Evolution of Management Theories

There has been a continuous evolution of management theories.

Early management theory consisted of numerous attempts at getting to know the newcomers to industrial life at the end of the nineteenth century and beginning of the twentieth century in Europe and United States.

Management theories are as follows:

1.      Classical organization theory

2.      Scientific management

3.      Contingency Approach

4.      System Approach

                  

The figure below shows the evolution of management theories.

  

Fedrick W Taylor (1986-1915) rested his philosophy on four basic principles.

1. The development of a true science of management so that the best method for performing each task could be determined.

2. The Scientific selection of workers so that the each workers would be given responsibility for the task for which he or she was best suited.

3. The scientific education and development of workers.

4.      Intimate friendly cooperation between management and labor.

With this, Scientific management theory also came into existence.

1. Scientific management theory arose in part from the need to increase productivity.

2. In the US especially, skilled labor was in short supply at the beginning of the twentieth century.

3. The only way to expand the productivity was to raise the efficiency of workers.

4. Therefore , Fredick W.Taylor,Henry Gantt,and Frank and Lillian Gilberth devised the body of principles known as Scientific management theory.

 Contributions of scientific management theory

– The modern assembly line pours out finished products faster than Taylor could ever imagined.

– This production “Miracle” is just one legacy of scientific management.

– In addition its efficiency techniques have been applied to many tasks in non-industrial organizations ranging from fat food service to the training of surgeons.

• Limitations of scientific management theory

Although Taylor's method led to dramatic increase in productivity and higher pay in number of instance.

Workers and unions began to oppose his approach because they feared that working harder or faster would exhaust whatever work was available Causing layoffs.

Moreover, Taylors system clearly meant that time was of the essence.

His critics objected to the speed up condition that placed undue pressure on employees to perform at faster and faster levels.

The emphasis on productivity and by extension profitability led some managers to exploit both the workers and customers.

As a result more workers joined unions and thus reinforced a pattern of suspicious and mistrust that shaded labour relations for decades.

Henri fayol (1841-1925) is generally hailed as the founder of the classical management school – not because he was the first to investigate managerial behaviour but because he was the first to systematize it.

Fayol believed on the following:

a.    Division of labor

The most people specialize the more efficiency they can perform their

work. This principle is epitomized by the modern assembly line.

b.   Authority

Managers must give orders so that they can get things done.

c.      Discipline

Members in an organization need to respect the rules and agreement that govern the organization .

d.   Unity of commands

Each employee must receive instruction from one person.

More than one manager conflict in instruction and confusion of authority would result.

e.    Unity of direction

Those operations with in the same organization which have the same objective should be directed by only one manager using one plan.

For example the personnel department in the company should not have two directors each with a different hiring policy.

f.     Subordination of individual interest to common good

In any undertaking the interest of employees should not take the precedence over the interest of organization as a whole.

g.   Remuneration:

Compensation of work done should be common to both employees and employers.

THE CONTINGENCY APPROACH

The contingency approach sometimes called (situation approach) was developed by the managers, consultants and researchers who tried to apply the concepts of the major schools to the real life.

When methods highly effective in one situation failed to work in other situation, they sought an explanation.  

For example why did an organization development work brilliantly in one situation and fail miserably in another. The contingency approach had a logical answer to such question. Results differ because

• Situation differs. A technique that works in one case will not work in other.

• According to the contagious technique the managers’ job is to find which technique will work in a particular situation, under particular circumstances and at a particular time.

• This theory best contributes to attainments of management goals, where workers need to be encouraged for increasing productivity.

SYSTEM APPROACH

• The system approach to management views the organizations as a unified, purposeful system composed of integral parts.

• This approach gives managers a way of looking at the organization as a whole and as a part of the larger external environment.

• Systems theory tells us that the activity of any segment of an organization affects, in varying degree the activity of every other segment.

• Production managers in a manufacturing plant, for example, prefer long uninterrupted production runs of standardized products in order to maintain maximum efficiency and low costs.

• Marketing managers on the other hand who want to offer customers quick delivery of a wide range of products would like a flexible manufacturing schedule that can fill special order on short notice.

• Systems oriented production managers make scheduling decisions only after they have identified the impact of these decisions on other department and on the entire organization.

• The point of system approach is that managers cannot wholly with in the traditional organization chart. They must mesh their department with the whole enterprise.

• To do that they have to communicate not only with other employees and departments, but frequently with representative of other organization as well.

• Clearly, systems managers grasp the importance of the webs of business relationship to their efforts.

Evolution of management theories is still in progress and new theories are bound to come in future.