Understanding participatory management

1. INTRODUCTION

Participatory management is the practice of empowering employees to participate in organizational decision making. This practice grew out of the human relations movement in the 1920s, and is based on some of the principles discovered by scholars doing research in management and organization studies, such as the Hawthorne Effect. While senior managers still retain final decision making authority when participatory management is practiced, employees are encouraged to voice their opinions about their working conditions in a safe environment, protected from the potential defensiveness of middle managers who they might criticize. In the 1990s, participatory management was revived in a different form through advocacy of organizational learning practices, particularly by clients and students of Peter Senge. There is some criticism of participatory management (see Heckscher, below), particularly because it is difficult to combine this practice with a more financially oriented approach to restructuring that may require downsizing. (Wikipedia, 2010)

The participatory management model, or at least techniques for systematically sharing authority, has been with us for decades. In broad terms, the model concerns the delegation of decision-making authority to employees or representative groups of employees. It entails much more than the recognition that employees ought to be able to recommend changes or courses of action. In its purest form, which is the form to be addressed in this article, the participatory management model is premised upon the belief that actual authority should be transferred to and shared with employees. Whether you are responsible for setting up a new organization, a new NGO or CBO, a new department, or a new project, you want to ensure that the process of management will enhance the effectiveness of the organization. If we are on a Board of Directors, you will want to give advice to the managers that will make the organization stronger, but also most fair and humane. We may be a village chief looking to modernize your office and council. We may be the leader of a workers' organization, pressing for improvement in management that gives greater voice for staff, and more respect for and consideration of them. The guidelines here on how to make management more participatory will help you in our efforts.

1.2 The participatory management of people

Managing people volunteering their time and energy in community self help projects has many elements of experience that can be effectively used in managing paid staff in an organization. Do not expect their salary to be the only motivating force in getting the best out of staff. We can be reminded that although human labour, ideas and energy can be seen as resources or inputs for any productive activities, human beings are also the reason why we want the facilities and services in the first place, and why we want to empower low income communities to determine their own development destinies. When we mobilize people to organize and engage in community activities, they will give more of themselves if they are not burdened with the luxury of low self esteem. People who feel good about themselves produce good results. When mobilizing and organizing people, then, a good trainer or mobilizer will get better results in putting some effort into finding and using ways to encourage the people to feel better about themselves. It may be an immediate and thoughtless reaction, when you want a good thing produced and in a good manner, to criticize people when they do it incorrectly. People, however, are more willing to improve when the good things they do are praised and recognized than when attention is drawn to the mistakes they make, and they feel hurt by criticism of their mistakes. Help people reach their full potential; catch them doing something right. In other words, look for the good things people have done and draw attention to them, and they will work harder at continuing them, and improving them. When no attention is paid to their mistakes, they will quietly strive to improve them. People are less predictable and less able to be manipulated than tools and other inanimate things. Working with people requires more wisdom, energy and experience than working with things.

In terms of improvement of conditions and of long term and sustainable results, however, investing your time, your attention, your interest, in people, is far more valuable that the same amount of investment in things. The best minute we spend is the one we invest in people. Note the word "invest." It means that we are not just "giving, spending or wasting" our time and energy; we are "investing," and that means we can expect some valuable returns on our investment. We can easily get discouraged by seeing what people can not do. We are tempted to divide people into two categories; winners and losers. If we do that, we lose the potential of those we dismiss as losers. Everyone is a potential winner; some people are disguised as losers; don't let their appearances deceive you. If we spend some time and energy in helping those we see first only as losers, to win at something, we will reap considerable benefits in what we want to achieve. It is valuable to stand back from ourselves and neutrally observe our selves and our behaviour. We will see that we are human beings ourselves. We are not just our behaviour; we are the person managing our behaviour. If we want to be managers of people, we must then see that we must each manage the closest person we know; our self. Self management precedes management of other people. All people have desires, needs and wants. When they do something to reach them, they can be called goals. Goals begin behaviours for example the consequences maintain behaviours. The desire may be enough to begin action towards reaching a goal, but the results of those actions are important in continued action aimed at reaching that goal. Management and planning must start by the identifying and setting of goals general or objectives, specific and verifiable. We must not forget, however, that reaching those goals does not end with merely deciding what they should be. We must take actions that will encourage the achievement of those objectives. When people get discouraged, then they are likely to reduce their efforts. They need more than praise and exhortations to continue. They need to see some results that show them they are on the path to success. Only positive consequences encourage good future performance. Negative consequences result in a decline in the quality of efforts. Most people work well when they are supervised; they appreciate the interest shown in them as they work, and wish to demonstrate that they can work well. So when a coordinator or manager shows up, they work well. But do they work as well when the manager is absent? As a manager the important thing is not what happens when you are there but what happens when you are not there. A good manager ensures that the people who are working, volunteers or paid staff the same principle applies to both, work as well when not being supervised as when they are supervised. No one likes to feel criticized, and when they make mistakes, they do not want to feel belittled. The good manager learns how to ensure that when a worker makes a mistake that they learn from the mistake, and improve their work so as to avoid making the same mistake again. When a manager ends a reprimand with a praising, people think about their behaviour not the manager's behaviour.

Every one wants to know how well they are doing. Feedback is a very valuable activity for any manager to provide. Getting that feedback, the workers are motivated to try harder, and to sustain their efforts. Getting effective results is not a static condition, but a process. Achieving good performance is a journey not a destination. Putting management effort into a community project "once and for all," is like trying to eat "once and for all." Strive for excellence, not perfection. Anything worth doing does not have to be done perfectly at first, it can be improved.

1.3 Staff/Volunteer Participation in Decision Making:

Participation is a much used word these days; it means different things in different contexts. In training, the trainees benefit by participating in the activity being trained, they "learn from doing." In community work, participation means that the whole community, including those that do not usually speak up, participate in decisions that affect the future of the community. In games for example the poker, participation means that people are allowed to play engage in the gambling. Participatory management means that staff, not only the designated managers, have input and influence over the decisions that affect the organization. It is not the same as communal or co-operative management, where every staff member has the same weight in the decision making process. A voted majority, or a consensus, is not the final arbitrator for a contentious decision. In participatory management, the designated managers or manager still have or has the final responsibility for making decisions and answering for them, but members of the staff who are affected by those decisions are actively sought to provide observations, analysis, suggestions and recommendations in the executive decision making process. These guidelines can be used whole cloth when you are setting up a new organization, can be made as a major conscious decision for an ongoing organization, or can be slowly added piece by piece in an organization that is more monopolistic about decision making where decisions are made only at the top.

1.4  Benefits of Participation:

If we set things up as described below, we and our organization will benefit in many ways. Our organization will run better if our staff are more loyal, feel needed and wanted, feel that they are respected, and feel that their opinions count. If we pro-actively seek their input into management decision making, you will contribute to all those things. Decisions tend to be better when they can call on a wider range of knowledge, information and experience. No matter how wise and experienced a boss may be, she or he does not have as much experience as the total of all her or his staff. Trust is an important factor of leadership.

Participatory approaches usually mean that decision making is more transparent. That, in turn, increases the trust of the staff, and the leadership of the manager is increased. And transparency itself is an added benefit to this approach. When decisions are made in active consultation with the staff, there is less suspicion of illegal and immoral decisions being made in sneaky circumstances. As with community participation, the end result is that participatory management yields many benefits. There are a few costs, however, to obtaining participatory input. One is that it takes time to obtain it, and decisions are therefor slower than when they are made unilaterally. When staff argue for a particular decision, but the regulations, the budget, the board, or the head office do not allow that decision, then staff will be disappointed; some may even ask why they participated. It needs the manager to show that even though they all wanted a particular path to be taken, circumstances beyond management even beyond participatory management, hindered them from taking that path. When staff are hotly divided on a particular issue, this will be revealed when it appears as a management decision. Disagreements may affect the work. The manager must put in extra time and effort to reach a decision with staff participation, that will reduce that schism. While there are a few irritations in taking a participatory approach to management, the many benefits outweigh the costs. Ways to Channel Participation is if you choose to plan and implement a programme to increase staff participation in management decision making, and we encourage you to do so, you can devise many ways to make your organization more participatory. Participation in decision making requires good communication; the more channels you can open up, the more you can have staff participate in managing the organization. Every chance you get, look for ways to talk with staff. Let them show you their achievements and frustrations. Staff will quickly see if you are sincere or not. Do not do this in a superficial or perfunctory manner.

Develop a genuine interest in what they do. Show respect. Set up a routine and regular participatory management meeting. Set up special sessions that allow and encourage the staff input. Use job descriptions as your programme of increasing staff participation, and arrange annual review sessions to obtain staff input for making annual work plans. One way I found useful was to put up a sign behind me at may desk, "Management is far too important to be left only to the managers." When visitors in my office remarked on it, or asked about it, I used the opportunity to explain the value of staff input into the process of management decision making. Brainstorming is another method of pro-actively seeking participation in decision making. It is different than the others here in that it is aimed at communal decision making, not decision making that is moderated by the manager. It has its own separate module. Give them management training aimed at non-managers; at least an introduction to the four basic questions. Look at how your organization is running at present. Ask how  in what ways staff already participate in management decision making. Generate ways you think that they can be encouraged to participate more. Design your programme to be appropriate for the conditions you face, and choose only what will work.

2. PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT MODEL

2.1 Model of Participatory Management

This module aims to provide guidance for setting up management systems, especially for NGOs, assistance projects, departments and firms. The module includes material on various methods of increasing the participation of staff in the management of organizations, benefits of the method, and training related to increasing that participation. The core document on participatory management lists some of the reasons why a manager should work towards increasing the participation of staff in management meetings. The document then describes a few of the mechanisms available for doing so. The most important of these is the admonition to "pay attention" to staff, and thus to ensure a two way flow of communications. Some of those mechanisms have separate documents set out for them so as to be discussed in more detail. They include management meetings, using job descriptions, preparing a work plan, positive attitude, encouragement, and annual reviews. An important message is that it is how job descriptions are used, for review, negotiation and contracting, that make them a tool of participatory management, not the job descriptions themselves. The meetings document proposes a radical change in how meetings are conducted.

Complementary Modules: Management Training, Managing Mobilization

2.1.1 Positive attitude

A positive, problem solving approach is more productive and effective for the organization than a negative, problem raising attitude. The same applies in empowering communities. Problems exist. That is a fact of life. Making mistakes is a characteristic of being human. We all make mistakes. Some religious teachers tell us that only God or whatever name we have for a higher power is perfect; to err is human. So that means we, as managers, must be aware that people will make mistakes. That is a fact of life that we need to accept. It is how we respond or react to those mistakes that is crucial to good or bad management. If we get upset and complain or criticize the person or group that makes a mistake, we do not correct the mistake. We add to the problem.

A positive approach would contribute to the solution. We recognize that the mistake is made, but we emphasize the positive contributions of those who made the mistake. We build up the strengths, self esteem and self confidence of our staff or community members. Remember that a manager has only one resource, people; make them strong. Those people will not be as loyal, as enthusiastic, as motivated or as helpful when they feel they are being criticized, that their positive attributes are not recognized, or feel that they are worthless. They are not stupid; they know that they made a mistake. If they feel that they have the support of their leader in spite of the mistake, they will try harder. This is a recognized principle of good management. Management is a process of solving problems. If there were no problems then there would be no need for management. It is important to instil in everybody concerned not just the "boss" or the executive committee that it is their business to suggest solutions to the inevitable problems. Both community and organizational management training should include in its curriculum the encouragement of this attitude. One technique that can be taught is through the manipulation of words, which can be used to see any problem from a new perspective. One way, for example, is to write the problem down, on a piece of paper or up on a board in front of participants. Then cross off the word "problem" and write the word "opportunity" in its place. It is a simple tip, but can bring surprisingly good results. Most mobilizers and animators know the value of a good story, metaphor, parable or anecdote.

We all want to be respected and to be taken seriously. Our staff are no different. You can quickly alienate and discourage staff if you act as if they are not there, act as if they do not count (ie are not important), or act as if they are part of the room decorations. In contrast, if you listen to staff, ask their opinions, take them seriously, treat them wit respect, then they will respect themselves, the organization, and you, more. They will take their work more seriously; they will put in extra effort; they will be more productive. The more you can do this, then the more you exercise leadership. Participatory management, at the very minimum, means that a manager pays attention to her/his staff. Put that into all the methods mentioned in this document.

2.1.2 Management Meetings:

Another document in this module looks in more detail at management meetings. What is important here is that you can make management meetings an integral part of your programme to develop participatory management in your organization. Such meetings should be held routinely and regularly. If we absent ourself from meetings, or cancel them too often, our lower the respect and importance we show to them. Both us and our staff can schedule other work around the time we select. Do not select a time when it is likely that anyone outside our control can call a different meeting that we are obliged to attend. The optimum frequency is two weeks or a half month between meetings. Some managers meet weekly, others monthly. Choose what is most appropriate. Ensure that they are held on the same week-day and at the same time for every meeting.

Make every attempt to make these meetings decision-making meetings. It is so easy to waste time with formalities, and listening to individuals who like to hear themselves talk, wasting time on hearing information that everyone already knows, or should know. Do not allow verbal reports when those reports should have been written and circulated before the meeting. Meeting time should only be decision-making time. What is important here is that you want staff members to contribute to the management decision making process. Note also that meetings can be a burden rather than an asset if they are not conducted well. Not all of their suggestions will be automatically accepted, if they are contradicted by the board of directors or a steering committee with powers of making policy, the constitution or official policy document of the organization if it has one, the law of the land, the available budget for the organization, or its stated purpose, goals, objectives, strategy or other officially stated parameters. Suggestions that can not be followed through because of those limitations may be made by some staff members. Thank the staff member for his/her contribution, explain why it can not be accepted, and ensure them that management can only make executive decisions, and can not contradict policy.

Meetings are opportunities to let staff know how, in various ways, that they are valuable, have useful ideas to offer, and are respected. Just inviting them to attend meetings is not sufficient. They may feel that they have better things to do, especially if meetings are not productive and meaningful to them. It is necessary to ensure that their attendance is productive, and seen to be productive. It is OK to have different meetings for different categories of staff for example one for support staff and another for professional or line staff. Sometimes it is useful for the manager of the support staff to chair support staff participatory management meetings. If so, the overall manager should sit in the meetings to show interest and make sure that support staff know that they are needed and respected. If you ask a secretary or other support staff to take notes during management meetings, they may have to concentrate on recording and not participate fully in the decision making process. In such cases make sure that you spend time with that person, depending on the topics, asking for opinions. Consider giving staff some training, management training for non managers. The four key questions, and other management issues for non managers are included in the module, Management Training.

a. Groans:

If, during a relaxed discussion, you raise the issue of "meetings," more often than not you will get a response of groans. People think: "Too many meetings," "Boring meetings,”"Time wasting meetings,"  "Useless meetings." Too often, they are right. We waste too much unproductive time on meetings, and yet we are reluctant to do anything about that. As part of your programme of increasing staff participation in organizational decision making, you are in an excellent position to make some radical changes in how meetings are conducted, and doing so you can increase participatory management, and help your organization become more effective and stronger. This document is aimed at guiding you to do so. You can make changes if you spend some time: firstly carefully appraising what meetings produce today, and then being prepared to discard many assumptions about how to conduct meetings. The suggestions in this document may sound too unorthodox at first, but if you start with an open mind, not an empty mind, you will be able to make your own conclusions and make the necessary changes.

b. Purpose:

No meeting should be held if it does not have a purpose. If you look carefully at the meetings you now attend, ask what the purpose of each might be. Unfortunately, it looks as if the purpose of some meetings is: to let the boss hear him/her self talk, to let someone else hear him/her self talk, to act out a series of empty rituals, to keep staff members away from their regular work, to hear news about events we have already heard, to listen to verbal reports by people who should have written them, or to make it appear that some decisions are being made. The essence of management is to make decisions. If you are serious about participatory, management, you want to channel observations and analysis of staff members into the process of management decision making. Meetings can be a very effective mechanism to do so. For that to happen, you must decide that the purpose of management meetings is to make decisions. It should have no other purpose. If the purpose of a management meeting is to make decisions, then you must design it for making decisions.

c. Time:

A management meeting should only last long enough to make decisions. Any time above that is wasted time. When you attend meetings, do a little appraisal on your own. With a stop watch, time all the segments of the meeting which are unproductive. When someone arrives late, s/he wastes the time of all who arrived on time.If six persons wait ten minutes for a seventh person, then not ten minutes are wasted but six times ten minutes; one hour. If you are tolerant of people arriving late, then you are tolerant of wasting that time of all who arrive on time. Some people waste time by speaking:  repeating what has already been stated, adding information that is not relevant to the decision at hand, using unnecessarily flowery and redundant phrasing, correcting unimportant errors that do not affect the decision at hand, making speeches (grand standing), and making time-consuming use of protocol. So how long should a management meeting be? Well, it should not take longer than five minutes to make a decision, and there should not be more than three decisions (give or take a couple) to make. That means a meeting should be about fifteen minutes in length. Can you make a meeting be limited to that length?

d. Formalities:

Meetings for other purposes usually have a strict procedure. The agenda starts with reading and accepting the previous minutes, and moves on to business arising from those minutes. Then the agenda is discussed in detail, and decisions are made by someone making a motion, it is seconded, and then all vote on it. Such meetings are useful where the deliberations are highly political or contested, and where the participants represent different and competing organisations. For a management meeting, such formality is dysfunctional and should be eliminated. For a meeting to last only fifteen minutes, it will have three decisions to be made, which the meeting coordinator can list on the board, and allow only five minutes to come to a decision for each. Eliminate the traditional formalities completely.

e. Speaking:

Some people just love to hear themselves speak in a meeting. It does not matter to them that everyone already knows what they believe, and have heard the arguments before. The meeting coordinator should make it clear that such speeches are anti-productive and not invited to the management meeting. What is invited, and encouraged, is for the decision and its alternatives to clearly and briefly stated, for reasons why it should be made one way or another made, and for the decision made and recorded. The total time allowed for each decision must be five minutes, and anyone speaking must limit her or his time to allow all statements to take only five minutes.

f. Chairing:

The word "chairman" comes to us from the middle ages when the feudal king and his council would meet. Only the king had a chair, and "chairman" was a euphemism for the king who had complete control over the meeting. The others, who sat on the ground, on stools or carpets, always agreed with what the king said, if they wanted to keep their heads. Nowadays some people try to keep the word, but want to appear to be gender balanced so use "chair" or "chairperson" for the position, especially if it is held by a women often reverting to "chairman" when it is held by a man. In management meetings, we need to remove the word and its derivatives altogether. What the meeting needs is a "meeting coordinator." The meeting coordinator keeps the meeting co-ordinated, ensures that time is not wasted and that it is used only for making executive management decisions. If a meeting is only fifteen minutes long, there should not be any chairs available for any of the participants, including the coordinator. The secretary or support staff assigned to taking notes of the decisions may be given a chair, but no one else. If chairs are given to participants, they get too comfortable with the meeting, and automatically find ways, such as talking too much or becoming too formal, that will extend their comfort. Remove all chairs for participants in management meetings. The same might be said for offering refreshments during the meeting. Do not offer refreshments. This encourages meetings to become longer. Instead, invite everyone to the cafeteria, restaurant or bar, after the meeting is over. If it was done right, the meeting will have taken only fifteen or twenty meetings, so there should be enough time left over for enjoying the refreshments.

g. Records:

In orthodox meetings, minutes are kept. These are detailed descriptions of spoken events during the meeting. They may have a function in political and public meetings where there are different factions and the participants represent different organizations. There it might be necessary to have a written record of who said what. This is not needed for management meetings. What is needed is a meeting report, simple as a field trip report, with the date and time of the meeting, that lists only the decisions made. Who said what is not needed. Details are not needed. A meeting with four decisions should have a report, on a single page, that list the four decisions made by the participants. That meeting report should be completed in its final form within an hour of the end of the meeting, and distributed to participants on the same day.

h. Making Decisions:

The essence of management is making decisions for the organization. The essence of participatory management is the input of staff into making those decisions. A meeting is one mechanism for encouraging that input. Meetings should be simple, without formalities, should concentrate only on the decisions, and be short. Some decisions, such as selection of a new staff member, or finalising a budget, and some selected confidential and sensitive actions, might not be open to all staff members. Meetings should be co-ordinated, not chaired, and no chairs used by participants. If you are honest and careful, and appraise how much time is being wasted now in meetings, you will see the value of making meetings simple and focused on decision making. The difficulty then lies in breaking traditions, and just doing it. If there are issues that need to be digested, and information that needs to be given in detail to members, then do not misuse a meeting to do that. Instead, set up a short workshop, for as long as it is needed, for example an hour or three, to transfer the information or raise awareness. It can be done on the same day, or another. Do it professionally. Leave management meetings to concentrate only on making management decisions. Since staff members will not automatically understand these issues and the need to simplify management meetings, use this to make up a handout, and set up a half day workshop to impart the principles of participatory management in meetings. Ensure that there are lots of "learning by doing," sessions in your meetings workshop. It is simple. Simple is not the same thing as easy. There are many thoughtless assumptions and traditions practised in how meetings are run. You and your staff have an opportunity to remove tradition and add effectiveness. It might not be easy, but it will produce wanted and needed results.

2.1.3 Job Descriptions:

The way you use job descriptions can also be an opportunity for contributing to participatory management. Very often a job description is designed initially when an organization is set up. It might be written by a planner or an outside consultant. After its initial use, it is filed or lost and never seen again. Used that way, the job description contributes nothing to participatory management, and has little value. Regular reviews of a job description, by the concerned staff and his/her supervisor, modifying its content to reflect changing conditions and in response to changing tasks and responsibilities, then signing it by both staff and supervisor, can contribute to participatory management in many ways. It is not the job descriptions themselves, but how you use them, that contributes to participatory management.

In participatory management, decision making is still the responsibility of the designated managers, and it is not the same as collective or communal decision making with everyone having equal weight. What it needs, however, is that there is invited participation of all staff members in the decision making that affects the whole, or their particular segments or departments. Some of the important principles in participatory management are respect for the staff and transparency of decision making. Furthermore, when staff members are invited to participate in decision making, when they can feel safe and that they will not be punished for making unpopular suggestions, they bring to management a wider range of experience, knowledge, wisdom and training. Management as an element of organizational structure and process is noticeably strengthened by the addition of those elements. When the staff member is initially taken on as a member of the organization, she or he is hired in order to do a job, to do a specific set of tasks. That is what she or he is paid to do, and if she or he does not do them, then she or he knows that s/he is not in a secure position to keep the job. The definition of her/his set of tasks should be, from the beginning, set down on paper as a formal job description. Upon the hiring of the new staff, that new staff and his or her immediate supervisor should sit down and review each item on the job description, line by line, to ensure that both the staff member and the supervisor are well familiar with what the position entails.

At the end of this initial discussion, both the supervisor and the staff member should sign the job description. The new staff member should be encouraged to indicate which of the tasks listed in the job description can be done and which not. The supervisor can take some time to initially sketch how to do such tasks, and set up a time later for detailed instruction. Supervision and Staff Performance: The job description not only improves supervision, it is an integral part of supervision in participatory management. All staff members will do better, perform well, be more loyal, and make more positive suggestions and contributions, when their supervisors show interest in them, take time to see what they are doing, and are sympathetic to their difficulties and problems. This is not the same thing as standing over a worker and insisting on the staff member working hard; that will achieve the opposite result.

When a staff member and supervisor are very familiar with the job description, supervision can be much more positive, less stressful, and a process of co-operation instead of dictatorship. The mark of a good manager is that staff do well in her or his absence. Frequent review of job descriptions, line by line, allows the supervisor to make necessary field trips and missions, knowing that each staff member knows what to do and is willing to do it well. The job description should be seen as a non-monetary written contract between the staff member and the supervisor, legitimized by and in the organization. It sets out the tasks that the staff member should do, and the overall responsibilities. Some job descriptions include a list of required and desired qualifications and the document can then, perhaps, be called TORs –Terms of Reference. The signature by the staff member and supervisor should be seen as a necessary and integral part of the job description, and it should be stated that it is not valid until it is signed.

No job can remain static, especially on project work or programmes, and where conditions are changing. For that reason, every job description in an organization should be reviewed at least once a year by each staff member and supervisor. They should set aside an hour to go through the job description line by line, and indicate what tasks are no longer part of the job, what tasks have been changed, however slightly, and what new task have been added to the job. This session, taken out of the time and context of performing the tasks, gives the supervisor and staff member a chance to indicate that some tasks are inappropriate and should be dropped by mutual consent. Where a staff member does not want to do a task, and the supervisor insists that the staff member should do it, then the staff members should suggest an alternative method to get the task done if it is one necessary to the objectives of the organization, in a cost effective manner. Where such conflicts can not be resolved, the two should bring the issue to the attention of the supervisor's supervisor for reconciliation. Review of the job description gives the supervisor an opportunity to emphasize some important elements of the job, remind the staff member perhaps that some of the tasks are not being done as well or as often as needed, and to remind the staff member that taking on the job, and its tasks, is a decision made by the staff member. Conversely, it gives the staff member an opportunity to suggest better ways of doing thins more cost effective, more efficient, more easily accomplished, to point out some tasks that are redundant, unnecessary or negative to the goals of the organization. By dialogues both the supervisor and staff member are co-operating in participatory management of the organization.

The annual review by the staff member and supervisor, modification and updating of the job description, and signing the new job description, become a very important non-intrusive, calm and balanced form of supervision. If changes in the situation are more rapid, the job description should be similarly updated and signed more frequently than once a year. Review of each job description should never be left to more than a year later each time. Creation of job descriptions, initial and regular joint review by supervisors and staff members, regular and frequent modifications to reflect changing realities and conditions, and signing each updated job description, together make up an important element of participatory management.

2.1.4 Special Sessions:

By organizing special sessions, you have a further opportunity to encourage honest and candid contributions by the staff. The most necessary thing to remember is that such sessions can easily become superficial, for example for friendly but insubstantial exchanges and pleasantries, for repeating time-worn clichés and empty slogans, or for impressing the visiting VIP. As part of your programme, ensure that genuine contributions to organizational decision making are offered by staff. Special sessions can be set up for various occasions, including the visit of a VIP from the head office, from the government, or from a major donor agency. It can be for a major restructuring exercise, or a national event that calls for refection by all organizations in the country. The SWOT session, as part of an agency transforming from an emergency response the charity agency to a sustainable development empowerment agency, is an example of a special session. SWOT stands for "Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats," and can be used on many occasions as well as the one in that module aimed at transforming an agency or programme. The appearance of an organizational crisis, whether it has internal or external factors, or both, is also a good opportunity to organize a special occasion. The arrival of an outside intervening consultant, for example for management training or monitoring and assessment, are all further events that can offer opportunities for setting up special sessions in which you can encourage staff participation in management decision making.

2.1.5 Annual Reviews:

Conducting an annual review with all the stake holders in a development programme is an important and valuable way to get feedback on recent activities, and input to be inserted in the upcoming annual work plan. Similarly, an annual review for staff within a single organization can be if done right a useful way to review the past year, successes, failures, lessons learned, and to obtain suggestions that can be put into the next annual work plan for that organization. It is a good tool for exercising participatory management.

Make sure, when you conduct an annual review, that all participants attend and that no participant can be distracted by the calls of daily work or by issues at home, or by anything outside the review itself. It is therefore better to arrange that the meeting be held away from the location of the organization's office. A conference centre or a school or some other venue that an be temporarily converted into a conference centre that is away from any urban location, and without telephones, is best. Complement that choice of venue by announcing that all staff members should suspend their regular work, not allow any appointments on that day, be prepared to pay attention to the review one hundred per cent. You may find it interesting and useful to hire an outside experienced participatory appraisal (PRA, PAR) facilitator to conduct the review for you. Structure the annual review so that all will participate in decision making, all will feel safe and free to express their opinions. Ensure that the MC or facilitator thanks each participant for every contribution, even the less than popular suggestions. As well as just holding the annual review, it is up to you to ensure that staff are listened to, and that they feel they are listened to. They are important; show them that you know that. A manager has only one resource; his or her people; she or he succeeds or fails on their behaviour. Make sure that their suggestions and recommendations are reflected in the annual work plan, or that they understand why some might not be feasible.

Annual reviews can be different things in different contexts. This document describes how an annual review (AR) can be used as a mechanism of participatory management, and as a means for obtaining staff input into the planning and management of an organization. The main content of management is decision making. That decision making is practised in the context of planning, implementation and monitoring. That applies regardless of what kind of organization it is, an assistance project, a CBO or NGO, a private firm, a governmental or multilateral department or division. The annual review lies between monitoring and planning. Firstly is monitoring and assessing the implementation of the past year, and secondly planning the implementation of the upcoming year. While some annual reviews may involve various actors, including stake holders or development projects; this annual review description will focus on staff participation, and ways to obtain their input into the management process.

a.  Decision Making:

The objective of participatory management is to obtain staff decision making to put into the management process. Not all decisions, however. Both staff and managers have no control over some decisions, firstly is because of the policy of the board of directors, and then because of the law of the land, and also because of budgetary restrictions, or because of head office goals and objectives. Participatory management does not mean that the staff are the final arbitrators of decisions that affect the organization; it means that their wisdom, experience, observations and creativity are factored into the making of executive decisions. The staff members supplement and contribute to the work of managers. The annual review, therefore, should be designed and run in a way that maximizes staff input, within its limitations, and contributes to planning, implementation and monitoring.

b.  Focus on the Review:

Make sure that all the participants participate all the time. It is very easy for busy people to get distracted from review discussions. Ongoing work can intrude onto the discussions, as the people the staff work with clients, customers, stakeholders will phone or come to the office, and expect to be paid attention – to be answered. For that reason, the reviews should take place outside the locality of the workplace, and preferably outside any urban centre, away from phones, faxes and email. If the review is to take place over more than one day maximum two days is adequate, then they should be informed that they are expected to stay at the location of the review, in their assigned quarters. If a rural conference centre is not available outside what your budget allows, arrange with a school or rural extension centre or similar institution to provide space for the meeting and accommodation. Arrange with them or with a different caterer, for the meals during the review. The objective is to make it as convenient as possible for all the participants to attend the review at tall times, and not be tempted to find other tasks to do. It is also easy to get distracted from the review because of the nature of the review process itself. Sometimes there will be grievances, for example. If those complaints imply that a management decision must be made, then that is good, but it is easy for the discussion to spiral into the grievances without reaching any decision at all. It is important to ensure that all participants know that the annual review is intended to monitor activities and their results, and to draw lessons from them that will be useful in generating the next year’s work plan. In both the planning and the implementing of the annual review, it is necessary to set things up to that the focus will be on the review. The focus should be on all participants observing and assessing how actions and results went over the last year, and generating recommendation and suggestions for planning the oncoming year.

c. Make it Safe:

Some people will hesitate to speak out and be frank about events that happened in the organization. They may feel, often with some justification, that they may be punished in various ways by their supervisors by being critical. You must find ways to draw out of them observations that can lead to suggestions which will improve output next year, without their feeling that they will suffer as a result. One way is to communicate an important management principle known by the slogan, "You do not have to be bad to get better." In the training document, management training, you see that this slogan is used as a positive way for a supervisor to suggest improvements in a staff member without being negative about past actions.

A manager can get much more out of staff by avoiding negative criticism. In the annual review, you reverse the situation, letting staff know that if they have complaints and criticisms about the organization or its activities, they can express them as positive recommendations for changes, rather than dwell on what was done incorrectly in the past. Let the staff know that this will be better for avoiding the fear of reprisals for criticizing their supervisors. See Sandwich. In the context of the annual review, it helps make the environment a more safe place if the manager plays a role as just one of the staff. Below, it is recommended that you hire a professional facilitator to facilitate the review process. The facilitator becomes the "MC" (Master of Ceremonies), and the managers become regular participants just like the other staff members.

 This has somewhat of an "equalizing" effect which helps make the review more of a safe place for staff members. Another way is for the manager or managers to be humble and show that they are human; not pretending to be gods. An opening icebreaker is mentioned below in setting up the agenda. The manager or managers should not stand apart and watch an icebreaker; that completely defeats its purpose. They should participate fully in the icebreaker, even if it means being courageous and abandoning or setting aside one's symbols of pride and status. Participants should not feel that they are under scrutiny or being observed by outsiders. You must make it your policy and stick to it that there will be no observers. If you are forced to have visitors, such as representatives from a donor agency, Government officials, head office representatives or VIPs of any persuasion, then let them know that they may only attend as full participants. They must participate in all sessions. This includes that they should participate in the ice breakers described below. The most important way to reduce fear that will hinder staff from providing honest assessments of the past year, is to let them know that there will be no reprisals for candour, and tell the truth when you do.

d. Use a Facilitator:

There are many reasons why you should use a facilitator to co-ordinate and run the annual review. Putting the manager in a position resembling equality with the staff, mentioned above, is only one of them. That will help them feel more safe in making candid observations or recommendations. The facilitation of participation in appraisal is hard work, and requires concentration, training and experience. It must be recognized that a PRA facilitator, apart from everything else, is engaging in a performance. If a manager does the facilitation at an AR, then that manager has less mental energy left over for listening. Yes, it is difficult to tie shoe laces and chew gum at the same time. At all times, most especially during an annual review, it is the task for the manager to listen to staff members. Employing a professional to facilitate the participation of staff in appraising the organization or its work, allows managers to spent more time, rightfully on listening to what staff members are saying. If not given your guidance, however, a professional facilitator trained and experienced in PRA or PAR techniques may be inclined to allow the appraisal to be completely unstructured. So as to ensure that the discussion is focused on the activities and results of the past year, and on recommendations for the annual work plan for the upcoming year, the facilitator must be completely briefed on the goals or policy of the organization and, if they are explicit and written, the specific objectives and outputs of the project or organization. The facilitator must be briefed to keep the discussion on those two topics.

e. Plan the Agenda:

You must spend enough time, perhaps a half day, with the facilitator, to plan the agenda. Ensure that the facilitator knows what you want her or his role to be in obtaining the objectives of the annual review. All the key elements must be included in the agenda:  no formal opening;  at least one icebreaker to relax the participants and set the ambience out of the daily work environment; various sessions that use props and gimmicks to obtain input through un-orthodox methods;  sessions to obtain observations and analysis of what went on during the previous year;  suggestions to obtain recommendations and suggestions of what to include in the work plan for the following year; and finally  a simple closing session that reminds participants what went on, no formal speech by a VIP.

See the document on Preparing a Workshop. Use it in planning the agenda with the facilitator. It is best to have the agenda written out on a single sheet of paper, handed out as participants arrive. If there are any visitors, ie people who are neither staff nor managers, they should be introduced to the other participants, at which time it should be repeated that they are not here to observe, but to participate. This is a working session, and should not be treated as an international conference or seminar. Specifically, the annual review should not be formally opened with speeches by any VIP. In your agenda, at the beginning of the review, plan to have an icebreaker. This is a humorous session aimed at breaking down day-to-day social relations, especially those based on respect and duty towards supervisors, on and roles in the organization that contribute to its social structure. See the document: Icebreakers, for more information about this kind of session. The message that an icebreaker sends is that this session is not part of day-to-day work in the project or organization. As mentioned above, the annual review should have no observers. It is intended mainly for staff and managers. If there must be guests, and this in not encouraged, then those guests must participate, and participate especially in the icebreakers. In the icebreaker document, it is explained that the icebreaker session is one which sets the tone of the whole workshop. It communicates that all participants, managers and staff alike, must not take themselves seriously, should not think they are any more important than any other participant, and that they must be able to laugh at themselves. The same applies to organizing an annual review,  this will encourage more honest and comprehensive input from all participants. When designing your agenda, make sure that you carefully explain the objectives of the workshop.

The participants must all work together as a group to assess what has gone on before, and provide inputs into what is to go on ahead. This should be communicated both verbally and on paper. It is OK to be redundant to be sure the message gets across. While working with the facilitator, indicate that you expect varied participatory sessions. They should not all be the same. It is good to have light sessions, where the participants, working in small groups perhaps, do some cutting, drawing or designing, using markers, scissors, coloured construction paper, newsprint or other props and supplies. It is good to give simple physical tasks to be done by small groups by co-operation. This encourages team work, good for the review and good for the organization. The facilitator or reporter may sum up the annual review with a list of what observations and recommendations were offered and recorded. As with the opening, there should be no closing speeches or remarks by any VIP.

f. Assign a Rapporteur:

While it is important to avoid having observers, it is necessary to have a review reporter. This is best someone known to all staff. It could be a support staff member, such as a secretary, skilled in taking meeting notes. It is then advised that you provide him or her with a small honorarium, perhaps about a hundred dollars, for giving up the chance to be a full participant in order to take accurate notes and write up a session report. As with participatory management meetings, the report should emphasize only decisions, except that for the annual review it should list them in the form of observations about the past year and recommendations for the coming year. It should be ready as a first draft at the end of the day the annual review is held. It should be edited by the manager and distributed to all participants by the end of the day following the annual review. The agenda may be attached to the form to indicate what sessions were undertaken. Discussions about who said what are not necessary in the review report. At the wrap up of the review, the report, in draft form, can be read out to the participants. This can be done by the reporter or the facilitator. The written report, after some proof reading and tidying, can be circulated later, but not too much later.

g. Annual Work Plan:

The annual work plan (AWP) for the coming year should be produced shortly after the annual review. It should list the major goals of the organization or project. It may include some of the outputs or objectives, with an emphasis on those which will be most prominent in the following year. It might elaborate on some of the needed strategies needed in order to reach them. The recommendations and suggestions that were recorded in the annual review should be reflected in the AWP. The report of the annual review should be attached as an appendix to the AWP. Any suggestions coming from the annual review, which can not be exercised because of head office policy, laws of the land, budget restraints or other over-riding reasons, must be pointed out and explained in the AWP. The AWP with those items might be used as a tool to lobby for changes in any of those over-riding issues. The annual review (AR) is an excellent mechanism for channelling the participation of staff members into the management decision making process. It takes their observations and analyses as input for monitoring and assessment. It takes their suggestions and recommendations as input for planning. Implementation during the following year should follow the annual work plan which, in turn, should reflect the inputs from staff that were generated by the annual review.

2.1.6 Work plan

Here are recommendations and guiding principles for writing six-month or one-year work plans. This document is written in the context of participatory management. You need to set up an environment where staff and managers can work together to produce the work plan. The best timing for preparing a work plan is within a few days following a review. For an annual work plan (AWP) this means a few days after the Annual Review (AR). Most importantly, the plan should be printed and circulated among all the participants within a few days of being made. Transparency is vital to participatory management. In many ways, a work plan resembles a proposal, except that the overall budget may be already approved, or is conditional on the work plan. As in all planning, whether as a group process or not, you should think backwards, starting with where you want to be at the end of the period, and generate the steps needed to get there from where you are now, and review the four key questions of management and use that as a skeleton for your discussions and thinking.

A work plan is a tool for planning during a specific period of time (6 or 12 months) that identifies the problems to be solved, and ways to solve them. It is a standard management tool. When staff participate in management, they need to learn what it is. In setting up an environment for staff to participate in making a plan, you also set up a learning process. This set of guidelines is aimed coordinators and managers for working with their staff or clients. The writing of work plans is not specifically unique, however, and the advice contained herein is useful for all planners, managers, and implementors, of governmental ministries, NGOs and private sector organizations. If you involve staff in generating or designing a plan, then this document can be given to them to assist them in learning things needed to make management a participatory process. The plan is the guide for the organization, and when staff participate in preparing it, they are more likely to "own" it and use it during implementation. From the beginning, it is important to get rid of two assumptions about work plans: firstly, that a work plan consists only of a budget, and secondly that a work plan consists only of a schedule. Many managers are disappointed when their work plans are rejected when they have made these incorrect assumptions. Many funding agencies and many executing agencies require a work plan in order to justify the release of funds for the period in question. Because of this, many managers incorrectly assume that the budget is the centre or only the element of the work plan. Far from it. The budget is necessary, or course, but every item on the budget needs to be justified. That justification is the text of the work plan itself (while the budget is best included as an appendix to the work plan) which is the subject of this document.

The second incorrect assumption is that a schedule is a work plan. A coordinator may struggle to prepare a schedule, listing the tasks to be done, day by day, for the period in question. While a schedule is useful, of course, it is not a work plan. Furthermore, although a schedule can be a desired list of day by day activities, in the real world such precise lists can not be followed. Other urgent tasks come up, unexpected visitors for example donors or distant VIPs, may show up, planned meetings may have to be rescheduled as the other parties may have unexpected tasks or visitors, and on and on. Rather than a rigid schedule, this document recommends that each of the outputs or objectives have a time period within which the completion date may be expected, which is an organic and flexible approach rather than the mechanical approach to preparing a schedule. Once these two incorrect assumptions are discarded, then it is possible to go on and prepare a genuine work plan. The following provides guidance in doing so. A work plan is an argument; it is written to plan the activities for a given period of time, first so as to convince decision makers for its approval, then as a guiding document for the activities to be carried out during that time period. The purposes of a work plan are several. The main purpose, however, is often forgotten; it is a planning and management instrument tool which provides a framework for planning the work, and is a guide during the period in question for carrying out that work. It is also used by funding agencies and executing agencies as a document for justifying the release of money and this is why the first purpose can easily be forgotten; some managers see it as a necessary inconvenience, rather than a useful tool for their own work. It is also a useful document contributing to transparency, as copies of the work plan can be given to those persons or organizations who have a need or a right to know what you are doing, and why, during the current period and some ways a work plan is very similar to a proposal.

The difference is that a work plan is based upon a project already approved, and identifies a specific time segment within that project or programme. It identifies as goals the problems to be solved, makes them finite, precise and verifiable as objectives, indicates the resources needed and constraints to be overcome, outlines a strategy, and identifies the actions to be taken in order to reach the objectives and complete the outputs. A proposal does much the same, but for the whole time period of the project, and it is written prior to project approval as a justification for approval. In order to obtain the resources, including the finance indicated in the budget, the work plan serves as justification for the release of funds. When approved, the work plan serves as a guide to actions to be taken in order to reach the objectives, written so as to be transparent to anyone, inside or outside the implementing group, in describing those objectives, and outputs, and justifying the actions to be taken. A work plan therefore serves the needs of implementors, target groups beneficiaries, managers, planners, committees and boards and the donors, not only of projects, but also of programmes, and organizations that work independently of project documents. A work plan is an argument. An argument is a logical order of linked statements, where each one is logically derived from its previous one. The list of chapters described below is a list of kinds of linked statements that together comprise the whole argument.  To make the argument simple and easy to read and understand, only the argument is put into the text of the work plan, and all accompanying details are attached as appendices at the end of the document. The work plan, as an argument, can be described as follows: firstly, there is a problem, or problems selected for logical reasons. Secondly they call for a solution; thirdly the solution is the work plan which includes a list of goals, objectives and actions which are part of a strategy; and then the strategy is based upon what those problems are to be solved and what resources are available to be converted into solving the problems and what hindrances are to be overcome. The goals and objectives when accomplished are the output of the project, while the resources when used are the inputs of the project, and the aim of the strategy is to convert inputs into outputs. The optimum length for a work plan is either six months or twelve months. A three month work plan is too short, considering the amount of time and effort needed to prepare the plan. A twenty four month work plan might be too long, because many conditions change during a whole year, and by the end of the year the objectives and priorities may have have all become different. They should follow annual reviews.

This is not a rule written on stone tablets. Needless to say, there may be specific reasons why a work plan should be shorter than three months or longer than six months. This chapter describes what you should include in your work plan, and how to construct it. It includes the following parts:  Abstract or Executive Summary;  Introduction and Background (The Problems);  Goals and Objectives (The Outputs);  Resources and Constraints (The Inputs);  Strategy and Actions (from Inputs to Outputs);  Appendices (Budget, Schedule and Others).

6.1  Abstract or Executive Summary

Write this part last, and make sure it is a summary, not an introduction. The optimum size is one or two paragraphs covering a half a page. In a short work plan the introduction and background can be combined into one short chapter. A long work plan may look better and is more likely to be read if they are separated into two chapters.  The Introduction should introduce the work plan. This sounds so obvious when written like this, but many planners and managers get carried away with long, historical and analytical introductions which discourage or bore the readers before they get to the actual planning part of the work plan. Do not repeat or copy much text from the ProDoc or proposal; limit your text here to material relevant only to the period covered by the work plan.

6.2 Introduction and Background

The Background begins a logical argument that leads to the selection of objectives (outputs) that are planned to be reached or attained during the planning period. This section includes the relevant Problems and Issues that should be addressed during the period covered by the work plan. The background should not be a long analysis or history; provide only the issues that justify the choice of objectives for the period of time in question. The background should contain the information gleaned from the previous six month or quarterly report, especially the recommendations or any relevant changes in conditions in the environment that have affected the project, or may affect the projec or any relevant effects or results of project activities that may call for changes in the project desig or relevant paragraphs in appropriate documents, including Policy or Programme documents and any other references that will justify your selection of objectives and outputs for the planned period.  The project document or whatever other relevant document that is used for justifying the objectives identified in your work plan may be long and may include many separate objectives or outputs. Not all of them need be addressed during the time period covered by your work plan. The background section of your work plan should include logical arguments why you have selected some of them, and why you have not included the others. You should not copy or repeat the background information of the core document for example a project document, programme document, proposal, or policy paper; that information was useful for justifying the overall project or programme but not for the specific time segment of your work plan. In the background section of your work plan, you should include only information or references that refer specifically to those outputs and objectives you wish to achieve during the period covered by the work plan.

6.3: Goals and Objectives:

In other CMP guidelines it was pointed out that goals, objectives and outputs are different but related things. A goal is broad and general, the solving of the problem that has been identified. A goal can never be achieved or verified as achieved because it is not specific, finite, concrete or verifiable. A goal can point to an objective, in contrast, because an objective is more specific, is finite, has a completion date, and can be verified. Objectives are derived or generated from the goals.  The work plan should have a logical progression from the introduction and background to the goals and objectives. Where the background explains the selection of the problems to be solved, the goals define the solutions to those problems, while the objectives are more precise, finite and verifiable derivations of the goals. The Goals for your work plan, as solutions to the problems raised in your background section, must be stated here, then used to generate the specific objectives. The Objectives should be chosen from among the objectives of the project document or relevant equivalent, as mentioned earlier, or they should be derived from new problems arising and identified in the previous progress report and described in the background section of your work plan. Objectives are derived from each goal. They should be written down here, and their completion date be identified as some specific time within the period covered by the work plan. Do not necessarily include all the objectives listed in the project document or equivalent.  Choose only those objectives which are appropriate for the time period covered by the work plan, and justified in the background identification of problems section described above. The selected objectives of the work plan or outputs, if they are more specific than the objectives from which they are derived are the central elements of the work plan. They provide the justifications for the actions to be taken and the costs incurred. They are the core of the work plan. They indicate where you want to get to by the end of the period covered by the work plan.

6.4: Resources and Constraints:

As with the introduction and background, resources and constraints can be one chapter or two, depending upon how long your whole work plan may be. The Constraints section should identify any restrictions or hindrances that must be overcome in order to reach the objectives. Include also a short description of how you plan to overcome them. The Resources section should indicate what (potential) inputs can be identified that will contribute to reaching the identified and selected objectives. Do not dwell too much on financial resources, but instead direct the reader to the appendix that contains the budget. Include resources that are not necessarily liquid cash at this time; including staff and other personnel for example the volunteers, partners from the organizations and individuals, consultants, land, capital, supplies, equipment, other inventory that can be used, sold or traded, and anything at all that is available to be mobilized and used in reaching the identified objectives.

6.5: Strategy and Actions:

As with other paired sections above, the strategy and actions sections can be put into one chapter or two. Together, they explain how you intend to go about converting inputs into outputs. The Strategy section of your work plan should indicate how you intend to convert your resources, overcome the constraints, using those identified inputs resources to reach the objectives or attain the outputs specified in the previous chapter. In the best of work plans, several alternate strategies are listed, one is then chosen, and the reasons for the choice is given. Your work plan may not be long, and the provision of alternatives may be left out. Decide if we should include alternatives or not. Strictly speaking, Actions belong to inputs rather than outputs. Actions primarily belong to strategy because they are the activities that convert inputs into outputs. Where the goals and objectives are among the outputs of what comes out of the project, the resources are among the inputs of what goes into the project. Let the action be clearly derived from the strategy, which identifies how the inputs are to be converted to outputs. Each action listed in this section should be related to one of the outputs objectives, goals, and it should be clear how the described action will contribute to reaching its respective objective.

6.6: Appendices, Including Budget and Schedule:

The text of your work plan include the chapters described in 3.1 to 3.5 above. The purpose of appendices, now, is to supplement that text, ie to provide details that support the argument included in the text. Budgets and schedules are among such details. The Budget for the work plan should be placed in an appendix, not in the main text of the work plan. Important as it is, it is not part of the argument of the work plan, but is a list of details that supports the argument. It can be the first appendix. Each of the budget items should relate to one or more of the objectives as the outputs. Some budget items for example transport, postage, photocopying, phones, e-mail must be arbitrarily divided among several outputs, because they support all of them. No budget item should be included that does not relate to some identified portion of the text of the work plan.

The Schedule of the work plan is optional. Some coordinators feel that they must plan for every day in the period. What is recommended here is that completion dates for each of the stated objectives or outputs are listed in order, and that a reasonable length of time be allotted to each; eg one output can be completed on one day between two stated dates, say, a week apart. This is more flexible and reasonable. Dates of actions to be taken are therefore optional. If there are any other details, such as lists, that are mentioned in the text the argument of the work plan, they can be included as appendices, where they will not clutter up or clog the argument. These are optional. The text must refer to each appendix where appropriate. No appendix should be included unless it is referred to in the text. The appendices therefore provide necessary details, but are put at the end of the work plan where they will not hinder the reader from seeing the continuity of the whole argument, and how each of the above described chapters link, one to the next. Note the inclusion of appendices in the structure and outline of the work plan. These are essential parts of the whole work plan, especially the budget, but they are put into appendices at the end of the work plan for an important purpose. The text of the work plan is composed of several chapters include the introduction, background, goals, objectives outputs, resources, constraints, strategy, actions. Together, these comprise a single argument, and every chapter is related to each of the others.  The background identifies the problems; then The goal defines solutions, then  the objectives outputs refine the goals, specific and verifiable; then 

The resources and constraints indicate what can and cannot be used to reach the objectives; and then  The strategy, along with specific or precise actions, indicates how the inputs will be converted to outputs. The logic that links these chapters together constitutes an argument. That argument should be easy to follow, written in very simple vocabulary and grammar, and easy and smooth in linking one chapter to the next. To make the argument more visible, more transparent, details, especially those related to finances the budget and other detailed lists, are put into appendices. Remember, the complete text of a work plan is a single logical argument, with each chapter linking to the one before and after it. The appendices provide details that support the argument, but they are not included in the text so that they will not clutter up the argument. A work plan is a necessary tool for planning, executing, implementation and monitoring any project, or any ordered set of activities, a project or a programme. It is composed of a logical argument forming the text, and an accompanying set of appendices that provide details to support the logical argument. This guidelines document has provided some details about the form and content of a work plan, and can be read in conjunction with related guidelines on report writing and proposal writing.

3. STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS OF PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT

3.1 Advantages

There are some advantages of the participatory management. Firstly the organization will run better. The staff also more loyal to the manager and to the management above. Beside that, the staff also feel needed and wanted and also they feel that they are respected and their opinions count. Then, the decisions also tend to be better and the decision making is more transparent too. It also increases the trust of the staff, and increased the leadership of the manager

3.2 Disadvantages

From the weaknesses of the participatory management, firstly it takes time to obtain and the decisions which are make from the meeting or the discussion are slower. For examples the manager suggest that coming to the office earlier and they can go back earlier from usual. Maybe the suggestion was received some staff and the other are not agree. It makes the discussion get slower.

4. ROLES OF MANAGERS UNDER PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT

From the roles of managers under participatory management model, firstly the managers can brainstorming the staff and they paying Attention with the idea from staff. Then, they have to set up the Management Meetings and make the Special Sessions too. Giving the Job Descriptions is also required and lastly make the annual review to make sure that all the problem solved.

5. RECENT EXAMPLES

There are some examples in participatory management. I brought three examples including from the higher education, from secondary education and from a primary education. From the Higher education , the UMctes by University of Malaya give the space to the student to give their comment and opinion to the lecturer, the condition of the class, the lecturer and the resources. This can improve the grade of the lecturer and it also increased the quality of the learning process in the University. From the Secondary and primary education , parensts and teachers association also can be the example of the participatory management. The parents participate in discuss with the teachers about the students and finally they will make the suggesting and the decision together.

3. CONCLUSION:

Participatory management can improve the effectiveness and capacity of an organization. It lies among the sixteen elements of organizational capacity." It contributes to good leadership by management. It contributes to increased transparency in organizational decision making. Among the slogans that direct you to god management, the phrase, "Do not work hard; get results." That is the strategy of good managers. If someone is working hard, she or he is not managing. The only asset of a manager is people. If those people are more dependable, loyal, willing to work their all and give the extra effort, if they trust their leaders and know that they are safe, then the output and efficiency, thus the capacity of that organization will be much higher. The more you can delegate decision making and responsibility, the more trust and loyalty your staff will have in you. The more effective will be the organization, and the more you will succeed as a manager. Asses your situation in the organization. Appraise what elements of participatory management indicated here can be added to what you have, or what existing elements can be enhanced within the organization. Generate strategies for increasing participatory management. Use these guidelines and do not blindly copy them to create your own programme of increasing participatory management, a programme that is sensitive to conditions and lies within the parameters that delimit your action.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Jaime Herrera S.,( 2001) Participatory management, teamwork and leadership: key requirements for the success of organization in the twenty-first century. Expert in human-resource development and organizational development San José, Costa Rica –

 

Phil Bartle . Running a Project, an NGO, a Department or a Firm, PhD

 

Ronald L. Gilardi. Participatory Management theory and financial decision making. School of Library and Information Science University of Western Ontario

Phil Bartle, PhD (2007) PARTICIPATORY MANAGEMENT: Methods to Increase Staff Input in Organizational Decision Making

http://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-d/hrdqpub/hrdq/hrdq86/part_ww7.doc

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=4&oq=PARTICIPATORY+&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4RNWN_enMY277MY286&q=participatory+management

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_management

http://www.scn.org/cmp/modules/pm-pm.htm