Different Management Models

ELEMENTS	FORMAL	COLLEGIAL	POLITICAL	SUBJECTIVE	AMBIGUITY	CULTURAL
Goal Setting	Members of the body pursue goals that are set deliberately of a preferred future of a body. Goals are often vague and general because groups or even leaders of the organization are competing for the resources. They also have their own specific objective.	For this model, the group or organization has to formulate and agree upon raised goals. The voice of everyone is important to know their needs and to set objectives.	Inclined with their interests, every subgroup or interest groups of this body has their own specific goal. These particular objectives tend to create conflicts which are endemic among groups.	Individual goals exist in this model. These goals are focused on the subjects or people in the group. It is more of enriching what they have. It is more focused on humanitarian stuffs.	Organizational objectives are vague and problematic due to the difficulty or ordering their priorities. Also, sub-units have vague relationship with each other. It has thought to have inconsistent and opaque goals.	The goals of this model are focused enriching the values, beliefs and norms of individuals in the organization.
Decision-Making process	In this model, decisions are made through a series of processes. All options are considered and evaluated, thus the most appropriate among the choices is selected for the pursuance of the goal. The decision is made by the leader or principal of an institution.	The decisions here are made by some or all the members of the group. Thus, teamwork is important to end up in a consensus. With common interests, participative leadership takes place. Through this kind of leadership, effectiveness of the decisions can be easily achieved.	Bargaining and negotiations between interest groups are rampant to make decisions. Transactions are to be made to materialize objectives. Conflicts occur but in the end, it’s still the decision of the leader that should be followed. The leader is the prime authority in this model.	Decisions are highly based on the perceptions of the members of the body. Voices of the individuals and groups are heard because individual expertise and difference are recognized. Democracy is practiced in this model.	It has a fluid decision making processes. This means that members participation is opt in or out. Lack of interest and seriousness within the institution creates passiveness. They just implement without planning.	Cultural leaders have mostly the right to decide within the cultural norms of the society. Sometimes, in some tribe or groups, rituals and ceremonies are needed to make a decision. They tend to follow the will of the higher order.
Nature of the Structure	There is a systematic structure in this model. It follows a hierarchy from the head officer to the common staffs. The leaders have the control over their staff.	Leaders and subordinates comprise the structure. The leader is the “first among equals” and has the positional authority but the power is shared among all the members of the organization due to teachers also have an authority of expertise.	Political model is comprised by interest groups which has their own objectives. Within a macro body exist micro organizations. They follow a hierarchical system where in the leader has the power / authority over his/her subordinates.	Leaders and members exist but this model emphasizes on behaviour and process not the organizational structure. Post modern leadership stresses that it prefers personal qualities of the individuals rather than their official positions in the organizations.	Its structure is fragmented or divided into groups which have common interests. It is a loose coupling; It has no bond or unity as a whole. The structure is problematic due to overlapping rights and responsibilities among the body.	Its structure is hierarchical. The leaders have the responsibility to generate and sustain their culture. They must govern the entire society. Followers or members should adhere to their leader.

IQ VS. EQ

Dissimilarities. Intelligent Quotient (IQ) and Emotional Quotient (EQ) very much differ from one another.

©  IQ is profoundly the measure of cognitive abilities. This all about mental, logical, analytical and reasoning abilities of a human being. With that it can really get you through college or maybe law or doctoral courses. A person who has high IQ tends to be perfectionists. He/she thinks that everyone can also do what he can do and is not sensitive about what others are feeling. Persons who are like this does not know how to control or deal with their emotions. They rely on facts and speak about it all the time even when convincing someone to do such things. The bulb which is shining brightly symbolizes IQ. In contrast, EQ is symbolized by heart. It is all about the affective or emotional intelligence of a person. EQ can get an individual through life not only in school. It is knowing how and why things go. A good mixture of IQ and EQ can lead to effectiveness and efficiency in work. People who have this attribute can manage their emotions well for them to have good results in their endeavour. Being sensitive to other feelings is one of the major characteristics of a person who has high EQ.

Similarities. IQ and EQ are similar in some ways.

 that employees should be disciplined according to the standards of his/her superior

©  Both are innate to a person. The more IQ, the more logical and analytical a person is. On the other hand, when EQ is greater than IQ, the more affective a person can be. Also, one of their similarities is that both help an individual to survive the daily challenges in life. Furthermore, EQ and IQ dictate where a person is going to be.

AMERICAN MANAGEMENT VS. JAPANESE MANAGEMENT

Dissimilarities. American Management (AM) highly differs from Japanese Management (JM).

©  AM reflects a formal and political model. This stresses that there is a hierarchical structure influenced by power and authority in their organizations. The one on the top is responsible for decision making and dictating the subordinates to follow what was ordered. Thus, decisions are made quickly and clearly but its implementation takes time. Hiring their employees is based on their field of expertise and their promotion is based on individual’s performance which results to job insecurity within the organization. There is also a frequent change of companies. AM is primarily short-term orientation. On the other hand, JM replicates collegial/subjective model. Japanese organization leaders tend to consult the body hence decision making is slow. But having consensus in preparing and making decisions results to fast implementations processes. The decision flow is from the bottom-to-top and back. There is a collective responsibility and accountability among the members of the organizations. Japanese workers have rotations of jobs within the company. Therefore, there is a slow promotion through ranks and evaluation of long-term performance is considered. Mostly in large companies, JM renders to its body a lifetime of employment thus training and professional development is also a long term investment. As a result, loyalty to the company is produced. Harmony is in the air for JM, there are no insecurities within the company because they are all managed equally. Furthermore, this management is for long term orientation.

Similarities. American Management (AM) has a handful of likeness to Japanese Management (JM).

©  These two management styles also have similarities. Both have goals, decision making processes and nature of structure. AM and JM’s goals are within their preferred future of their organization. In a management, processes such us negotiations and decision making are crucial that is why it can be lost. The nature of structure for the two kinds of managements is both have leaders who govern the organization.