Human resources - the central problem of macroeconomics Management and building of human resources

The essence of management activities is working with people that requires knowing what best person is. But what does "to know what man is" mean? The principle of "know thyself" is not an answer, but a question, a call to research and confrontation of various alternatives. In other words, the focus is not only, or primarily, on the act of knowledge - as it is clear and indisputable what is the man in general and individual in private. - but the interpretation of what is man as such. Putting the problem (the formula the discussion in terms of a well-constructed problem) means first, to determine in what areas of discussion ("discourse") the question is meaningless, where we can find the answers. "Know thyself" has as sense a scientific approach, philosophical, religious or what type? To know yourself what they mean? To know yourself as an individual, assuming that we know better what is man in general: to know what is man as a starting point in knowing who we are as personalities, to know others and in relation to whom we are, to know what makes the man (the existing body) "being human" (as socio-cultural reality) find answers to big questions Kant asked (who we are, where we came from, what to do?). As we move from the scientific field to that of philosophy and religion, to know what we are or why should we, entering into an axiological discussion. To understand what man is it is supposed to learn about what "world" and "reality" are, however we could say that we find plausible answers to questions about what a man is if we do not correlate with those of what "reality" and "world" are. There are many questions that customize the background, knowledge related approach man (emphasis on man and not the knowledge). Obviously, the two dimensions of the problem are related, for determining how knowledge involves knowing what a man is (and, therefore, by what kinds of interrogations can be discussed), but knowing what a man is before any act of knowledge is impossible (even in the case of intuition or revelation).

We started with a brief formulation of philosophical issues (including axiological), noting that religious sense approaches require that the problem be reformulated in other terms to be the basic premises in the philosophy analyzes themselves. What is the aim of management? To answer this question it requires, first, to restate the problem, to discuss other possible questions on the report of which is in the ability to act of management and what does not enter (not enter the main) in the zone which management can influence. Obviously, management practices, as empirical aspects of the problem - emphasize the managerial behaviors of different interventions in more limited areas or broader reality, and this fact is not theoretically really significant in itself. In other words, not all is (was) designed in practice likely to exceed the scope of management is beyond any possibility of management approach.

Strictly-deterministic models emerging an "objective" area which exceeds the capabilities of the manager and, in addition, generates necessarily (i.e. obligatory) processes and trends, that forces the managers to actions to comply better to "objective requirements." According to these models, the future is strictly determined (linear and univocal) by the present. The manager has a limited area of activity: to know the best (full and exactly) the "objective requirements," to "discover" the future (which is predetermined by objective laws) and to take appropriate measures. Liability of the manager is limited at the area of action available. If he manages to know better the determined context then he must take appropriate measures (as its knowledge management). Management is considered as a science accurately and efficiently: if you know the situation and know the rules of management you must be able to take the best measures. If wrong, it is due to: a) that you have not studied and known well the situation, b) do not know better the management. Like when you need to do a multiplication, if you know better rules cannot be wrong.

The base consists in learning management, the manager's role is secondary.

Between the two schools of thought there are radical differences. "The first current thinking is "deterministic." It is based on the old maximum "science discovers, technology applies, man conforms." The second current of thinking is "conditional." It is based on the observation that, in a commercial enterprise, the activity is influenced by a complex of factors, other than the ones used by technology. Some of these factors are able to moderate the negative impact on business ("employ"), others to accelerate. In the final analysis, everything depends on the relative forces of moderation and existing acceleration at some point in the enterprise." The solution is to train staff to ensure the necessary skills keeping under human control factors that influence the company.

The non deterministic prospective models, starting from a different understanding philosophy of social reality: there is not a single future, predetermined linear (past > present > future), human actions are not limited to "objective necessity" knowledge and its comply answers ("freedom is the understood need," said Hegel and Marx "transformed" the concept of need into a category of economic and social "objectivity"). There are a number of constraints (of human nature and of nature, and contextual limits of society: the limits of knowledge, of technologic development, economics, educational, of availability of resources, etc., which generates (dynamic, historical, changing) a zone of possible action, defined by a "space" (direction of action) open by the possibilities created (invented) by men in relation with a series of factors related to the aspects of psychic (character, temper, will, courage, intelligence, etc.), cognitive (knowledge, intellectual models by judgment, types of understanding of reality, etc.), axiological (values and norms), management (management models), beliefs, prejudices etc. possible alternative future is taking shape with varying degrees of realism and probability, accessibility and achievable. In this space of possible-action, the manager has full freedom and responsibility for action. The focus shifts from knowledge (which remains extremely important) to creativity and decision. Manager as social actor is the basis of management activity. The management is not just a science (providing knowledge accurately and effective rules to be applied), but increasingly more an art, a construction activity itself to reality that the manager wants to achieve.

Focus shift from management to manager, to the free actor (in the space of possible action and the ability to initiate actions to limit the area of constraints through the development of knowledge, technologies, resources etc.) and responsible (because he is free to define his space of action, alternative future that he wants to achieve). The manager, as an actor, acts intentionally and non-intentionally and he is able (or not) through intelligence, training, courage to face risk, through imagination to conceive possible future alternative, power to grasp in the immediately concrete, possible areas of intervention and trends in training, ability to decide and choose to pursue persistent way, his style of leadership, ability to cooperate with other specialists, etc., to lead the organization to areas of maximum competitiveness.

The knowledge is necessary but not sufficient and essential. Management can guide the manager on a set of possible actions, but manager will not find ready-made answers in any management thesis. Instead of looking at management as a multiplication table (need to be learned and applied as exactly), it becomes a "guide behavior" that includes tips, experiences, various theories and explanations that are sometimes applicable and sometimes not. Hence, the analysis of the management, the focus ought to be put on the relationship and the various actors holding an asymmetric power. Understanding managerial activity (within an organization, period, country, etc.) requires the study and see how players behave in caught relationship management, how why take (or not) certain actions. This view is particularly productive when we deal with current guidelines for management of skills.

 
< Prev   CONTENTS   Next >