CIPS L5M1 - Managing Teams and Individuals

The Taylorism school of thought, also known asScientific Management, was developed byFrederick Winslow Taylorin the early 20th century. It aimed to improve efficiency and productivity by applying systematic, scientific methods to the management of work. Its key principles can be summarised as follows.

The first principle is thescientific study of work. Taylor rejected traditional “rule of thumb” methods, instead advocating time-and-motion studies to identify the most efficient way of completing tasks. This broke jobs into smaller, measurable steps.

Secondly, Taylor emphasised thedivision of labour and specialisation. Workers should focus on narrowly defined tasks, allowing them to become faster and more efficient, similar to parts in a machine.

Thirdly, he argued forscientific selection and training of workers. Instead of leaving workers to train themselves, managers should select the right person for the job and provide formal training in the “one best way” to complete tasks.

Fourthly, Taylor stressedmanagerial control and supervision. He believed management should plan, organise and set methods, while workers should focus on carrying them out. This created a strong separation between planning and execution.

Finally, Taylor promotedfinancial incentives as motivators. He assumed that workers are primarily motivated by pay, so piece-rate systems and performance-based rewards were used to encourage higher output.

Taylorism brought many benefits, such as increased productivity, efficiency, and predictability in mass production industries. However, it also attracted criticism for treating workers like machines, reducing autonomy, and ignoring social and psychological needs. From a modern procurement perspective, its ideas are still visible in standardised processes such as purchase-to-pay systems, KPIs, and efficiency-driven shared services. However, organisations today often balance these principles with more human-centred approaches to motivation and teamwork.

In conclusion, the key principles of Taylorism were scientific analysis of work, specialisation, scientific selection and training, strict managerial control, and financial incentives. While its focus on efficiency shaped early management thinking, modern leaders must also consider motivation, empowerment, and adaptability to achieve sustainable success.

Definition (5 points):

Alienation at work refers to a state where employees feel disconnected, powerless, or estranged from their job, their colleagues, or the organisation. The concept, linked to Karl Marx’s theory, highlights situations where workers feel that they have little control, little purpose, and no personal fulfilment in their role. Alienation often leads to low motivation, disengagement, and reduced productivity.

Five Factors that Cause Alienation (20 points):

Repetitive and monotonous work– Jobs that involve the same routine tasks every day can make employees feel like “cogs in a machine.” For example, a procurement clerk only processing invoices with no involvement in decision-making may quickly feel alienated.

Lack of autonomy– When employees have no control over how they do their work, they feel powerless. In procurement, if buyers must follow rigid procedures without input into strategy, they may feel disengaged.

Poor leadership and communication– Alienation grows when managers fail to involve employees, communicate decisions, or provide feedback. Staff may feel undervalued and excluded from organisational goals.

Weak connection to organisational purpose– If employees cannot see how their work contributes to wider goals or society, they may feel their role lacks meaning. For instance, working in a cost-cutting environment without recognition of social value or sustainability can reduce motivation.

Lack of recognition or development opportunities– When employees feel their contributions are ignored, or they see no path for growth, they disengage. In procurement, failing to recognise successful negotiations or not offering training can create a sense of alienation.

Conclusion:

Alienation occurs when employees feel disconnected from their work, leading to low morale and performance. It can be caused by repetitive tasks, lack of autonomy, poor leadership, absence of purpose, and lack of recognition. For managers, reducing alienation means creating meaningful work, involving employees in decisions, and supporting development, which leads to higher engagement and productivity in procurement and supply functions.

Organisations can be understood in many different ways through metaphors, which help managers and leaders interpret behaviour, culture and performance. Morgan’s metaphors are widely used to explain these perspectives. Five key metaphors are explained below.

The first metaphor is theorganisation as a machine. Here the business is seen like a well-oiled mechanism with standardised processes, clear rules, hierarchy and repeatable outputs. This works well for efficiency and control, for example in a procurement shared services function, but can be rigid and demotivating if flexibility and creativity are required.

The second is theorganisation as an organism. This views the business as a living system that must adapt to its environment. Structures, processes and leadership styles must “fit” the context, whether technological, market-driven or human needs. In procurement, this could be seen when category teams adapt to sudden supply market changes, showing flexibility to survive in a dynamic environment.

The third is theorganisation as a brain. This emphasises learning, feedback loops, and knowledge-sharing, where continuous improvement and innovation are central. Leaders encourage collaboration, reflection and data-driven decision-making. For procurement, this might be using spend analytics, lessons learned from supplier negotiations, and knowledge sharing across teams to improve sourcing strategies.

The fourth metaphor is theorganisation as a culture. This highlights the shared values, beliefs and rituals that shape “how things are done.” Leadership here involves role-modelling behaviours, building ethical cultures, and maintaining consistency between words and actions. In procurement, culture may show through an organisation’s commitment to ethical sourcing, sustainability, and supplier diversity.

Finally, theorganisation as a political systemsees it as an arena of power and influence where decisions are made through negotiation, persuasion and coalition-building. Managers must understand power bases and stakeholder interests. In procurement, for instance, winning senior approval for a sourcing strategy may require influencing finance, operations, and CSR teams with different agendas.

In summary, each metaphor offers insights into how organisations function. The machine focuses on control, the organism on adaptability, the brain on learning, the culture on shared values, and the political system on power and influence. Good leaders in procurement should recognise that all these metaphors may apply in different situations, and use them to manage individuals and teams more effectively.

Conflict is common in organisations and in procurement, where competing priorities, supplier issues, and internal pressures often clash. TheThomas-Kilmann Conflict Modelidentifies five different approaches managers may use to handle conflict, depending on the situation and the desired outcome.

The first approach isCompeting (high concern for task, low concern for people). Here the manager asserts their own position to achieve quick results, even at the expense of relationships. For example, a procurement manager may insist on enforcing compliance with tendering rules despite stakeholder resistance. This is effective in crises but can harm morale if overused.

The second isAccommodating (low concern for task, high concern for people). In this style, the manager prioritises relationships by giving way to the other party’s needs. For instance, a procurement manager might accept a stakeholder’s preferred supplier to maintain goodwill, even if it is not the cheapest option. This preserves harmony but risks poor business outcomes if used too often.

The third approach isAvoiding (low concern for both task and people). Here, the manager withdraws from the conflict or postpones action. This may be appropriate when the issue is minor or when emotions are high, giving time for reflection. However, in procurement, avoiding conflict with a poor-performing supplier may worsen problems over time.

The fourth isCollaborating (high concern for both task and people). This involves working with others to find win-win solutions. For example, a procurement manager may work with finance and operations to balance cost, quality, and sustainability objectives in supplier selection. This is often the most effective approach but requires time and trust.

Finally,Compromising (medium concern for task and people)involves each side giving up something to reach a middle ground. For instance, a procurement manager may agree to split supplier contracts between two stakeholders’ preferences. This provides quick solutions but may leave all parties partially dissatisfied.

Conclusion:

A procurement manager can approach conflict through competing, accommodating, avoiding, collaborating, or compromising. Each has strengths and weaknesses. The best managers adapt their style depending on the importance of the issue, the urgency of the decision, and the relationships involved. In procurement, collaboration often delivers the most sustainable results, but flexibility across all five approaches is key.

Understanding individuals is crucial for effective leadership. People bring unique qualities to the workplace, which influence how they behave, perform, and interact. Four important factors that make up the individual are as follows.

Firstly,personalityplays a major role. Traits such as extroversion, conscientiousness, or openness (from models like the Big Five) influence how individuals communicate, make decisions, and fit into teams. For example, an extrovert may thrive in negotiation roles, while an introvert may excel in analytical procurement tasks.

Secondly,attitudes and valuesshape how individuals respond to work situations. Values around ethics, sustainability, or fairness can influence motivation and alignment with organisational culture. In procurement, a professional with strong ethical values may be more resistant to corruption risks.

Thirdly,perception and motivationaffect behaviour. Individuals interpret situations differently, and motivation theories such as Maslow, Herzberg or McGregor’s Theory X/Y show how personal drivers impact performance. Some may be motivated by pay, others by recognition or career development.

Finally,abilities and skillsdefine what individuals can contribute. These include technical competencies, problem-solving skills, and interpersonal abilities. A skilled negotiator, for example, adds significant value to a procurement team.

Managers must also choose effective ways to lead teams. Three common approaches are:

Autocratic leadership– where the manager makes decisions without consulting the team. This can be effective in crises or routine, highly regulated tasks (e.g., compliance procurement), but risks low morale if overused.

Democratic or participative leadership– where managers involve team members in decision-making. This improves engagement, creativity, and buy-in. For example, involving procurement staff in category strategy development can generate stronger results.

Laissez-faire leadership– where the manager provides minimal direction, allowing the team high autonomy. This works well when teams are highly skilled and self-motivated, but may cause confusion if individuals lack experience.

In conclusion, individuals are shaped by their personality, values, perceptions/motivations, and skills, all of which affect their workplace performance. Managers can choose between autocratic, democratic, or laissez-faire leadership depending on the situation. Successful leaders adapt their style to the individuals and teams they manage, ensuring both high performance and motivation.

When major change is introduced, employees often experience strong emotions. TheChange Curve, based on Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’s grief model, describes the stages staff may go through when faced with organisational change.

The first stage isShock/Denial. The procurement assistants may initially resist the idea of e-procurement, insisting that the paper-based system “has always worked.” Sayed should communicate openly about why the change is needed and provide clear facts about its benefits.

The second stage isAnger/Resistance. Staff may feel threatened, fearing loss of control or concern that they will not have the skills to manage digital systems. They may complain or openly resist. At this point, Sayed should listen empathetically, address concerns, and provide reassurance that training and support will be available.

The third stage isExploration/Acceptance. Gradually, staff begin to see potential benefits, such as less paperwork and faster processes. Curiosity grows, and employees start experimenting with the new system. Here, Sayed should encourage participation, offer pilot training, and allow staff to test the system in a safe environment.

The fourth stage isCommitment/Integration. Once staff feel competent and confident, they fully adopt the change. At this stage, Sayed should reinforce the success, recognise achievements, and celebrate improvements, such as reduced errors or faster ordering.

How Sayed Should Act:

Communicate clearly– explain why digitalisation is important (efficiency, accuracy, competitiveness).

Provide training and support– ensure assistants feel capable of using the new e-procurement tools.

Involve the team– allow staff to give feedback on system design or pilot trials to increase buy-in.

Be empathetic and patient– acknowledge fears and provide reassurance during resistance.

Reinforce success– highlight early wins and show how the change benefits both the team and the organisation.

Conclusion:

The team is likely to experience stages of shock, anger, exploration, and eventual commitment as they move through the change curve. Sayed must act as a supportive leader by communicating openly, offering training, involving staff, and recognising progress. This approach will help the team transition smoothly to e-procurement and ensure the change is successful.

Part A – Three Ways a Procurement Professional Could Be Biased (15 marks):

Personal Relationships / Conflicts of Interest:A buyer may favour a supplier due to friendship, family connection, or long-standing personal ties. For example, awarding a contract to a supplier owned by a relative, even if another supplier offers better value. This undermines fairness and can damage organisational reputation.

Preference for Incumbent Suppliers (Status Quo Bias):Professionals may repeatedly select the same suppliers simply because they are familiar, ignoring new entrants who could provide better innovation, cost savings, or sustainability. This limits competition and supplier diversity.

Cultural or Geographical Bias:A procurement professional may favour local suppliers over international ones, or show unconscious bias against suppliers from certain regions. While local sourcing can have benefits, excluding other suppliers without objective evaluation reduces fairness and potentially increases costs.

(Other possible biases include brand preference, ignoring SMEs, or favouring suppliers who provide personal benefits – but only three are required for full marks.)

Part B – Benefits of Remaining Unbiased (10 marks):

Remaining unbiased means making supplier decisions based on objective, transparent, and fair criteria such as cost, quality, delivery performance, risk, and sustainability. The benefits include:

Fairness and Transparency:All suppliers have equal opportunity, protecting the organisation’s integrity and compliance with regulations.

Best Value for Money:Objective evaluation ensures the chosen supplier offers the best mix of cost, quality, and service.

Encouraging Innovation:By considering a wider pool of suppliers, procurement can benefit from new ideas and technologies.

Ethical Compliance:Avoids corruption, fraud, or bribery, maintaining alignment with the CIPS Code of Conduct.

Reputation and Trust:Stakeholders and the market see the organisation as professional and ethical, which strengthens long-term supplier relationships.

Conclusion:

Procurement professionals may show bias through personal relationships, favouring incumbents, or cultural preferences. Remaining unbiased ensures decisions are fair, transparent, and ethical, leading to better value, innovation, and stronger supplier trust. This supports both organisational objectives and the professional standards of procurement.

Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (10 points):

Motivation refers to the internal drive that influences people’s behaviour and performance.

Intrinsic motivationcomes from within the individual and is linked to personal satisfaction, enjoyment, achievement, or a sense of purpose. For example, a procurement professional may feel motivated by solving complex supplier challenges or contributing to sustainability goals.

Extrinsic motivationcomes from external rewards such as pay, bonuses, promotions, or recognition. For instance, a buyer might be motivated by achieving cost savings to receive a financial bonus.

Both types of motivation are important in the workplace. Intrinsic motivation sustains long-term commitment, while extrinsic rewards provide short-term incentives. Effective managers balance both to maximise performance.

One theory of motivation (15 points):

A widely used theory isHerzberg’s Two-Factor Theory. Herzberg identified two sets of factors that influence motivation:

Hygiene factors– these do not motivate if present, but if absent, they cause dissatisfaction. Examples include salary, working conditions, policies, supervision, and job security. For example, if procurement staff lack proper tools or fair pay, they may feel dissatisfied, but simply improving pay will not necessarily make them highly motivated.

Motivators– these are intrinsic to the job and lead to satisfaction and motivation. They include achievement, recognition, responsibility, personal growth, and meaningful work. For instance, giving a buyer responsibility to lead a supplier negotiation or recognising their success increases intrinsic motivation.

Herzberg’s theory highlights that managers cannot rely on pay and policies alone. They must remove dissatisfaction by ensuring fair hygiene factors and then boost engagement by providing motivators. In procurement, this could mean ensuring fair contracts, proper systems, and clear processes (hygiene factors), while also giving staff opportunities for training, career progression, and recognition (motivators).

Conclusion:

Intrinsic motivation is about internal satisfaction, while extrinsic motivation relies on external rewards. Herzberg’s theory shows that managers should address hygiene factors to avoid dissatisfaction but must focus on motivators to truly drive performance. For procurement and supply leaders, combining both ensures staff remain engaged, loyal, and productive.

TheTwo-Factor Hygiene Theory, developed byFrederick Herzberg, explains what drives employee satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work. Herzberg argued that there are two categories of factors that affect motivation.

The first category isHygiene Factors. These are extrinsic elements such as pay, working conditions, company policies, job security and supervision. If these are poor or absent, employees become dissatisfied. However, their presence alone does not create motivation – they simply prevent dissatisfaction. For example, in procurement, if buyers do not have fair pay or adequate systems, they will feel frustrated, but improving pay alone will not guarantee enthusiasm or creativity.

The second category isMotivators. These are intrinsic to the job itself, such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, and personal growth. When present, these factors actively increase motivation and job satisfaction. For instance, giving a procurement professional ownership of a supplier relationship, recognising their success in a negotiation, or offering training opportunities can significantly boost motivation.

The impact of Herzberg’s theory on motivation is significant. Managers cannot rely only on hygiene factors like pay and working conditions to motivate staff. These need to be in place to avoid dissatisfaction, but true motivation comes from providing meaningful work, opportunities for growth, and recognition.

In practice, this means managers should:

Ensure hygiene factors are adequate (fair pay, safe environment, supportive policies).

Focus on motivators such as giving responsibility, offering progression pathways, and recognising achievement.

Design jobs with variety and challenge, rather than only repetitive tasks.

Encourage intrinsic motivation through empowerment and involvement in decision-making.

In procurement and supply, applying Herzberg’s theory could mean ensuring staff have reliable systems and clear processes (hygiene), while also providing opportunities to lead supplier negotiations, recognise cost savings achievements, or involve staff in strategic sourcing projects (motivators).

In conclusion, Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory shows that avoiding dissatisfaction through hygiene factors is not enough. Managers must also provide motivators to create true engagement and drive performance. For procurement leaders, balancing both sets of factors is essential for building high-performing, motivated teams.