Guest Post by Jyothi M John
I have been thinking about this concepts of management after watching Last week’s Hard Talk show on BBC.
Let me first explain the concepts before going about the pro’s and con’s of each style. First the Top down management is a management structure in which, the managers are appointed directly -with or without relevent experience but with the necessary qualification. The Bottom Up management style is where the manager’s are appointed by promoting the lower-rung people who have plenty of experience but not necessarily with the qualifications.
The Biggest drawback of Top Down Management structure is that the Manager lacks understanding of the actual setup and structure of the company. They may have learned a lot at school but when it comes to implementation, there will be a lot of hurdles, you never read about in the books. The biggest advantage being that the person has ready made answers, and can avoid a lot of mistakes.
For Bottom Up Management the biggest disadvantage being that the person is not a subscriber of out of the box ideas. And the biggest advantage being that he has a total understanding of the whole structure of the company and knows where to put enough oil for the functioning to be smooth. But without aggressive and out of the box ideas, it is very difficult to grow a company these days.
Me being a product of Bottom up management structure, have a soft conner for this structure. But I feel that there should be some balance in the management structure, to maximize the profitability. On the top level management it should be always bottom up managers – as these guy’s will always have the respect of the people below, and also these guy’s will have a better understanding of the rick factors in running a company. On the advisory levels, it is better to have top down management people – as these people will bring in a lot of fresh and out of the box Ideas. And moreover these guy’s will have a better understanding of today’s technology and concepts to implement them and improve the productivity of the company.
Please do leave comments on as to what you think of these management structures.
I agree with your philosophy well put.
Comment by Steve — February 11, 2008 @ 5:41 am
Hi Jyothi
I’m surprised by your definitions. I though that top down management was decision at the top and execution at the bottom.
I thought bottom up management was decision at the bottom and execution at the top!
I didn’t see the Hard Talk program so maybe I’ve missed a beat!
Comment by Jo — February 12, 2008 @ 4:15 am
I think that both “the bottom up” and “the top down” styles are implemented in the vertical management structure which are of course very much prevalent in todays management system but i see that a lot of companies are trying to put a horizontal management system in place where the two styles you mentioned are somewhat extinct.
In a horizontal system, we have a top management team with one or two (minimum no.) levels in b/w and then the executives.
So, the employees have a direct approach to, lets say, even the CEO of the company.
Comment by Ritesh — February 12, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
Hi Jo
I am not very sure about your definition of the management structures. Top-Down and Down-Up, it has always been the management that has been on the top that takes decisions and it has always been the people below who do the execution….
It will be interesting to know about a management structure that takes decisions at the bottom and the execution happens at the top.
Hi Ritesh
Your observations about horizontal management structure is perfectly true. This is basically driven by customer centric focus of the company, where the company is more of interested in satisfying the customer more than anything else. In the Horizontal Management structure, the Manager attending to a customer is responsible for sorting out all the customers issues, even if it does not fall under his portfolio. In the older vertical structure, if the problem did not fall under the managers portfolio, the problem is escalated to the respective department and the customer is shunned from desk to desk to get his problem solved. Here again I feel that there has to be a balanced implementation of both Vertical and Horizontal Management structures for the organization to get optimum results.
Comment by John — February 14, 2008 @ 2:07 pm
Top-Down and Down-Up Management Rely on a number of assumptions that are pretty shaky, e.g., In some Japanese management structures, Down-Up is used as the workers are quite good at out-of-the-box thinking. However Top-Down remains in Decision control….
Therefore, a balanced implementation of both Vertical and Horizontal Management structures for the organization is probable a good way to go unless something in the organization proves otherwise.
Comment by Al Gates — February 18, 2008 @ 1:12 am
[...] Top Down Management Vs Bottom Up Management [...]
Pingback by Happy BirthDay to Me and My Blog | Disruptive Technologies and Education — June 12, 2008 @ 10:09 am
In this modern world the art of Management has become a part and parcel of everyday life, be it at home, in the office or factory and in Government. In all organizations, where a group of human beings assemble for a common purpose irrespective of caste, creed, and religion, management principles come into play through the management of resources, finance and planning, priorities, policies and practice. Management is a systematic way of carrying out activities in any field of human effort. Management need to focus more on leadership skills, e.g., establishing vision and goals, communicating the vision and goals, and guiding others to accomplish them. It also assert that leadership must be more facilitative, participative and empowering in how visions and goals are established and carried out. Some people assert that this really isn’t a change in the management functions, rather it’s re-emphasizing certain aspects of management.
Its task is to make people capable of joint performance, to make their weaknesses irrelevant, says the Management Guru Peter Drucker. It creates harmony in working together – equilibrium in thoughts and actions, goals and achievements, plans and performance, products and markets. It resolves situations of scarcity, be they in the physical, technical or human fields, through maximum utilization with the minimum available processes to achieve the goal. Lack of management causes disorder, confusion, wastage, delay, destruction and even depression. Managing men, money and materials in the best possible way, according to circumstances and environment, is the most important and essential factor for a successful management.
Comment by BHATTATHIRI — November 21, 2008 @ 11:28 am
Jyothi, I couldn’t agree more about the balance between top-down and bottom-up. I’d also like to poin you to an article about this issue: http://www.wrike.com/projectmanagement/02/07/2008/Top-down-and-Bottom-up-Project-Management-Leveraging-the-Advantages-of-the-Two-Approaches. Your feedback is more than welcome.
Comment by Daria — December 25, 2008 @ 3:19 pm