Coordination as the *orderly arrangement* of group effort: its nature

The statement and its key terms

The statement treats coordination as the work of fitting people's efforts into a planned pattern so that a group moves as one towards a shared aim. Four ideas are packed into it. Orderly arrangement means that efforts are fitted together in the right amount, at the right time and in the right sequence instead of being left to chance. Efforts of a group means that coordination concerns many people and units, not one person working alone. Unity of action means that the separate actions add up to a single combined movement instead of pulling in different directions. Common purpose means that the goal of the organisation is the yardstick against which every effort is fitted. The study text explains coordination in the same terms: through it a manager links the efforts of individuals and groups in an orderly way so that the organisation acts together for its common objectives, and it involves synchronising the actions of the different units.

Nature of coordination

1. Its aim is unity of action. Coordination exists so that the actions of all departments serve one common purpose; it acts as the force that binds the departments together. In a Pune two-wheeler plant, the purchase team times its orders for steel and tyres to the production schedule, and production in turn plans its daily output to the dispatch plan agreed with dealers.
2. It is a deliberate act. Harmony among people does not arise on its own; a manager has to bring their efforts together consciously and on purpose. This is the orderly arrangement the statement speaks of.
3. It integrates group effort. Coordination turns diverse and even unrelated interests into purposeful work. It gives the group a common focus, so that performance follows the plan and the schedule.
4. It is all-pervasive. Because the activities of departments depend on one another, coordination is needed at every level and in every department. It is horizontal, between departments such as production and marketing, and also vertical, between the levels of the organisation.
5. It is continuous. It is never done once and finished. It begins when plans are drawn up and carries on until the stage of controlling.
6. It is the responsibility of every manager. Top managers coordinate with their subordinates so that the overall policies are carried out; middle managers coordinate both upwards with the top and downwards with first-line managers; operational managers coordinate the work of their workers so that it proceeds as planned.
7. It is the essence of management, not a separate function. Every managerial function contributes to coordination, and coordination is implicit in all of them. It therefore runs through planning, organising, staffing, directing and controlling instead of standing beside them as a sixth task.

Coordination and cooperation

The two are related but not the same, and each side needs the other. Cooperation is the members' willingness to work together; coordination is the manager's act of giving that willingness a direction. Willing cooperation without coordination may end in wasted effort, while coordination imposed without cooperation may leave employees dissatisfied. In the terms of the statement, cooperation supplies the group's effort and coordination supplies its orderly arrangement.

Conclusion

The statement captures the nature of coordination well. A manager arranges the efforts of the group deliberately, continuously and at every level, so that they add up to unity of action in pursuit of a common purpose; that is why coordination is described as the essence of management.