Introduction
The management style of an organisation can have a huge impact on its success. In the food manufacturing industry, there are various different management styles that can be used depending on the type and size of the business. These styles may include autocratic, democratic, technical authority and social authority-based approaches as well as drawing on persuasion, bureaucratic and organisational models. Each style has its own advantages and disadvantages that must be weighed up when choosing a method of managing for a particular situation.
Table of Contents
Key Takeaways
- Management structures and range from autocratic to a more democratic style of decision-making, depending on the situation, culture and the needs of the business.
- The application of authority is often a reflection of the management authority reflected on the company’s organogram, but can deviate to technical and social authority.
- The style of management and application of managerial authority is highly influential of engagement and compliance.
Management Styles
One of the most common management styles in food manufacturing businesses is autocratic management. This style is characterised by a top-down approach where managers make all the decisions without seeking input from employees. Autocratic management works well in situations that require quick decision-making, but it can lead to low employee morale, high turnover rates, and limited creativity.
Another management style that is gaining popularity in the food manufacturing industry is transformational leadership. This style focuses on inspiring employees to work towards a shared vision of success through motivation and inspiration. Transformational leaders empower their team members by delegating responsibilities and encouraging open communication, leading to higher levels of job satisfaction and employee engagement.
Finally, some food manufacturing businesses may adopt a laissez-faire management style where managers delegate responsibility with minimal supervision. While this approach can foster innovation and creativity among employees, it can also lead to inconsistent performance if there are no clear expectations or guidelines set in place for decision making. Ultimately, choosing the right management style depends on various factors such as company culture, goals, and available resources.
Autocratic Management
An autocratic management style is characterised by a top-down approach where the decision-making power rests solely with one person or a small group of people. In this type of management style, managers make decisions without seeking input from their subordinates. This can be an effective way to manage in certain situations, especially when time is of the essence or when there is a need for quick and decisive action.
However, in food manufacturing businesses, an autocratic management style can often lead to problems because it does not allow for flexibility or creativity. For example, if a manager makes all the decisions without consulting his or her employees, they may miss valuable insights and ideas that could improve operations or products. Additionally, employees may feel undervalued and unimportant which could lead to decreased morale and productivity.
While an autocratic management style can have its benefits in certain situations, it may not be the best fit for food manufacturing businesses due to their complex nature and need for collaboration among team members at various levels of expertise. A more collaborative approach such as democratic leadership may be more effective in these types of settings where teamwork and innovation are crucial components of success.
Autocratic management can appear to have advantages for particular functions or departments. For example, in the production department, it may be entirely appropriate for managers to adopt a dictatorial stance. Every operator may be required to adhere to a standard operating procedure or work instruction prepared for the specific task(s) that they are expected to perform, with no allowance for creativity or deviation in approach.
Similarly, a member of the hygiene department may be expected to clean a piece of equipment exactly according to the instructions given on the cleaning instruction card. Any deviation here could compromise the effectiveness of the cleaning process – so an autocratic management approach may be the most appropriate.
All of that acknowledged, food manufacturers should be careful not to rely too heavily on an autocratic approach. To illustrate, the kaizen methodology for continuous improvement adopts a deferential stance to the intimate knowledge and insights held by implementors, and encourages management teams to actively seek out the practical knowledge and expertise that only operators who carry out tasks on a day-to-day basis can provide.
Democratic Management
This style involves employees in decision-making processes, and their opinions are taken into account when making decisions. Managers using this style seek to create a work environment where every employee feels heard, valued, and respected.
In a democratic management setting, managers motivate their employees by empowering them with not only responsibilities but also decision-making power. When workers feel like they have a say in company decisions, they are more likely to remain loyal and committed to their job roles. Additionally, this style brings diversity of thought and innovation as different perspectives can lead to unique solutions for problems.
While it has many benefits, the democratic approach may occasionally lead to slower decision times as more input is required from various team members before making any final calls. However, managers who adopt this leadership style understand that true progress comes from collaboration between all levels of staff within an organisation.
Bureaucratic Management
Bureaucratic management in food manufacturing businesses is characterised by strict adherence to formal rules and procedures. This type of management style emphasises the importance of structuring organisations hierarchically, with clear lines of authority and control. Rules are established to ensure that everyone within the organisation knows what is expected of them, and exactly which individuals or departments are authorised to make particular decisions.
One way in which bureaucratic management has advantages for food manufacturing businesses is through standardisation. Standardisation ensures that all products are made according to a set recipe or formula, ensuring consistency across all products produced. This can be especially important when it comes to meeting regulatory requirements or maintaining quality standards.
However, one potential downside of this management style is that it can stifle adaptability and innovation within the organisation. Employees may feel limited in their ability to suggest new ideas or approaches because they must adhere strictly to established rules and procedures. Additionally, bureaucracy can result in slow decision-making processes due to the need for approvals from multiple levels of authority.
Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership is a management style that focuses on inspiring and motivating employees to achieve their full potential. This style emphasises the importance of communication, collaboration, and empowerment. Transformational leaders encourage their team members to take ownership of their work and to constantly strive for improvement.
In the food industry, transformational leadership can be particularly effective in promoting innovation and creativity. By fostering an environment that encourages experimentation and risk-taking, transformational leaders can inspire their teams to develop new products, processes or equipment that improve efficiency or enhance the quality of existing products. Through regular communication channels such as meetings or one-on-one conversations with employees, transformational leaders can also ensure that everyone is working towards common goals.
Ultimately, by adopting a transformational leadership style in food manufacturing businesses owners have an opportunity to create a positive culture where employees are engaged and motivated which usually results in better productivity levels across all departments involved in the production process.
Application of Authority
One common management style that applies to food manufacturing businesses is the authoritative style. This style involves a strong leader who makes decisions without seeking input from their team. This approach can be effective in situations where quick and decisive action is necessary, such as during a crisis or when time-sensitive decisions need to be made.
However, an overly authoritarian approach can lead to disengaged employees who do not feel valued or heard. It may also stifle creativity and innovation within the company. To mitigate these risks, some food manufacturing businesses may adopt a more participative approach, where leaders actively seek feedback from their team members before making important decisions.
Try to keep in mind, some people simply do not respond well to being dictated to. To put this into perspective, some employees would happily commit to a line of action if they felt like they had been respected and listed to during the decision-making process, but would rebel against the exact same decision if they felt like it had been imposed on them authoritatively.
Ultimately, the most effective management style will depend on the specific needs and goals of each individual business. By understanding the different approaches available and carefully considering which ones are best suited to their unique circumstances. Irrespective of the management style an organisation puts into place, decisions and actions depend on the application of authority through instructions and procedures. In this way, management styles determine who makes decisions (and how), while the application of authority is the way in which managerial decisions are enacted.
Authority can be manifested in a variety of ways that compound together to form an organisation’s management structure. Some manifestations of authority are formal and legitimised by the company’s documented processes, while others are informal and rooted in social dynamics. Some examples of hoe authority can be manifested are explored as follows.
Legitimate Authority
Legitimate authority involves leaders using their title or position to assert control over their subordinates. The managers who use this style believe that they have the right to make decisions and give orders because they are in charge.
In other words, legitimate authority is seen when a manager exerts the authority associated with their role or position. For example, the role of Quality Manager might have the authority to place a batch of product on QC hold, so a decision to place a batch of product on hold would be an example of the legitimate authority of the Quality Manager.
Under a legitimate authority style of management, employees are expected to follow the directions given by their superiors without questioning them. This style can be effective in situations where time is limited, and quick decisions need to be made. However, it can also create an environment where subordinate employees do not feel valued or respected.
It is crucial for food manufacturing businesses using legitimate authority management style to strike a balance between being authoritative while still being approachable and understanding towards employees’ needs. This will help foster good relationships between different levels of staff within the organisation as well as create a positive work culture that’s conducive for optimised performance output.
Technical Authority
Technical authority is a style of management that places emphasis on the technical expertise of the manager, who is expected to have an in-depth knowledge of the products and processes, as well as any regulatory or compliance restrictions. In this approach, managers rely heavily on their technical knowledge to make decisions and provide guidance to their team members. They are responsible for ensuring that all processes are carried out correctly and efficiently.
Technical authority enables a decision-maker with expert technical knowledge and experience to advise or even overrule a hierarchically more senior manager under specific circumstances. For example, the Technical Manager and/or HACCP Team might jointly or separately prevent the release of a contaminated batch of product – despite the legitimate authority of the Factory Manager.
Similarly, the HACCP Team might exert technical authority to prevent the introduction of a new raw material into the factory based on a hazard such as allergen exposure – despite the legitimate authority of the NPD Manager.
Technical authority can be particularly effective when dealing with complex production processes or when managing a team with diverse skill sets. In these situations, having a manager with strong technical expertise can help streamline operations and improve overall efficiency. However, this management style can also lead to micromanagement if not implemented correctly. Managers may become overly focused on details and lose sight of broader organisational goals.
To avoid these pitfalls, it’s important for managers using the technical authority approach to strike a balance between being hands-on and delegating tasks appropriately. By empowering their team members while still maintaining oversight over key processes, they can create a more collaborative work environment that drives success across the organisation as a whole.
Social Authority
Social authority is the ability of an individual or organisation to influence opinions, behaviours and actions of others through social capital. A popular or persuasive individual may be able to exert influence over others, despite a lack of legitimate authority. Conversely, a powerful idea or cause may be able to influence others with no formal authority at all.
Social authority is a key concept in the field of social psychology, and overlaps with some aspects of leadership and persuasion. The most influential leaders are able to leverage social authority to drive their organisation’s success. Social capital is a measure of the resources available to an individual through good will and rapport earned within their network, so individuals with strong social connections and relationships might exert significant organisational authority – which could have synergistic or antagonistic outcomes for organisational performance depending on how closely aligned the motivations and objectives of those individuals are with the objectives of the organisation.
Different management styles can also play a significant role in developing social authority within food manufacturing businesses. A democratic management style, for example, encourages open communication and collaboration amongst team members which can lead to stronger relationships both internally and externally. Autocratic management styles, on the other hand, may lead to a more hierarchical structure within the organisation which could hinder open communication and limit opportunities for social authority to develop.
Ultimately, it’s important for food manufacturing businesses to find a management style that aligns with their values and goals while also allowing them to build strong relationships within their industry. By doing so, they can establish themselves as trusted authorities among consumers who are looking for quality products from reputable sources.
In Summary
It is important for food manufacturing businesses to understand the different management styles and their applications in order to ensure optimal productivity and success. The autocratic style of management may be effective in times of crisis or when quick decisions need to be made, but it can also lead to resentment among employees if used too frequently. In contrast, the democratic management style allows for more input from employees and fosters a sense of teamwork, but can also lead to slower decision-making processes.
Furthermore, the laissez-faire management style may work well for self-motivated employees who require minimal supervision, but can lead to chaos if not properly implemented. Finally, the transformational leadership style inspires employees by providing a clear vision and empowering them to reach their full potential. However, it requires a strong leader who is able to effectively communicate their vision and motivate others.
Food manufacturing businesses should strive for balance between these different management styles based on their unique needs and circumstances. By understanding the strengths and drawbacks of each approach, they can make informed decisions that will support both the company’s goals and its workforce’s well-being.
Further Resources
Food Industry Hub serves the food industry with a range of digital resources for the benefit of both commercial food manufacturers and food industry professionals.
For food manufacturers, we offer integrated management systems that give every user a direct interface with your QMS.
For food industry professionals, we provide an extensive signposting service in addition to informational content we hope you’ll find useful as you face new professional challenges. We have very ambitious plans to expand the range of services offered, and currently present informational content on management, safety and quality, food safety and quality culture, and professional success.
