Classical and Human Relations Theories - Coursework Example

ical and Human Relations Theories Management theory can be defined as the general guidelines that are put in place within an organisation to ensure that it runs smoothly. The classical and human relations approaches to management are among the most compared and popular that is applied in the management of many companies. While this may be the case, there are many instances where some aspects of each are applied in different companies in order to make them work. This is because while neither of them is perfect on its own, they each contain aspects that can be extremely useful in management because they allow for a combination of the best aspects of these two approaches in order to develop a better order of management. It is through a study of these management approaches that companies in the current competitive world can be able to succeed in ensuring that their organisational objectives are met. The classical approach involves the creation of multiple levels within the workforce in order to ensure that there is an improvement in productivity. In this approach, workers at the lowest levels are usually under the oversight of supervisors who are in turn also under the oversight of managers (Gomez-Mejia, Balkin, and Cardy 2008, p.19). This arrangement allows for there to be an increase in productivity because each level of workers is designated a task that it has to fulfil and these are so well defined that they hardly go wrong in terms of meeting objectives. The impersonal nature of the classical approach allows for there to be consistency because workers are all united in the achievement of quotas that have been set for them rather than on relations where they can question the directives that they are given by their immediate supervisors. It is essential to note that in the classical approach, management has full control over all the activities taking place within an organisation and this allows it to ensure that there is an increase in productivity through being able to predict how various procedures will be undertaken. In case there are any issues concerning workers, the management has can easily either hire or fire them according to the benefits that they bring to the company and this ensures that there is constant efficiency. Through this approach, neither management nor workers allow the development of friendliness or personal attachments to hinder their work and even though individuals might be friends, a supervisor has the duty to fire a worker if the latter does not perform in the manner that is expected of him. The lack of personal relationships in the workplace makes the classical approach viable since it allows for the development of initiatives by management that are designed to ensure that the good of the company is placed above anything else. In this way, employees have to follow the initiatives developed by management to the latter in order to increase productivity and those who do not end up having their employment terminated. Despite the classical approach being most suitable in matters concerning the increase of productivity, it is not efficient enough because it does not allow the input of workers in the decision making process. This is especially true when it comes to management developing quotas that have to be fulfilled by workers and in case they do not do as they have been asked, they stand at a risk of being terminated (Lumley and Wilkinson 2013, p.71). The working conditions that occur under the classical approach, especially in the modern world, are not conducive for many workers and it creates a situation where companies end up facing high turnover rates as a result. Employees tend not to be satisfied working under conditions that are impersonal and this makes many of them want to leave for more employee-friendly companies where they can find more job satisfaction. Furthermore, because in this approach rules have to be followed exactly, it gives little chance for workers to be more innovative in their work and this creates a situation where a company ends up facing higher costs than in situations where worker input would have made a difference. Therefore, while the classical approach allows for employees to put aside personal relationships aside and instead focus on the job at hand, it also creates an environment that is not friendly to employee input and this is a disadvantage to a company because management does not get to find out the feelings or initiatives that workers might have in making the company perform better. Through such ignorance by management, the company ends up stagnating because it does not have the necessary innovative strategies developed by employees to ensure that it not only saves costs, but that it also increases output as well as develops better products for the market. The human relations approach is one of the most popular management methods that are used by many companies today. Its popularity is based on the fact that unlike the classical approach, it focuses on the individual workers within a company rather than the various rules or processes that take have been put in place to ensure efficient functioning of the organisation. The human relations approach recognises that workers are integral parts of the decision making process and that any decisions that are made without their input might result in failure once they are implemented (Cottrell 2013, p.245). It is through the input of workers that decisions within a company can be made because it is these workers who end up eventually overseeing the implementation of the decisions that have been made. The human relations approach recognises that workers are a primary resource of the company and they have to be kept happy in order to ensure that their productivity remains high. Any ideas that might improve the productivity as well as decrease costs of the company that workers might have are always taken into consideration by management because if they prove feasible, they allow the company to achieve its objectives faster than if there were no worker input (DuBrin 2007, p.2). The belief that workers are central in ensuring the success of the company is a basis of the human relations approach and it is because of this that there are open lines of communication between workers and management in almost every aspect of the workplace. Therefore, instead of giving workers quotas among other directives, they are instead provided with the necessary motivations to ensure that they increase their productivity. This approach is aimed at ensuring that workers are kept happy in the workplace and this in a manner that encourages them to increase productivity while at the same time urging them to invest their time and effort in the company. While the human relations approach might be popular among companies, it has some dangers which if not addressed swiftly might lead to the failure of the organisations that use it. The use of this approach in management might lead to a situation where workers become too social that they come to be easily influenced by emotions when conducting activities involving the company (Cottrell 2013, p.59). Under such circumstances, employees end up not making an accurate analysis of the hard data that has been presented to them and are instead influenced by their feelings at the moment and this might be disastrous for a company especially in situations where it is facing a serious crisis. Moreover, the human relations approach, because of its employee-friendly character, makes it difficult for management to sack those employees whose usefulness to the company is questionable. If such difficulties are encountered and not dealt with immediately, it might lead to a situation where the company faces problems such as having to pay employees who are not productive or high costs due to an excess of workers. Furthermore, this approach makes it difficult for supervisors to reprimand workers in case of poor performance and this creates a situation where there is a risk of the company ending up increasing employee retention rates not because they are needed but because the company is managed on the basis of emotion. However, the emotional content of human relations makes it possible for employees to feel more appreciated and this encourages them to be more productive because they feel that their interests are being taken care of (Gallagher 2012, p.54). In this way, despite the danger that employees might end up being guided by emotion rather than fact, the human relations approach has an edge over the classical approach because it allows for employees to be directly involved in the company and this helps them to invest more in its greater good. In conclusion, the discussion above has shown that the classical approach is based mainly on a multilayered worker structure that is designed to increase productivity while the human relations approach encourages open communication between management and workers to do the same. Both of these approaches have been found to have some flaws with the former resulting in high worker turnover rates while the latter might lead to serious risks due to too much emotion being involved in the decision making process of companies. These approaches can therefore be used side by side as a means of ensuring not only an employee friendly environment, but also one that puts into consideration decisions that are based on hard facts rather than on emotion to ensure the success of the company. References Cottrell, S., 2013. The Study Skills Handbook. 4th ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DuBrin, A.J., 2007. Human Relations Interpersonal Job-Oriented Skills. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. Gallagher, K., 2012. Skills Development for Business and Management Students. 2nd ed. Oxford: OUP. Gomez-Mejia, L.R., Balkin, D.B. and Cardy, R.L., 2008. Management: People, Performance, Change. New York: McGraw-Hill. Lumley, M. and Wilkinson, J., 2013. Developing Employability for Business. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More