Jenyo - Comparative Management.. 1

This document contains information about a student named Adepoju Ridwan Bidemi studying business administration at the 400 level. It discusses the important scope of comparative management, universality theory from a contingency perspective, and particularistic theory of management. Specifically, it covers topics such as the centralization of authority, systems of reward, formality levels, and loyalty within organizations between different cultures and countries.

Uploaded by

RII

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

260 views

Jenyo - Comparative Management.. 1

Uploaded by

RII

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 6

 NAME: ADEPOJU RIDWAN BIDEMI

 LEVEL: 400 LEVEL

 DEPARTMENT: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

 MATRIC NO: 18/0229

 COURSE TITLE: COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT

 COURSE CODE: BUS451

 QUESTIONS:
1. Discuss in details the important and scope of comparative management
2a. Discuss Universality Theory (contingency Perspective)
2b. Discuss the particularistic theory management.

 LECTURER IN CHARGE: Prof. G.K. Jenyo.

IMPORTANT OF COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT

1. An increasing number of managers go abroad for overseas assignments, they are faced
with the problems of motivating and communicating with the foreign workforce.
Understanding and being responsive to local conditions help managers to achieve
personal and organizational goals.
2. Getting to know how managers in foreign countries perform their tasks expedites
continued to trade and co-operation.
3. Observing how different cultures solve similar problems provides multinational with
innovative problem-solving techniques, which lead to improved management.

4. The ability to see worthwhile differences and to observe how to act in varying situations
is made available.

5. Awareness of potential conflict between the multinational company and the host country
makes for a mutually beneficial relationship. For example, the multinational might have a
higher percentage of national for managerial positions or permit more local autonomy as
a way of smoothing labor relations.

SCOPE OF COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT

1. Authority Centralization: Centralization of authority is the major cause of the

differences of culture occurring in the business because the degree to centralize the
authority for making necessary decisions regarding the business with the senior managers
and opposing the discussion with downward authority in the organizational hierarchy
2. System of Reward: Different organizations have different rewarding system. Some
organizations prefer to motivate the employees by measuring individual performance in
the business while some organizations prefer to give incentives as the reward to a
collective group based on group performance.
3. Formality Level: Every organization have different level of formal management
procedures on which they rely, and their difference cause difference in the results of the
organizations, so study of comparative management is required.
4. Loyalty Towards Organization: In some organizations, level of loyalty with the
whole organization is high as comparative to the other organization where the loyalty of
employees is inclined towards the particular group or any specific employer. So
definitely, the differences will occur.
5. Cooperation Level: Level of cooperation between the managers and the employees of
the companies also vary from company to company or from country to country which
encourages the competition among the employees to achieve the objectives of the
company.
6. Degree of Risk Tolerance: Different culture has different levels of uncertainties and
risks which are manageable by the managers of the organization comfortably.

2A. DISCUSS UNIVERSALISTIC {CONTEGENCY PERSPECTIVE}

The universalistic theory of management claim that the phenomena of management and
organization are subject to the same universal laws everywhere in the world. An example is the
positive relationship between the size of an organization and its degree of internal differentiation,
which has been found in many studies. Universalistic theory posits that this relationship is valid
everywhere in the world, because it is based on fundamental characteristics of human behavior.

Universalistic theory tend to predict that cross-national differences in management and

organization, in so far as they exist, will disappear in the future. A driving force for this
homogenization process is globalization. As more and more markets become subjected to world-
wide competitive pressure, less efficient ways of management and organization will give way top
best practices, regardless of the nationality of the company, management or employees. Existing
cross-national differences may be seen as temporary disequilibria, which will disappear when
obstacles to the free market are removed.

UNIVERSALISTIC THEORIES – THE CONTEGENCY PERSPECTIVE.

The contingency approach was developed by the Aston School in the 1960s. Much of the
contingency theory research studied organizational structure and for this reason is usually
referred to as structural contingency theory. This theory posits that, given similar circumstances,
the structure of an organization – that is, the best patterns of control, coordination and
communication – can be expected to be very much the same wherever it is located. (Hickson, et
al., 1974). The theory further posits that, if they are to be successful, organizations, must
structure in response to a series of demands or contingencies posed by then scale of operation,
usually expressed as size, the technology employed and the environment within which operations
take place.

The contingency theory states that the mechanistic structure (hierarchical, centralized,
formalized structure) fits a stable environment because a hierarchical approach is efficient for
routine operations. Given the routine nature of operations, the management at the upper level of
the hierarchy possesses sufficient knowledge and information to make decisions, and this
centralized control fosters efficiency.

2B. DISCUSS THE PATICULISTIC THEORY MANAGEMENT

The particularistic theory of management, on the other hand, predicts that cross-national
differences in management and organization will persist. The reason is that management and
organization reflect expectations and preferences that differ between countries. This theory
strongly believed that organizations and management in different countries can differ
fundamentally, and that different explanations are necessary for different countries.

Furthermore, particularistic interpretation of organization and management imply that history

matters, as national systems of management and organization are pat-dependent. For instance,
the question may be asked whether Japanese management and organization can be truly
understood without taking into account Japan‘s late industrialization halfway through the
nineteenth century, leading to dramatic changes in a society that still bore the characteristics of
the feudal era.
REFERENCE:

https://bankofinfo.com/nature-of-comparative-management/

https://www.foreigntradejournal.com/article/view/1/1-1-
1#:~:text=Scope%20of%20Comparative%20Management
%3A&text=the%20major%20cause%20of%20the,authority%20in
%20the%20organizational%20hierarchy.

https://nou.edu.ng/sites/default/files/2017-10/BUS
%20810%20COMPARATIVE%20MANAGEMENT.pdf