tice that organisations can not operate under one of the two above in absolute terms and a common ground should be struck to realise the best results and harmony.
This is the management approach that perceives that the organisation is a family-like setting and that the whole system is harmonious and integrated. In this approach the proponents are against the formation of trade unions or any activity that is taken to be disruptive (Charles & Simhala 1998). Therefore, all employees are required to be loyal to the organisation and that their interests and purpose need to be shared by all. In this respect harmony in doing ones duties is of huge importance as it is perceived to lead to the overall success of the organisation. The management takes all the employees and itself as a people working towards a common cause for the betterment of the organisation. In other words the entire workforce is supposed to work as a team and any objective that deviates and sounds to be conflicting is deemed negative or dysfunctional. In this approach the management is required to provide an environment that enhances communication between itself and the employees and among the employees themselves. Proper communication reduces chances of conflicts as the commonality of interest shall be achieved (Sonia 2000).
This approach has a number of pros that make it popular especially in the human resource sector of the United States. First is that the system or approach encourages harmony and builds on consensus. This as described in its definition above takes the core and therefore the foremost reason behind its adoption (Ackers 2008). Harmony and consensus are achieved since the employees and the management are made to work together in achieving the organisational goals and objectives. As also highlighted earlier the improved communication among the various parties enhances good relations that endeavour to promote peaceful coexistence. Secondly is that the approach makes the employees become