The manager should determine

 

how many hours are available to him for the coming week. He
knows what he has to accomplish with the available help.

The key Job in organizing a schedule is to play by whom and

when each job should be done.

59

First, every department should be covered by a person
"in charge" at all times. The designating of someone in
charge of a department for a given time is one good device
for developing this person for greater responsibility. It
also prevents work slowdown or stoppage from ladcof direction.

Lunch periods, breaks, and days off should be staggered
so that people are on the Job when needed. This is partic-
ularly important in the front end operation of a market
where slack and heavy periods can usually be anticipated.

A schedule should plan for regular maintenance. Unless
cleaning and maintenance of store equipment is scheduled in
some regular way, these Jobs have a way of not being done.

A plan should be in effect to have every area of the store

cleaned and checked regularly.

 

A schedule should PE accessable 39 each employee. The

 

time spent planning a schedule is wasted effort unless each
employee is aware of what he should do and when he should
do it. Schedules should be posted in a place where every
employee can see the days and hours of his work, when he takes
' his meal hours, and what his Job assignment is. He must have
a clear idea of what his Job assignments are for each day
of the week and an understanding of their importance.

One further word on schedules. If the manager posts
a schedule each week without consulting his department heads
or employees, they lose some sense of the purpose of the
organization. If the employee only finds his assignments

on a cold impersonal list, he may well feel his personal

6O
satisfactions thwarted. The manager should, then, occasion-
ally consult with the people involved as to what must be
accomplished. He should listen to their suggestions and try
to incorporate them into his planning. If this is done,
the sense of group purpose is more easily maintained and the
schedule is more likely to be accepted.

Schedules are only check lists, they will not get the
Job done without follow-up on the part of the manager.
Conditions change daily and the organization must be flexible
enough to meet these new conditions. A continuous review of

the schedule is a must.

fawn

PART III

GETTING BETTER ORGANIZATION AT STORE

LEVEL

r“

. ..l‘ll$n‘|l.lll'|lulll

 

CHAPTER VII
SELECTING A GOOD ORGANIZER

Now that some of the basic areas and problems of
organization in the supermarket have beendiscussed, we are
faced with the problem of selecting the right man for the
Job of store manager and helping him develop the organiza-
tional skills necessary for the management of a successful
operation. The first and most obvious step is to select
the proper man to be a store manager. In choosing a man to
manage a store, a man with organizational ability must be
picked.

William J. Reilly, in his book The Law e£ Intelligent

 

Action, says that the intelligence of an individual's action
when confronted with a problem is dependent on three factors:

1. His desire to solve the problem.

2. His ability to solve it.

3. His capacity for handling the human relations

involved.

In these terms, then, we are looking for a manager with
the desire to engage in organizing a market with the ability,
or at least the potential ability, to organize an operation,
and with the well developed capacity for getting along with
other people. All of these qualities are certainly of para—

mount importance to the organizer.

63

How, then, can we go about selecting such a person?
It is certainly more difficult than when a person with
physical skills is needed. With these, all that is needed
is to try him out on a sample of the work that is to be
done and Judge him on how well he does it. If we are looking
for a cashier, it is a simple matter to test her for profici—
ency in arithmetic and the manual dexterity needed to perform
the Job. Unfortunately in the selection of store managers,
all too often the man is selected who has most successfully
performed physical Jobs in the market. The clerk who has
the fullest shelves is promoted to head clerk or produce
manager. The produce manager who keeps the best looking and
freshest produce stand is promoted to assistant manager.
The assistant manager who builds the best displays and does
the best Job of ordering is sometimes promoted to store
manager. These latter two Jobs do require some organizational
ability for their successful completion. However, how can
one be more sure that the candidate for store manager
possesses this quality? There are numerous tests on the
market which might give some clue in this matter, especially
if the candidate's results on these tests are compared with
the results on the same tests of a manager who is known to
be a good organizer. However, in the use of any ready-made
test, the words of the National Industrial Conference Board

report must be considered.1

 

lHerbert Moore, Ph.D., "Experience with Employment
Tests," Studies in Personnel Policy, No. 32 (New York:
National Industrial ConferenceIBoard, Inc., 1941).

 

6A

Personnel men who use tests as selection tools are
not concerned with the same problem as academic men.
Their concern is not with the level of intelligence,
degree of mechanical ability, amount of clerical ability,
or extent of personality development. Their concern
is with the particular kind of ability that the demands
of their organization establish, with the particular
kinds of mechanical skill that must be acquired by
operators of their machines and with the particular
personality assets that their organization demands.

For that reason, the tests that are selected are in
terms of organizational needs first and foremost.

Some substitute for formal testing can well be utilized
to further locate the presence of ability in the prospective
manager. The "work sample" approach might also be used. In
order to get an indication as to whether or not a man can
organize a market, he might be asked several questions on
how he would go about handling certain problems in store
organization. His answers to these questions would show
his knowledge of organizational principles.

Even though the person has the ability to fill the
Job, his desire to work at the Job of market manager is
also a determining factor and must be considered. In this
case we are concerned with the question: "Does he desire
to work at this kind of Job?" Human desire is the great
motivating force and the extent to which a person's desires
have been defined and developed determines the extent to
which he is motivated to do anything.

A few tests have been developed to measure this
factor, but they are not in wide use. Personal interviews
must then be used in an attempt to get at a person's under—

H

lying desires. W. J. Reilly suggests as conversation

65
starters" in getting this information such questions as:2

1. Suppose you were financially independent and
perfectly free to do anything you wanted, what
life would you select, if any?

2. Is there anything that you do which interests you
so much that you lose all sense of time and forget
to watch the clock?

3. How do you spend your spare time?

4. What courses of study did you enJoy most in school
and why?

These simple questions are effective in finding the
real desire of a person and revealing whether or not he
really wants to work at a particular type of Job. They help
to show whether or not he has a belief in the importance of
that kind of work.

The third element to measure is the candidate's capacity
for getting along with other people with whom he will have
to associate and organize. This is a very difficult talent
to measure. There are several ways, however, that the can-
didate's capacity for good human relations can be Judged.
Most obvious is the person's past performance in gettfng
along with the people he has worked with. Presumably, a
prospective manager has been with the company for some time,
and there is a history of observations available on the
candidate.

Another way to Judge a candidate's capacity in human
relations in specific situations which he might encounter

in organizing a market is to ask him how he would handle

 

21bid., p. 70.

66
such as these: "How would you win the acceptance of your
employees to a new assistant manager?" or "How would you get
an assistant manager to take a greater interest in the pro-
duce operation?"

In addition to specific questions, we can use some
general questions in a written test or in a personal inter-
view to discover the person's attitude toward people. Some
helpful questions are: "Do you enJoy being with all kinds
of people?" "Do you like to work with people or would you
prefer to work alone?" "Do you enJoy trying to persuade
others to your point of View?" The quality and quantity of
answers to such questions give a clue to the candidate's
skill in human relations.

If the right kind of Job is done in the selection of
a manager, we have gone a long way toward the establishment

of a good organization in his particular store.

CHAPTER VIII
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

When a man is made the manager of a modern, large
supermarket, he is placed in charge of up to one hundred
employees. Reporting to him are two to seven department
heads, often with a knowledge of their departments that the
manager cannot hope to equal. The capital investment in the
physical plant may be up to one and one-half million dollars.
The annual sales volume of the store might be as much as
five million dollars a year. In some areas this store might
be open seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. This
store may sell over seven thousand different items and have
over ten thousand customers a week. Surely a man given this
responsibility is in an executive position.

Not many years ago in some grocery chains, the store
manager was responsible for about one to ten subordinates.
The store was small. An annual sales volume of $150,000
per year was quite respectable. Most of the work in the
store was done either personally by the store manager or
done under his close supervision.

There is little similarity between the requirements
(for managing a small grocery store and the abilities needed

to successfully operate a large supermarket.

68

With the rapid growth of the supermarket industry,
many of the market managers and supervisors today come from
the ranks of former service store managers. What changes
did the transition require in the way that a manager accom-
plishes his Job? An understanding of this will help in
giving all store managers a better knowledge of how to do
their Jobs successfully. The key difference between a small
and a large store manager‘s Job is obvious. The small store
manager works with his hands while the large store manager
must spend his time working through others. The key to his
success is in organizing and directing the work of his crew.

To successfully coordinate the activities of a large
group, the successful manager must have an understanding of
some basic criteria of a sound organizational structure in
his market. He must first recognize that the purpose of his
organization is to serve his customers in such a way that
they will be completely satisfied and at the same time show
a profit. This dual purpose must be accomplished in a way
that will allow his employees to satisfy their personal
goals and have the opportunities for individual development.

The first step in accomplishing this is to relate the
functions in the market and make individual assignment of
the functions. These should be related by a chain of com-
mand understood by each person in the market. This sets
forth the part which each member of the enterprise is
expected to perform. In establishing these relationships,

the manager must keep in mind the strong and weak point of

{9’1 351? 't/alio..lba

z

m

69
each member of his team. The assignments should be a
challenge for each individual and allow room for personal
development by giving each man the authority to carry out
his responsibility.

The market manager must recognize that the process
of organizing a market never is completed; he must be thinking
a year ahead to make his organization suitable for a changing
environment. The schedule of duties and hours, which is
usually the organization chart of a market, must be constantly
revised to keep it from becoming obsolete.

It is the duty of management and supervision to choose
store managers who will be able to carry out the manager's
duty of maintaining an effective organization and to give
them every help in fulfilling the objectives.

We have tried to show in this thesis some of the
classic principles of organization and to test their sound—
ness in terms of a supermarket operation. We have also dis-
cussed briefly the problem of selecting a man with organi-
zational skills as a manager.

The following check list is offered as a guide to how
well the organizer is fulfilling his requirements:

1. Know-How —— Does he know the fundamentals of
the operation he is directing?

 

2. Planning -— Does he know how to divide or
assemble operations into Jobs
which represent a fair distribution
of the work?

 

Does he know how to relate these
Jobs into a unified, smooth-
running team?

 

 

7O

3. Judgment -- Does he show good Judgment in
allocating duties and respon-
sibilities in accordance with
the ability and attitude of
the personnel?

 

4. Selling -- Can he sell people on the impor-
tance of their Jobs and the
necessity and desirability of
doing them capably?

 

5. Developing Men —— Is he good at developing the
skills and attitudes of his
personnel?

6. Follow—Through -- Does he follow-through to see

 

that each man does his Job?
If there is a "yes" answer to each of these questions,

the organization is in good hands.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bernard, Chester I. The Functions of the Executive.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard UniversIty Press,

1938.

Brown, Alvin. Organization, A Formulation of Principles.
New York: HibEert Printing Company, 1945.

 

Brown, Marvin. The Development of Executive Leadership.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press,

1951.

Clark, J. M. Social Control of Business. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company, 1939.

 

 

Dale, Ernest. Planning and Developing the Organization
Structure. New York: American Management Association,

195?.

Fayol, Henri. General and Industrial Management. London:
Sir Isaac Pitman andISons, Ltd., 1949.

 

 

 

Holden, Paul E., Lounsbury S. Fish, and Hubert L. Smith.
Top Management Organization and Control. California:
Stanfdrd University Press, 19AII

 

Hopf, H. A. Engineering Journal (Canada), XX, No. 12
(December, 1937f.

 

. Organization Executive Capacity and Progress.
OsignIng, New York: HOpf Institute of Management,
19 .

 

Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp. Organization Manual.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Jones and Laughlin Steel
Corporation, June, 1950.

 

Kornhouser, Dubin, and Rose. Industrial Conflict. New York:
McGraw-Hkll Book Company, 195A.

 

Moore, Franklin G. Manufacturing Management. Homewood,
Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., I954.

 

Moore, Herbert. "Experience With Employment Tests," Studies
in Personnel Policy, No. 32. New York: National
Industrial Conference Board, Inc., l9Al.

 

Paterson, Elmore, and E. Grosvenor Plowman. Business
Organization and Management. Chicago, Illinois:
RiChard'D. Irwin, Inc., 19Al.

 

 

Sparling, Samuel E. Introduction to Business Organization.
New York: The MacMillian Company, 1906.

 

Taylor, Frederick. Scientific Management; Comprising Shop
Management, Principles of Scientific Management, ans
Congression Testimony. New York: Harper and Brothers,

T9747L.

Urwick, L. The Elements of Administration. London: Sir
Isaac Pitman and Son., I9A3.

 

 

 

 

Ward, Lester F. Applied Sociology. Boston, Massachusetts:
Ginn and Company, 1906.

 

i].

..J.

..m-..|n
1.4.

.h

i...

 

 

 

 

 

 

MAINTAIN”

”'clllifiillfllfllfllllfll