CASE STUDIES
CHAPTER 11 CONTROLLING
At first glance, the term 'controlling' may be difficult for Christians to accept, for it seems to contradict the ideas of love, humility and dignity that have been discussed as foundational for Christian managers. However, control in this context does not mean domination and command as the term seems to imply. Instead, it refers to the process of monitoring the progress of a project or organisation against the goals that were setinthe planning phase.
Control is the process of monitoring activities to ensure that they are being accomplished as planned and of correcting any significant deviations
(Robbins and Coulter 1995:576) The process of controlling involves three major elements (Scanlan 1973:455; Robbins and
Coulter 1995:557). First, performance goals must be established. Second, a system of collecting, interpreting and evaluating information must be developed. Third, action must be taken to correct discrepancies between the ideal and reality. Controlling is only effective when it leads to changes in organisational performance (Newman and Warren 1977:453).
There are three types of controlling. The first, precontrolling, takes place before work begins. It involves anticipating possible problems and introducing systems to prevent them from occurring (Certo 2000:430; Robbins and Coulter 1995:563-564). For example, the chairman of the East End Mission was aware that misappropriation of funds might become a problem in some of the mission projects. Consequently, he advised the executive that one of the requirements that should be met before a project receives funding is that an appropriately trained person is appointed as treasurer and must agree to keep detailed financial statements.
The second type of controlling is concurrent controlling. This takes place while work is being carried out and involves monitoring the performance of employees, equipment and any other factors (Certo 2000:430; Robbins and Coulter 1995:563-564). In all of the initiatives surveyed, this was the most common form of controlling and generally involved informal discussions with
staff members about problems that had arisen or spontaneous responses to immediate needs.
Some examples of concurrent controlling from the case studies are listed below:
• The principal of the pre-school would sometimes sit in on a teacher's class to observe her skills in teaching and relating to children. Problems would be discussed after the lesson.
• A member of the executive of the East End Mission visited a number of the local projects and met with project leaders to assess how effectively the initiatives were functioning.
• The chairman of the Ubunye project visited the staff from time to time to find out how they were coping.
While these examples represent important types of controlling, the way in which they were implemented would be described by Newman and Warren as lacking in 'consistency and predictability' (1977:526). The need for a structured approach to controlling is important,
especially when the control process indicates a need for performance modification of employees.
If controlling is not built into the operating system of an organisation and understood and expected by all employees, the required modifications are likely to be met with resentment and hostility (1977:526).
Lastly, feedback controlling is concerned with analysing previous organisational performance and attempting to improve performance in the future. This generally includes an analysis of how well the organisation has reached its objectives (Certo 2000:430; Robbins and Coulter 1995:563- 564). This process should be intertwined with the planning process, especially given the earlier statement that planning is to be considered an ongoing activity (Cusworth and Franks 1993:38;
Robbins and Coulter 1999:212). When discrepancies between objectives and reality are noted, plans must be modified such that objectives are more likely to be reached.
None of the initiatives surveyed had undertaken any formal evaluation, whether internal or external, of their effectiveness in reaching objectives. While the East End Mission is too young to warrant such evaluations at this stage, the leaders of the other three initiatives acknowledged that it would probably be a good idea to conduct formal evaluations. In terms of management theory, they would need to revisit their objectives as defined at the beginning of the project and
evaluation were built in, however, internal evaluations are likely to involve subjective
comparisons between objectives and current outcomes. An external evaluator may provide some more objective insights, but evaluation is difficult without predetermined approaches to
measurement. One of the most useful products of the process of controlling would thus be a revised set of clear, detailed objectives accompanied by well thought-out methods of measurement to aid future evaluations.
In 1977, Warren and Newman wrote that 'controlling in not-for-profit ventures is still in an elementary and uninspiring stage' (1977:526). Itwould appear from the case studies that this statement is still relevant to faith-based development initiatives in 2001. One of the greatest challenges to churches, therefore, is to ensure that all three types of controlling are introduced as an integral part of the management ofthese initiatives. If this is done, there is a much greater chance that original objectives will be met effectively and that the initiatives will be able to run smoothly and efficiently.
CHAPTER 12