The Progress of the Industrial Scene and the Evolution of Management Theory - Essay Example

I. Introduction Changing circumstances served as impetus for the evolution of management theories over the years. As the industrial scene had changed, managers learned to create ideas that would help them cope with the changes. This paper probes the link between the progress of the industrial scene and the evolution of management theory over the years. This paper aims to see the connection between the continually evolving management theories, which are driven by factors in the business environment in order to help managers address the current issues they face and ensure their organisation’s survival. II. Body A. Pre-classical viewpoint Management, during the middle and late 1800s was not a formal field of study. The emergence of early thoughts regarding management, when looked from today’s perspective was a mere response to the problems that had arisen during those times. The start of industrial revolution had prompted management to emerge as a formal course of study over the years to follow. The shift from agriculture to manufacturing during the industrial revolution had resulted in the increase in urbanization and growth in factories. This overall growth in production called for a greater integration and facilitation of efforts of a huge number of people. In order to ensure adequate production, managers were forced to address certain issues. Even when these issues were addressed in an organized field of study back then, there were some ideas that laid down the groundwork for management as a discipline to emerge. These ideas were classified as the pre-classical viewpoint. Robert Owen’s pioneering idea was that he “advocated concern for the working and living conditions of workers (Bartol 2001, 39).” Being a cotton mill entrepreneur in Scotland, Owen considered providing considerable improvements to the work environment of its workforce. According to Bartol, “Owen tried to improve the living conditions of the employees by upgrading streets, houses, sanitation, and the educational system in New Lanark, [Scotland] (2001, 39).” Owen’s idea seemed to be relevant today, being the cornerstone of the modern human resource management philosophy. Charles Babbage was known for the first practical mechanical calculator that laid the foundation for the modern calculators and computers. In pursuit of his projects, Babbage was able to find ways to address problems that he faced. These explorations of ways lead Babbage to some ideas such as prediction of work specialization and profit sharing plan, which had been his contribution to management theory. According to Bartol, “[Babbage] recognized that not only physical work but mental work as well could be specialized (2001, 39).” Apart from this, Babbage had formulated a profit-sharing plan that was cornerstone for the modern compensation and incentive practices. “Babbage also devised a profit-sharing plan that had two parts, a bonus that was awarded for useful suggestions and a portion of wages that was dependent on factory profits (Bartol 2001, 39).” Henry R. Towne’s contribution to management theory had been contained in a paper entitled “The Engineer as an Economist” where he discussed the need for management to become a “separate field of systematic inquiry on a par with engineering (Bartol 2001, 39).” Being the president of his company, Yale and Town Manufacturing, as well as a mechanical engineer, he saw the need of both engineering skills and business skills in order to effectively administer the operations of an organisation. His paper set the groundwork for management to become a science, and development of management principles. B. Classical management theory Pre-classical management viewpoints had provided a lot of individual ideas that laid down the foundation of management as a discipline—most of them served as the cornerstone for many modern management philosophies. As the industrial revolution had prevailed, the call for better ideas and integration of these thoughts into a systematic field of inquiry had lead to the creation of the classical management theory. Managers during the late 1800s, faced with the challenges of greater production as the industrial revolution continued, needed to find ways in order formally address their issues. Manufacture had been the emphasis of industrial revolution. As urbanization had increased and the number of factories grew, the call to increase production was evident during that time. In order to do this, some thinkers had looked for ways for it to happen; they later learned that by increasing the efficiency of workers, and finding a way to more effectively manage an organisation, productivity could be boosted. Managers were faced with issues of battling with inefficiencies and increasing effectiveness. These issues were the focus of the classical management theory. This viewpoint had led to evolution of three sub-schools, which included scientific management, bureaucratic management, and administrative management. The major contributors to scientific management as an approach included Frederick Winslow Taylor, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, and Henry L. Gantt. For the scientific management approach for instance, time-and-motion study of Frederick Winslow Taylor was aimed to solve the soldiering problem, which according to Bartol was defined as, “deliberately working at less than full capacity (2001, 41),” by creating a science of management. Frederick Winslow Taylor’s major contribution to this approach was his time-and-motion study which involves “breaking down the work task into its various elements or motions, eliminating unnecessary motions, determining the best way to do the job, and then timing each motion to determine the amount of production that could be expected per day (with allowances for delays and rest period) (Bartol 2001, 41).” Similar to this was Frank and Lilian Gilbreth’s motion studies in line with bricklaying process. By identifying the tasks, streamlining them and eliminating the unnecessary motion, more bricks were laid with the same amount of physical effort. Frank and Lillian Gilbreth also advocated motion studies in order to address the inefficiency in the bricklaying process. Henry L. Gantt, which was known for his contribution, the Gantt chart, had devised this chart in order to improve efficiency through planning, scheduling and control. Bureaucratic management, as according to Bartol, in contrast to scientific management “emphasizes the need for organisations to operate in a rational manner rather than relying on the arbitrary whims of owners and managers (2001, 43).” The major contributor to this approach was Max Weber. To Weber, in order for organisations to function on a more rational basis, the following characteristics were presented as components of an ideal bureaucracy: specialization of labor, formal rules and procedures, impersonality, well-defined hierarchy, and career advancement based on merit (Bartol 2001, 44). Max Weber’s concern was organisations’ less rational approach during his time which contributed a lot to ineffectiveness and inefficiency. He believed that by limiting certain positions in both the public and private office available to aristocracies, the larger pool of human resources was wasted. Nepotism, as according to Bartol was defined as “the hiring of relatives regardless of their competence (2001, 44)” was also an issue that he was trying to address in proposing a bureaucratic approach to management. Henri Fayol’s contribution to administrative management as the third approach in the classical management theory was his functional approach to management, in which he categorized managerial activities into five functions: planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling which was the cornerstone for the four contemporary management functions. He also outlined some fourteen general management principles in line with his view of teaching management theories to individuals who held positions that required administration skills. C. Behavioral viewpoint The industrial revolution had sparked a number of human-rights related issues when looked from today’s perspective. As child labor was very apparent during those days, the injustice that was suffered by many children in the workplace environment had resulted in public outcries in many industrialist economies. These events had posed some serious legal, as well as social effects on many organisations. From the classical viewpoint, the workforce or the people were seen as machines or parts of machines that were used for production. As legal and social issues had surfaced, the society called for more humane approach to management. This lead to the creation of the behavioral viewpoint of management, which in itself also experienced an evolution: from the early behaviorists, to the Hawthorne studies, to the human relations movement, then to the behavioral science approach. These social events also created different attitudes among employees toward their jobs. The shift of emphasis from treating humans as another resource necessary to produce into vital to doing business was the focus of the behavioral viewpoint of management. In response to these public outcries, early behaviorists such as Hugo Münsterberg and Mary Parker Follett offered some alternatives viewpoints. Münsterberg’s contribution was introducing psychology as a major partner for organisations in order for them to understand the employees’ needs better, as well as identifying the best individuals that suit a certain job within the organisation (Bartol 2001, 47). Follett on the other hand focused on ideas from the field of political science such as “group dynamics, power sharing, conflict resolution, and the integration of organisational systems.” As the shift from classical viewpoints to behavioral viewpoints continued, the Hawthorne studies had been a major contribution to the human relations view of management. These studies that were conducted at the Hawthorne plant of Western Electric Company tried to determine the relationship between lighting and productivity of workers, seeking to improve tools and methods of work in order to improve efficiency. The study pointed out the “impact that social aspects of the job had on productivity, particularly the effects of personal attention from supervisors and relationships among group members (Bartol 2001, 50).” Other contributors to the human relations movement included Abraham Maslow and Douglas McGregor who introduced the ideas of motivation and job satisfaction in relation to management. The third sub-school “emphasizes scientific research as the basis for developing theories about human behavior in organisation that can be used to establish practical guidelines for managers (Bartol 2001, 52).” D. Quantitative viewpoint Quantitative management did not evolve in commercial establishments first, but were found to be very usable for the military. During the World War 2, conservation of the available resources became the primary consideration of the military in industrialist countries such as the US and Great Britain. These efforts to conserve the resources had led these military organisations to use quantitative analysis. As these models had been proven to be very useful to the military community, the business community had taken interests in it for the possibility of utilizing it in organisations to also conserve resources. Commercial businesses, being similar to their military counterparts were organisations that dealt with resource allocation issues, decision-making and dealing with effectiveness. Therefore, the adoption of these methods led to the quantitative viewpoint of management over the years. This viewpoint had expanded to three branches namely: management science or operations research, operations management, and management information system. Advancement in technology allowed companies some sophisticated quantitative analysis with the use of computers. Utilization of statistical models was important for companies especially in the increasingly competitive business environment during those times. With statistical models and advance computing, companies were able to control their costs more effectively, thus being able to gain competitive advantage in terms of their operations. This was the major focus of the quantitative viewpoint of management. E. Contemporary viewpoint As technological advancement provided more things possible for businesses, globalisation had played a major force in the development of contemporary management theories. As economies open that enabled businesses to enter foreign markets, the many changes that occurred in the marketplace redefined the competition. As globalisation became the new rule of the game, both global companies and incumbent local players needed new theories in order to remain competent in the game. The role of the environment had been very much apparent during these modern times. As uncertainty due to forces that could affect an organisation’s performance, management theories had evolved in order to address these changes. Sub-schools of the contemporary theory included systems theory, contingency theory, and other emerging views such as the TQM. Systems theory according to Bartol “is an approach based on the notion that organisations can be visualized as systems (2001, 54).” As organisations were viewed as interrelated parts that function together in order to achieve a common goal, the idea of an organisation as an open system that would constantly interact with its environment was a vital contemporary view. This allowed organisations to determine the parts in its system that could be affected by certain environmental factors. The contingency theory was a major breakthrough in management, in such a way that the theory “argues that appropriate managerial action depends on the particular parameters of the situation (Bartol 2001, 58).” As the business environment became more complex, situations that confronted managers became complex too. Thus, a single solution or way to address some issues, as proposed by the classical viewpoints was refuted by this theory. Total quality management, as another contemporary viewpoint according to Bartol, “is a management system that is an integral part of an organisation’s strategy and is aimed at continually improving product and service quality so as to achieve high levels of customer satisfaction and build strong customer loyalty. As globalisation offered more choices to different markets due to the presence of foreign competition, the market had become increasingly sophisticated and complex that meeting the quality levels that customers demand to maintain loyalty would be crucial for an organisation’s survival in the modern marketplace. III. Conclusion As we look back in the pages of economic progress, the need to have a systematic field of inquiry and study as regards putting the efforts of a large number of people within an organisation had prompted the creation of management as a formal field of study. The changes in the industrial scene forced managers to come up with specific ideas that would help them cope with certain problems. These ideas evolved to a formal knowledge discipline; management theory would continue to change in response to, as well as incorporate the changes that occur to the industrial scene, in order to aid organisations over the changing times. The shift from agriculture to manufacturing during the industrial revolution had resulted in the increase in urbanization and growth in factories. This overall growth in production called for a greater integration and facilitation of efforts of a huge number of people. In order to ensure adequate production, managers were forced to address certain issues. Even when these issues were addressed in an organized field of study back then, there were some ideas that laid down the groundwork for management as a discipline to emerge. These ideas were classified as the pre-classical viewpoint. Pre-classical management viewpoints had provided a lot of individual ideas that laid down the foundation of management as a discipline—most of them served as the cornerstone for many modern management philosophies. As the industrial revolution had prevailed, the call for better ideas and integration of these thoughts into a systematic field of inquiry had lead to the creation of the classical management theory. Managers during the late 1800s, faced with the challenges of greater production as the industrial revolution continued, needed to find ways in order formally address their issues. From the classical viewpoint, the workforce or the people were seen as machines or parts of machines that were used for production. As legal and social issues had surfaced, the society called for more humane approach to management. This lead to the creation of the behavioral viewpoint of management, which in itself also experienced an evolution: from the early behaviorists, to the Hawthorne studies, to the human relations movement, then to the behavioral science approach. The shift of emphasis from treating humans as another resource necessary to produce into vital to doing business was the focus of the behavioral viewpoint of management. Quantitative management did not evolve in commercial establishments first, but were found to be very usable for the military. During the World War 2, conservation of the available resources became the primary consideration of the military in industrialist countries such as the US and Great Britain. These efforts to conserve the resources had led these military organisations to use quantitative analysis. As these models had been proven to be very useful to the military community, the business community had taken interests in it for the possibility of utilizing it in organisations to also conserve resources. As technological advancement provided more things possible for businesses, globalisation had played a major force in the development of contemporary management theories. As economies open that enabled businesses to enter foreign markets, the many changes that occurred in the marketplace redefined the competition. All these changes that occur in the economic progress of the industrial scene determined the pace of evolution of the management theory. Constant changes in the business environment had prompted managers and academics to come up with theories to enable organisations to adapt to these changes. This highlights the role of managers to devise ways to adapt to change in order to ensure the organisation’s survival in the business world. References Bartol, K., Martin, D., Tein, M., & Matthews, G. 2001. Management: A Pacific Rim Focus. McGraw Hill Company, Australia. Bibliography Noe, R., Hollenbeck, J., Gerhart, B. & Wright, P. Human Resource Management: Gaining a Competitive Advantage. 5th ed. McGraw-Hill Company, New York. Robbins, S. 2005. Organisational Behavior. McGraw-Hill Company, New York. Read More