Everyone thinks of him as a staff man who serves management in an advisory capacity, but he is, in truth, an executive with very real and far-reaching powers. Though he may manipulate men and policies with the velvet glove of persuasion, the iron hand of authority is there as this article, which analyzes his complex role in the factual terms of job performance, reveals.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HayakawaS. I., Language in Thought and Action (New York, Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1949), pp. 31–33.
2.
We are taking these quotations without some qualifying comments which may appear earlier or later in the manuscripts because these statements point up vividly the problem to which we are addressing ourselves.
3.
MacFarlandDalton E., “The Scope of the Industrial Relations Function,”Personnel, January—February, 1959, pp. 42–51.
4.
MyersCharles A.TurnbullJohn, “Line and Staff in Industrial Relations,”Harvard Business Review, July-August, 1956, pp. 113–124. (Without saying so, Myers and Turnbull point up the inadequacy of the word “staff” as we shall see later.)
5.
SaylesLeonardStraussGeorge, Personnel, The Human Problems of Management (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1960), pp. 395–396.
6.
MeeJohn F.WilliamsEdward G., “Managing a Successful Personnel Relations Program,”Indiana Press Information Bulletin No. 33, Bureau of Business Research, Indiana University, 1958, p. 24.
7.
McGregorDouglas, “Line Management Responsibility for Human Relations” in. Building up the Supervisor's Job. (Manufacturing Series, No. 213, American Management Association, 1953), pp. 27–35.
8.
MyersTurnbull, see note 4, p. 114.
9.
SaltonstallRobert, “Who's Who in Personnel Administration,”Harvard Business Review, Vol. 33, No. 4, July-August, 1955, pp. 75–83.
10.
StahlA. G., “The Network of Authority,”Public Administration Review, Vol. 18, No. 1, Winter, 1958.
11.
Ibid.
12.
UrwickL., “Personnel Management in Relation to Factory Organization,”Institute of Labor Management, Aldwych, London, W.C.2, England, 1943, p. 17.
13.
AndersonE. H., “The Functional Concept in Organization,”Advanced Management, October, 1960, Vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 17, 18.
14.
It goes without saying that he exercises authority within his own department. We are not here concerned with this, but rather with his exercise of authority in other organizational units.
15.
SimonHerbert, Administrative Behavior (New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1958), p. 126.
16.
The superior retains his authority through time. In the particular instance where compliance is not forthcoming, this authority is ineffective and hence can be argued to be nonexistent. For a discussion of this point of view see BarnardChesterFunctions of the Executive (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1938).
17.
Note that if the personnel manager goes to his superior and asks that the superior force his subordinate to comply, influence rather than authority is being manifested, i.e., the personnel manager influences his superior to use his authority.
