Evolution of Management Principles - Coursework Example

? Management Principles Diane Shears Kathy Pine American Public MGMT310 B004 Fall 12 Nov 18 Evolution of Management Principles The principles of management have undergone changes over the past few centuries. The early principles of management were based on efforts to try and understand the new entrants in the industrial revolution that was taking shape. This was at the beginning of the nineteenth century to the beginning of the twentieth century, both in the United States and Europe. These theories were classified into three, namely; Scientific Management Theory, Classical Organization Theory and Behavioral School and Management Science Theory. The early theories, however, was based on mere assumptions but were highly relevant at the time. The managers who coined such theories did so with an attempt to understand the human behavior, though with remarkably little effort. 1. Scientific Management Theory. This theory is developed with the need to improve on productivity in the various industries at the time (Cole, 2004). There was a shortage of skilled labor in countries such as the United States and therefore, the only way to improve productivity was through increasing the efficiency of the available laborers. It is for this reason that Fredrick Taylor, Henry Gannt and Frank and Lillian Gilberth coined this concept. Taylor, therefore, stated that for productivity and efficiency to improve, there needs to be a complete over haul on the management and labor departments. He claimed that these two departments ought to focus on improving productivity rather than quarreling over profits. Based on Taylor’s findings in a study he did on management system on a production line; he concluded that workers need to make use of their working equipment and manage time well. He also deduced that a formula for payment should be devised such that productive workers were paid more than the others. Henry Gannt, on the other hand, reconsidered Taylor’s insensitive assumptions and coined his own. His system involved giving the workers a fifty percent bonus to those who cleared their day’s works. He also gave the supervisors bonuses for each daily standard reached by the workers, plus an extra bonus if all workers reached it. Frank and Lillian Gilbreths contribution to this theory was that they studied fatigue and motion and focused on means of improving the welfare of the workers. Their aim, therefore, was to improve the welfare of the workers if their maximum potential as human beings is to be met. 2. Classical Organization Theory School. This theory deals with formulating guidelines that would be used in managing sophisticated organizations such as industries. This system of management, therefore, was formulated by Henry Fayol, and they comprised of the following. The division of labor, authority, discipline members in an organization, unit of commands, unit of direction, subordinate of individual interest to common good, remuneration, centralization, the hierarchy, order, equity, stability of staff, initiative and finally a promoting team spirit, also referred to as esprit de corps (Adetule, 2011). 3. The Behavioral School and Management Science Theory. The behavioral school theory had been developed to respond to the flaws of classical organization theory and as expected, people did not follow the set out system of management, and this frustrated the managers. There was a need to assist the managers relate well with the people aspect in an organization. This resulted to the human relations movement which explicitly explained how managers relate with their workers. Theorists, who concurred with this school, believed that employees should be treated as individuals, resources and assets to be natured and worked with. Management Theory, on the other hand, tries to establish the relationship between actions, outcomes and situations. It, therefore, aims at showing the interdependence between the various aspects in the managerial system. The management theory has several approaches used to achieve its goal. These include; The Contingency Approach, the Systems Approach and the Dynamic Engagement Approach. This theory is the most widely used approach to management presently. Comparison between the Different Schools of Management Theories The systematization of the organization structure of institutions is widely practiced to date. Most organizations have different divisions and departments that specialize in a particular aspect of the production process. This system has borrowed heavily from the classical organization school, developed by Henri Fayol. For instance, specialization of labor is common place in almost every industry since it has proven to increase productivity with a tremendously large margin. The same can be said of the disciplinary committee. Borrowed from Henris’ system, disciplinary action is common place in todays’ working environment. Errand staff members have often been disciplined when they violate company policy, rules and regulation. Company staff whose production efforts have been outstanding are rewarded through promotion, salary increases or awarding of bonuses. This system of management is characteristic of Taylors’ scientific management theory where he states that workers should be paid according to their productivity. It is common to find organizations holding ceremonies for awarding employees for their diligent performance during the financial year, or over time. Most organizations give their employee’s holiday leaves to allow them get plenty of rest and rejuvenate their energy. It has even been enshrined in the labor laws as an entitlement for workers to be allowed paid leave of absence. This, however, contradicts the scientific management theory. According to Taylor, laborers who do not work should not be paid as their payment system is based on productivity. He did not give provision for paid leave of absence to employees. Those who opted to go for leave did so in their own merit and were even risking losing their jobs. This flaw resulted to decreased productivity of the workers due to overworking. Frank and Lillian Gilbreths assumption in the scientific theory has been practiced widely by organizations the world over (Miles, 2012). They claimed that, by taking care of the welfare of employees’, improved performance is inevitable. It is common place to find organizations catering for the basic needs of their employees such as shelter, health and education of their children. These are often in the form of house allowance, medical allowance as well as entertainment allows. This practice is in tandem with the Gilberths’ proposals. The current work environment provides for training of managers not only in their roles as supervisors and policy makers, but also in employee and manager relation. It is observed that a good relation between the employees and management is directly proportional to the productivity of such employee. The chain of command is respected when the relationship between these two groups blossoms. This management technique is similar to behavioral school theory in that, it emphasized on the need for managers to relate well with their junior staff, so as to resist rebellion from the chain of command, as well as following the laid out organization structure. Interdependence between different departments is the norm in most complex organizations in the current environment. For instance, in a manufacturing plant, the supply and distribution department is dependent on the processing department since they determine the quantity of goods produced and vice Versa. Consequently, different companies rely on one another for the success of their businesses. This interdependence of organizations borrows heavily from the systems approach to management. This approach states that the activity of one unit of the system affects the performance of the entire system. Managers have been advised to approach an organization to part of a larger external environment. Profit making is the main drive for organizations in the modern era. Most industries will use any available means to achieve this. This is contrary to the Taylors scientific school theory where he states that organizations should focus on production rather than fighting over profits. Employees and managers also have no jurisdiction over the control of profits as was in the past. Such responsibility had been given to the board of directors and other stake holders in modern day management. Emphasis is being placed on making profits so business can grow exponentially. Conclusion It is pertinent to note that modern management theories borrowed heavily from the various elements in each of these theories. In other words, theories such as the scientific and the classical organization theories brought about brilliant ideas that are applied jointly to constitute modern day management techniques. Additionally, for proper management of any production unit or organization, there need to be harmony between all these theories. The success of management theories lies most in learning from flaws on the existing or past theories or management. Needless to say, there is still more room for change in the management system that exists since there is no perfect system of management. Managers, therefore, should be willing to accept any change that may be necessitated as a result of failure of the prevailing system of management. References Cole, G. A. (2004). Management theory and practice. London: Thomson Learning. Adetule, J. (2011). Handbook on management theories. Bloomington: Author House. Miles, J. A. (2012). Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey-Bass Reader. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Read More