Lost managers or industrial dinosaurs? A reappraisal of front-line management

Patrick Mark Dawson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A narrow concept of industrial supervision continues to dominate discussion on the future rôle of the supervisor. Although the nature and purpose of workplace supervision has continuously evolved, there remains a general reluctance to accept the significance of these changes. Substantive shifts in supervisory control indicate that there is a far broader range of policy options available in the development of supervision than is currently suggested in the literature. It is therefore important that management understand what constitutes supervision if they wish to be active and constructive shapers rather than passive observers of tomorrow's front-line management.
This paper examines the need to reconceptualise supervision and go beyond the simple dichotomy of technical competency and labour regulation. It is argued that the supervisor is neither an “Industrial Dinosaur” nor simply a “Lost Manager”, but a key organisational player whose position should be realigned to meet current organisational needs.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)35-48
JournalAustralian Journal of Management
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1991

Fingerprint

Line management
Supervision
Managers
Supervisors
Labor regulation
Observer
Policy options
Dichotomy
Work place
Competency

Keywords

  • supervisor
  • supervision
  • change
  • control
  • manager

Cite this

Lost managers or industrial dinosaurs? A reappraisal of front-line management. / Dawson, Patrick Mark.

In: Australian Journal of Management, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1991, p. 35-48.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{205652b0eada45aaa77b18a9f03b2c0e,
title = "Lost managers or industrial dinosaurs? A reappraisal of front-line management",
abstract = "A narrow concept of industrial supervision continues to dominate discussion on the future r{\^o}le of the supervisor. Although the nature and purpose of workplace supervision has continuously evolved, there remains a general reluctance to accept the significance of these changes. Substantive shifts in supervisory control indicate that there is a far broader range of policy options available in the development of supervision than is currently suggested in the literature. It is therefore important that management understand what constitutes supervision if they wish to be active and constructive shapers rather than passive observers of tomorrow's front-line management. This paper examines the need to reconceptualise supervision and go beyond the simple dichotomy of technical competency and labour regulation. It is argued that the supervisor is neither an “Industrial Dinosaur” nor simply a “Lost Manager”, but a key organisational player whose position should be realigned to meet current organisational needs.",
keywords = "supervisor, supervision, change , control, manager",
author = "Dawson, {Patrick Mark}",
year = "1991",
doi = "10.1177/031289629101600102",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "35--48",
journal = "Australian Journal of Management",
issn = "0312-8962",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Lost managers or industrial dinosaurs? A reappraisal of front-line management

AU - Dawson, Patrick Mark

PY - 1991

Y1 - 1991

N2 - A narrow concept of industrial supervision continues to dominate discussion on the future rôle of the supervisor. Although the nature and purpose of workplace supervision has continuously evolved, there remains a general reluctance to accept the significance of these changes. Substantive shifts in supervisory control indicate that there is a far broader range of policy options available in the development of supervision than is currently suggested in the literature. It is therefore important that management understand what constitutes supervision if they wish to be active and constructive shapers rather than passive observers of tomorrow's front-line management. This paper examines the need to reconceptualise supervision and go beyond the simple dichotomy of technical competency and labour regulation. It is argued that the supervisor is neither an “Industrial Dinosaur” nor simply a “Lost Manager”, but a key organisational player whose position should be realigned to meet current organisational needs.

AB - A narrow concept of industrial supervision continues to dominate discussion on the future rôle of the supervisor. Although the nature and purpose of workplace supervision has continuously evolved, there remains a general reluctance to accept the significance of these changes. Substantive shifts in supervisory control indicate that there is a far broader range of policy options available in the development of supervision than is currently suggested in the literature. It is therefore important that management understand what constitutes supervision if they wish to be active and constructive shapers rather than passive observers of tomorrow's front-line management. This paper examines the need to reconceptualise supervision and go beyond the simple dichotomy of technical competency and labour regulation. It is argued that the supervisor is neither an “Industrial Dinosaur” nor simply a “Lost Manager”, but a key organisational player whose position should be realigned to meet current organisational needs.

KW - supervisor

KW - supervision

KW - change

KW - control

KW - manager

U2 - 10.1177/031289629101600102

DO - 10.1177/031289629101600102

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 35

EP - 48

JO - Australian Journal of Management

JF - Australian Journal of Management

SN - 0312-8962

IS - 1

ER -