A520.5.3.RB_MaceRoyce
Review the article titled: “Empowerment: Rejuvenating a potent idea” by Russ Forrester (2000).
In your blog, prepare a summary that compares and contrasts the concepts discussed to those discussed in the text.
Forrester (2000) reminds us that while the idea of empowerment is an awesome one, leaders must approach it seriously and look for an strategic way of implementing it. Piecemeal approaches to empowerment simply won't cut it. Ultimately, empowerment is a double-edged sword: implement correctly and magnificent results may come to fruition; employ empowerment sloppily and disastrous aftermath may occur. Forrester points out his own vision of empowerment which tactically approaches it with stringent detail and strategic planning at all levels.
Forrester specifically compares and contrasts two very basic ways of implementing empowerment. First, is a very "laissez-faire" approach in which employees at all levels are empowered with the ability to make their own decisions. This approach can carry many consequences, but is specifically dangerous due to the fact that newer and inexperienced employees are unable to make company decisions based on an overall lack of experience and competence.
The second approach to empowerment and one that Forrester supports is granting mid-level managers more decision-making power. He places the trust of empowerment to those that know what to do with it. These employees have the training, knowledge, and overall experience necessary to make the empowering decisions needed for company success. Empowerment should essentially be placed in the hands of those who know how to properly wield and employ it.
As leaders, Forrester (2000) believes that we must equip our specialists (managers) with as many tools as possible that include knowledge, training, clear expectations, expanded access to resources, trust, and the opportunity for employees to build new relationships with customers, suppliers, and peers within the organization. Arming our knowledgeable and capable employees with the right tools can have tremendously positive results for our organizations.
In closing, Forrester agrees with a more refined and realistic approach to empowerment. Blanket empowerment across the spectrum typically incites negative results while pin-point empowerment targeted in the right areas and with the right ammunition (tools) can have positive and profound results. Empowerment is typically a positive leadership tool, but as Forrester points out: even too much of even a positive thing can ultimately be a bad thing.
References
Russ Forrester. (2000). Empowerment: Rejuvenating a potent idea. The Academy of Management
Executive (1993-2005), 14(3), 67–80. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4165660
In your blog, prepare a summary that compares and contrasts the concepts discussed to those discussed in the text.
Forrester (2000) reminds us that while the idea of empowerment is an awesome one, leaders must approach it seriously and look for an strategic way of implementing it. Piecemeal approaches to empowerment simply won't cut it. Ultimately, empowerment is a double-edged sword: implement correctly and magnificent results may come to fruition; employ empowerment sloppily and disastrous aftermath may occur. Forrester points out his own vision of empowerment which tactically approaches it with stringent detail and strategic planning at all levels.
Forrester specifically compares and contrasts two very basic ways of implementing empowerment. First, is a very "laissez-faire" approach in which employees at all levels are empowered with the ability to make their own decisions. This approach can carry many consequences, but is specifically dangerous due to the fact that newer and inexperienced employees are unable to make company decisions based on an overall lack of experience and competence.
The second approach to empowerment and one that Forrester supports is granting mid-level managers more decision-making power. He places the trust of empowerment to those that know what to do with it. These employees have the training, knowledge, and overall experience necessary to make the empowering decisions needed for company success. Empowerment should essentially be placed in the hands of those who know how to properly wield and employ it.
As leaders, Forrester (2000) believes that we must equip our specialists (managers) with as many tools as possible that include knowledge, training, clear expectations, expanded access to resources, trust, and the opportunity for employees to build new relationships with customers, suppliers, and peers within the organization. Arming our knowledgeable and capable employees with the right tools can have tremendously positive results for our organizations.
In closing, Forrester agrees with a more refined and realistic approach to empowerment. Blanket empowerment across the spectrum typically incites negative results while pin-point empowerment targeted in the right areas and with the right ammunition (tools) can have positive and profound results. Empowerment is typically a positive leadership tool, but as Forrester points out: even too much of even a positive thing can ultimately be a bad thing.
References
Russ Forrester. (2000). Empowerment: Rejuvenating a potent idea. The Academy of Management
Executive (1993-2005), 14(3), 67–80. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4165660
Comments
Post a Comment