The Nature Of Work Between Australia

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

The changes to the nature of work between Australia and Singapore

Student Name : Aylwin Eng Bin Alimin

Student ID : 1201009357

Matriculation No. : st20048135

Date : 12th April 2013

Word Count : 2830 words

Table of contents

Contents

Contents 2

Intro 3

Evolution of Management in Australia 4

Leadership, organisation and culture 5

Leadership, organisation and culture in Australia 7

Leadership, organisation and culture in Singapore 9

Comparative Analysis of Australia and Singapore 11

Predictive changes in Singapore for the next 10 years 13

Summary 15

Intro

In the early 19th century the nature of work differs greatly between then and in the modern world in the society today. During those times, the industries between some countries differ a lot due to some considerable factors. Some factors that are involved are war-time, technology wise, skills and capability and knowledge. This report shall look into the history of management and in comparison between two particular countries which are Australia and Singapore. This report shall explain the difference in management and also the changes or evolution of management that help these countries to improve the social skills, work and knowledge to support the ever fast paced changes over a number period of years for them as well.

Evolution of Management in Australia

Over the years there are many theories that were created by particular observers. These particular theories can be applied to the approach that Australia has adopted which is the scientific management. During the 16th century, Australia was dubbed as the "New Holland" as they were found by a number of Europeans. The expedition was led by a Dutch navigator named Willem Janszoon. It is then during the 17th century where the British arrived led by James Cook who then returned to Australia who favours colonisation on the state known as New South Wales today.

The management practices in Australia during the 1950s to 1960s were mainly because of industrial sectors begun to grow rapidly. According to Wright (1993), during this period were booming due to the application of scientific management (p.40). It is however, despite the practices or scientific movement at this time, were aimed to provide complete control to the labour processes. He then further explained that it is also questionable whether the scientific management was dominant in the upper management.

With the ever growing industrialization in Australia, the mechanization of factory enabled the employers to have sub-division and deskilling occurs as well. Throughout the period itself, manufacturers or factories have been taken over by using mechanical machines simply by job fragmentation. Such mechanical tools have helped processing faster such as sewing machines, typewriters and bicycles. Simply put by having scientific management, Australia has increased its economic efficiency such as labour productivity.

Leadership, organisation and culture

Each of these qualities plays an important role to the history of both Australia’s and Singapore’s business development. Leadership, organisation and culture plays important role in defining the business and for its success. Bass (2004) quoted that "cultural norms define how a given nation or organisations will define leadership-who will get promoted, who will get the attention of followers" (p 11). This means that leadership should be closely linked with culture in order a certain individual career in success. With culture being played an important role as it can define an organisation’s success is crucial. Leaders will need to create the right culture fit for the organisation. Bass (2004) also explained that culture itself is the result of a complex group learning process which is partially influenced by the leader.

According to Depree (1987), leadership itself is difficult to define. He basically defined it as a concept of how leaders contribute as a way of thinking about stewardship as contrasted with the ownership. Furthermore he explained that the art of leadership will require the leaders to think about the on how to manage in terms of relationships; of assets and legacy, of momentum and the effectiveness of civility and values.

Organisation in the modern world today is generally known as a group of people with the same interests. However, to actually define it is not totally accurate. March and Simon (1958), quoted that organisation is made up of members who are bound rationality in order to adapt to situations in either a short or long term through routines or programs and are accomplished through the creation and modification along the goals and directions set by leaders. This means that organisations are made up of people with the same interests to work into a specific goal with the right values, attitudes and commitment in order to achieve the target set.

Chatman and Cha (2003), quoted that culture is a system of shared values (defining what is important) and norms which will define the appropriate attitudes and behaviour (p. 3). They believed that by having a group of people who share the same values as the organisations will define the how the organisation works thus obtaining the culture in the work place. Furthermore they explained that firstly the organisation will need to energize their employees-appealing to their higher ideals and values and group all of them around a set of meaningful and unified goals. They also explained that such ideals or thoughts will excite employees and increase their determination and commitment as it creates the motivation needed in employees wanting to have their own identity, engagement and involvement with the organisation. Basically with a strong culture in the organisation, employers believed that it can boosts up employees morale as culture is a way of shaping an employee’s behaviour. Furthermore culture is considered as an important business strategy in order to maintain and retain employees in the organisation.

Leadership, organisation and culture in Australia

In terms of leadership in Australia leadership practices, there are many different roles and theories which supports the changes throughout the years. The most commonly used in Australia with the leadership theory was the environmental leadership. According to Carmazzi (2000), stated that "Environmental leadership is not about changing the mind-sets of the group or individual, but in the cultivation of an environment that brings out the best and inspires the individuals in that group" (p. 2). This means that rather than improving the people’s skills or abilities, leaders should evaluate the employee’s skillsets and assign them to the work environment instead. For example, if a person has a creative mind and is good at arts or design, then leaders should assign them in marketing or design department.

In Australia’s government organisational structure consists of state and territory government structure. The government of Australia sometimes is referred to as Commonwealth Government or the federal government passes laws which affect the whole country. There are a total of six states in Australia whereby each retains their own laws which are not controlled by the Commonwealth. This means that each state has their own state government having their own constitution as well as their own legislature, executive and judiciary. Each state also has their own local government that has control and responsibility for a number of community services. In Australia, organisations also practiced hierarchical approach meaning top management level will delegate the work to their down line managers and down supervisory level. This states that top management have superiority and tasks will be broken down into a considerable amount of work load.

The work culture in Australia is considered normally as "laid back". With the claim of being "laid-back", Australians work life does not mean that they are not hard at work. In Australia, punctuality is of extreme importance and tends to put a strong emphasis on personality. Australia is also made up of diversified workforce. In the past, Australia did not emphasize on having a diverse multi-cultural workforce in organisations. Now in the new generation, having a diverse multi-cultural and racial ethnicity proved to be a valuable "strategy" for any organisations to gain an upper advantage over their competitors. This is due to the multi-verse languages used to communicate with foreigners who are flooding into Australia every year.

Leadership, organisation and culture in Singapore

In the past, the Singapore government adopted the British system of parliamentary government. Singapore was an industrialised country which adopted the style of scientific management. Late in the 1980s, Singapore revolutionized industrial era then evolved into services.

According to Stanton and Nankervis (2011), they explained that Singapore organisation adopts and implement the performance management systems to as the main component of strategic human resource management approaches in the organisations. They further explain with examples that the organisations now link the performance management system to their own mission and vision as well as their strategic objectives and values. Since the modern Singapore now are currently considered a more service oriented country, the government and multinational enterprises will to focus on better utilization and the development of the domestic workforce through the means of foreign talent. Leadership style in Singapore comes in various differences in the practical view.

One that is quite common in the past twenty to fifty years which is practiced in Singapore is bureaucratic leadership. Bureaucratic leadership refers to the leaders who works or goes "by the book". Simply put is that they follow the rules which are created and making sure that employees follow the procedures precisely and accordingly. This strategy is also more on to people oriented allowing employees to focus on routine tasks. The only problem in this leadership style is that it is ineffective in terms or teams and organisations that rely on flexibility, creativity or innovation.

As management evolves over the twentieth century, Singapore organisations also changes the way leadership theories works. Early in the past, Singapore was considered a busy industrial port, but in the twentieth century, Singapore has become more of a service oriented country. With the new changes the country has adopted the style of democratic or participative leadership. Organisations are more focus on retaining loyal employees through the means of this leadership style. Singapore has adopted this approach because believes that this style of leadership tends achieve higher job satisfaction among employees and staffs. Not only by achieving high job satisfaction, but having a very good quality in the project. Although it can affect or delay in decision making, the results are often good or satisfactory.

The organisational structure in Singapore is more towards hierarchical. Due to the past of Singapore business or organisations, mostly were originated as family-run business which adds to the value of respecting seniority in the companies. Key decisions will be made at the top senior management level which delegates the work or tasks to the lower level or as the chain of command. This mostly works from top to down line of employees.

As it is mentioned at the above that Singapore is focusing on more towards service orientation by utilising and development through the means of foreign talent, Singapore is definitely practicing a multicultural work force. Singapore’s work culture is also considered as a mix of Asian and Western influences. In the past, Singapore work hours consisted of six days per week which now have been changed to five days a week. The main working hours practiced in Singapore is usually 40-45 hours per week depending on the work load spent.

Comparative Analysis of Australia and Singapore

Between Australia and Singapore, Australia is considered more "laid-back" than the rush hours picked in Singapore. Australia now emphasises on the leadership style based on environmental leadership. This shows that supervisors or management level in Australia tend to improve more on the skillset on their employees. They tend to work in an environment where employees will come together as a group to deal with projects or tasks which is also common in Singapore today.

Australia leadership styles which prefer employees to be placed on to the environment suitable to their employees instead of relying on their skills or abilities, will not seek to develop the employee any further as they believed that by placing the right people with the right mind-set, creative and flexibility will be beneficial in terms to cutting costs. In Singapore, organisations preferably use the method of participative and democratic leadership styles as they believe that by involving employees and listening to their suggestions will greatly benefit the company in terms of social and work life.

The organisational structure in both countries tends to be quite similar. The organisational structure in both countries practices the hierarchical approach where delegation is seemed the best option. In this way, top senior management tends to break down the work load to down line managers and down to the line or supervisory managers.

Lastly the work culture between the two countries is that in Singapore, people tend to have work much harder than in Australia. Due to yearly increment of standard of living costs in Singapore, people tend to seek more to satisfy their needs and wants by earning more. In Australia, the work culture is more of "laid-back". Management practices that employees should be able to start and leave work on time. If any employee who comes and leaves late will be considered as inefficient and have low attributes in time management.

Both countries appear to have all the traits in common. In terms of leadership style, management would prefer to have organisations to work mostly in team basis rather than individualism. The reason for this is that by working in teams or groups, the outcome for a project would be of a good and satisfactory quality, meet deadlines and improve the employees’ social work. Not only by benefiting from all the traits but employees are able to learn and cultivate new ideas from creativity and culture.

Predictive changes in Singapore for the next 10 years

Not only Singapore is consistently updating its own nation with the rest of the world, the government has one of the highest reserves. The government emphasises that education is high priority among the people living here in order to achieve the objectives and goals. One major changes that can be predicted in the next 10 years is that Singapore work life-style will change accordingly based on the environmental factors. As the current management style practiced in the organisation in terms of the leadership, organisational structure and culture, these traits will play a major impact on the people in Singapore. Within the next decade, organisations will have the needs to change in order to suit the factors affecting them.

Adaptation will be the key to progress smoothly and leaders will need to come up with different theories and implement according to the ever changing environment. For example, technology is one of the factors which plays an important role, that can be seen moving at a fast pace as it is always being improved over the years. In order for organisations to keep ahead of their competitors, they will need to update and upgrade themselves and employees to be sustainable in the market.

However, even with the fast paced technology world, organisations should not overlook the welfare of their employees. Employees should be treated fairly and equally. Organisations will need to implement suitable theories in terms of human resource management. Currently being employed is the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. With a lot of graduates every year, selecting and hiring the right person for the job can be a time consuming process.

Currently, over the next decade with the high immigration movement of people from different countries seeking opportunities to pursue their education and career here in Singapore, employment will be difficult leading to high fractions of unemployment. Singapore is considered one of the most diverse countries in South East Asia considering the fact it is a small country as well. The government tackled this problem by allowing foreign companies to invest here in Singapore thus allowing a control over the problem within the next 10 years.

People who worked in Singapore are considered very hardworking and almost all will not have the time to have leisure. Organisations have come up with certain benefits which may allow them to balance out the work and social life. Some organisations practice by allowing certain benefits of having a longer mandatory leave for employees who are working with them for a number of years. With this organisations believe they can retain their employees by creating an atmosphere that is needed by the employee by building trust and taking care of their welfare. By retaining employees organisations can cut additional costs and save more time. Organisations will also set some social and team building activities in order to reduce stress and avoiding unwanted conflicts in the work place. Over the next 10 years, organisations will need to manage their employees opportunities as well as balance out their work-life activities in order to maintain and up to date with the momentum shift in the global economy.

Summary

With the ever changing environment, organisations in both countries will need to be constantly updated in order to maintain the momentum shift in the ever fast changing world. Leadership, organisational structure as well as culture within will need to shift accordingly to the environment factors. Leaders will need to implement certain theories in order to suit the factors affected by the organisation. In the ever fast changing past of the world, leaders will need to cultivate base on the needs and wants of employees in order to achieve their objectives and goals as these factors play important roles. Without these traits organisations in both countries will bound to have hard time to keep up with the world today.