Abstract
The activity in the Rumanian construction field was marked by the characteristics of the communist society. The works were distributed according to a plan and not as a result of a competition between the construction companies. The management of those was characterized by a dictatorial style so that the conflicts between the enterprises and the beneficiaries or the enterprises and the surveyors were solved by the party’s militants, putting pressure upon one of the sides in conflict. The arbitrary methods were also used in the relations between the superintendents of work and their men, the supreme words being the directives of the party. Those ones came off victorious over the technical or economic criteria. This paper is meant to present these aspects, as well as some suggestions for improving the new relationship between partners in the construction field in Romania. The authors consider this fact absolutely necessary for this period of transition to a market economy—taking into account that many managers in the construction field had an old fashioned management style. This paper tries to grasp the differences between a leadership by oneself and a group leadership so intending to improve the management in the construction field for this period in Romania.
Keywords: Construction, Management in the Transition Period, Uncertain Decisions, Romania.
1 Introduction
The activity in the Rumanian construction field was marked by the characteristics of the communist society. The result of centralized system and the communist mixture between politics and economy was the party militants’
intervention in case of conflicts. This “Damocles sword” above the construction managers influenced management style and its effectiveness.
Through this transition period, crossed by Romania, new leadership methods are attempted for coping with the construction firms’ specific nature framework. It is hard to apply fixed economic or management models, even models verified in other countries because the specific economic and social aspects can falsify the efficiency of the models. The specific aspects of the transitional period require also more and more risk and uncertainty assessments.
This paper gives a brief review of the aspects, causes and implications of the centralized and dictatorial communist management style because if the system was changed, the managers and employee are the same and they have to function on the new background. This inheritance being spotlighted it will be easier to change what must be changed in construction managers’ style to increase their effectiveness.
2
The uncertain and management styles
2.1 Models of decision
The act of decision is borne because of the reality impact and it is the most important moment of the leadership thinking process. The decision links thinking with action.
The literature in matter emphasizes a lot of classifications of the decisional models:
Decision in terms of certitude Decision in terms of risk Decision in terms of uncertainty Cybernetic model
The classic models (certitude and risk) have a rigorous mathematical foundation so it’s relatively easy to deal with them. They are appropriate especially in cases with high level technics and/or high level of knowledge. The model of decision in terms of uncertainty has to be considered when we deal with low levels of knowledge and/or with high influence of the human factor. The cybernetic model is not a decisional model, not based on theoretical knowledge but through the intermediate feedback. The need for decision is not formulated but it’s felt.
For supporting this model one may mention the American philosophical trend founded by Sanders Peirce “the pragmatism”. The pragmatism appeared as a response against the “absolute truths” and considered as obviously only the practical checking of ideas’ effects. The truth of an idea is not a result of value of
an idea in itself or a result of its source. Only practise may confirm the ideas’
truths.
As we mentioned, one of the main factor which directly influences the decision under uncertainty is the leader’s level and his quality of knowledge. We may point out the relation between the knowledge’s level and the degree in certainty/uncertainty through four zones:
Zone IA: Low level of knowledge, hazy image of facts;
Zone IB: More knowledge but yet insufficient, may lead to a rapid increase of the subjective certainty. The stability of image is
precarious.
Zone IIA: The increase of knowledge leads to a sharp critical spirit, to increase the doubts. The alternative solutions are formulated.
Zone IIB: The alternative solutions are obvious and well differentiated. The image is sound.
Another aspect is the reducible/irreducible nature of uncertainty. This specific feature becomes manifest through opportunities so that by increasing the level of knowledge the uncertainty diminishes or not. The perception of this aspect determines the behavior of one who has to decide through all stages of the resolution process (the formulation of the problem, finding alternative solutions, the differentiation of alternatives, decision, decision applied).
The decisional factor has to realize the uncertain zone in which he lies, he has to estimate if the cognition effort is rewarding and he has to adopt the proper management style, also according to his personality. The different degrees in uncertainty lead the decisional factor to different management styles. At minimum levels of knowledge, the analytic decisional procedures become efficientless.
So we may characterize “the first arrival” procedure. The first identified solution is adopted. The uncertainty is artificially absorbed by investing the decision stage and the solution with surplus value (zone IB).
2.2
Aspects and consequences of the centralized leadership
Often in the relationships between the party militants and construction managers the production plan and the taboo communist party’s directions were involved in order to support a pressure attitude from the first one towards the latter. With such a frame, very often the economic effectiveness and normal human relations were neglected.
The lack of time, insufficient equipment and often insufficient project preparation and last but not least the party militants direct implication (the communist state being the unique owner) led to a “first arrival” decisional
182 TRANSITION AND MANAGEMENT OF UNCERTAIN RESOLUTION
procedure. For the communist militants the decision, or rather the directive, was not founded on the cognition procedure but on the communist dogmatic set of rules.
The decision of the party activist, as coming from someone on higher position, came off victorious over that of the people from the building firms. So an uncertain situation which leads to a decision full of surplus value, not ending artificially the incertitude, doesn’t settle on the basis of proficiency, but on the basis of social status.
This one is the basis of a certainty from IA zone or IB and not one from IIB zone as it would be proper. But accepting the incertitude would contradict the farseeing policy of the Communist Party so the activist’s decisions were controversial and arbitrary.
So decision wasn’t seen as an iterative process and was to be applied strictly without taking into account those who had to put it into practice. We have here a typical situation of overrating of the determinator and of underrating of the group.
We shall try to analyze the effects of this managerial style on the level of construction firms’ managers.
As we showed before the relationship between the party leaders and those in the construction firms generate anxiety for the latter. This situation full of stress and threatening was caused by a permanent latent conflict. This situation to which we might add the hard specific character of the work brought about some consequences for the building managers:
The group of builders consolidate their cohesion and strengthen their fellowship, sometime in the way of overrating their position. To a certain extend there was a motivation for the increase of competence and the improvement of performances. A negative process was that of the increase of frustration which leads to conflict managers-subordinates. A neglect of quality in favor of the quantity.
The researches of J.P.Dany (1966) and F.Schermer (1987) showed that once we passed over that step (which motivates the increase of competence) the efficiency of management diminishes so then for the reduction of anxiety if we don’t eliminate the cause then we resort to defensive devices. In this way the individual expresses his obedience to a person or to the rules, his conservatorism, his stereotyped thinking.
We must also take into account the fact that in that period they built a lot in Romania and in spite of the aspects mentioned before, the rumanian engineers didn’t neglect the safety devices and the resistance of the buildings. The proof is the resistance of these buildings to the last three earthquakes (1977, 1986, 1990).
2.3
Decision and styles in management in the transitional period
One might imagine that the fall of communism in Romania was followed immediately by a period of complete annihilation of the causes for an authoritative style in management. As we have already seen this style was founded to a high level of incertitude and gave birth to anxiety.
If we analyze the situation now we may point out that:
The state is still the main owner. The level of technical knowledge and technical equipment are approximately the same. There isn’t any longer the leadership of the party but there is a lack of funds for building. Prices rose.
As a result investment has considerably diminished. The construction managers and employees are almost the same, having a crystallized style in work and management. The result is inertia in acting through nchanges. There is a wide tendency of contesting authority at any level.
A quality project management requires a great deal of skill on the part of the management at the technical level of the project he is managing; at the interpersonal level of the human relations he has to handle and at the level of knowledge of good project management practices. The manager must cope with many differences in values and attitudes, must anticipate problems that may arise in connection with this project and must know how to act in order to solve them. In order to achieve these aims we must eliminate the causes which might disturb the management efficiency, or at least minimize their effects. We do this by:
Passing to a mate complete private property in construction, small firms having the advantage of accepting the leader, a larger mobility, smaller capitals and terms. Coopting new funds opening new construction sites by external investments. General straightening of economy. New education of the managers according to the new economical structure. Harmonization of the human relationship by increasing the living and cultural standard.
All these changes are meant to replace the authoritative style of management with a democratical one. This one is more stable but necessitates some conditions as: the possibility of finding and confronting alternative solutions, stable social relationships, the transition from the decision in incertitude top decision in terms of risk, which make possible the evaluation and the anticipation of the facts in terms of probabilities.
3 Conclusions
The paper tried to show that it is difficult to give categorical solutions which do not apply in Romania today, even though they were successful elsewhere. A comparative analysis made by R.T.Pascale and A.G.Athos (1981) among the
184 TRANSITION AND MANAGEMENT OF UNCERTAIN RESOLUTION