Theories of ManagementModule

Theories of Management
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Abstract
From the period, humans started establishing social institutions to achieve goals and purposes they could not attain them as persons; management has been necessary to guarantee the synchronization of individual labors. As the public uninterruptedly depended on group labors, and as many prearranged clusters have become huge, the responsibility of directors has been intensifying in significance and complexity. Hereafter, the supervisory theory has become vital in the manner executives manage complex institutions. These organizations utilize various theories to ensure the proper functioning and accomplishment of goals. These theories include the classical and human relations methodologies that further comprise of the Hawthorne studies, Scientific and bureaucratic management. The usage of these theories helps in the creation of jobs and tasks, training of recruited workers, specialization of their skills into various departments to ensure the company achieve the set objectives. These objectives may include the elevation of sales, increased production and output that in turn increases the profit margins that could be used for employee motivation, improvement of working conditions and further training of the workers.
Keywords: management, objectives, theory, organizations

Theories of Management
In the 20th century, many administrations had slight to no structure, and the employees merely did responsibilities the easiest and in an inefficient manner.

The organizational decisions back then were made based on presumptions or intuitions with no real consideration about the company’s benefits and production efficiency. With the evolution of management theories, organizations today have a quite definite structure with administrators to create all the vital and significant choices that affect its daily operations and productivity. Management theories are important for directing effective tasks and productivity in establishments and defining the proper management method that works for an enterprise is essential. About the classical and human relations management theories established in the late 1980s, the paper focuses on assessing their effectiveness in today’s administrations. In response to this subject, the paper starts by describing management and management theories, proceeds to provide literature assessments of the main classical and human relation methods such as Hawthorne Studies, Scientific Management, Bureaucratic Model, Hierarchy of Needs and many others. Cases and illustrations of administrations and industries, in this case, McDonalds and Google for classical and human relations respectively, which use these concepts will supplement the theoretical descriptions and help in the evaluation of their influence in today’s organizational management. The conclusion will entail a brief paragraph emphasizing all the key facts of the discussion and supporting that certainly classical and human methodologies do affect today’s organizational administration.
Management can be termed as the core of an organization as it extends motivation, reassurance, enablement, growth, direction, training and more to employees in the organization and encourages teamwork in the fulfillment of the organizational goals and objectives (Mahmood, Basharat & Bashir, 2012). Many researchers have described it in various manners. Management involves a range of activities like scheduling, policymaking, organizing, directing and monitoring directed to physical (human) and financial resources that enhance the achievement of organizational goals. There have been various management ideologies in existence, which continue to develop as time passes by. Management principles are important in the accomplishment of organizational objectives. For example, “The Great Wall of China,” is a sequence of earthworks estimated to be 21,196 km in length. China desired to guard its citizens against attacks and create trade barricades that imposed border controls. After creation of the objectives, the building process of the wall began and was finalized through operative and well-organized management. This accentuates the significance of management in the accomplishment of an organization’s aims. Management theory, therefore, directs and guides the manner in which directors relate to the association in the familiarity with the goals, execution of operative means to accomplish the objectives and ways to encourage the workers to execute their tasks effectively.
Various management methodologies have been invented since the late 1880s. The Classical methodologies that will be deliberated, first concentrated on the efficiency and proficiency of work, the key classical approaches comprise of the “Scientific Management, Bureaucratic Model and Principles of Administration” (Waddell & Sohal, 1998). In the late 1880s, Taylor invented the Scientific Management approach. In his time, there inefficiency issues at the shop level. He noticed that most employees had a propensity of soldiering in that they would methodically take things lightly by placing negligible energy into job delivery. This meant that employees could decide what they regarded a competent effort for the day and eventually, productivity lessened. Taylor observed that soldiering was caused by three key problems, first being the terror of redundancy. Employees had the attitude that if they executed extremely well in jobs, the time consumed in the distribution of those responsibilities would be diminished permitting more production. This would suggest that fewer workers would be needed to accomplish the task that a greater number of employees were formerly finishing thus some staffs would be dismissed. Secondly, the wages from the piece-rate arrangement meant employees would not essentially be identified for extra energy put into efficiency since regardless of the energy given; employees still the same wage amount. Lastly, the authorization of ‘rule of thumb’ by administration liberated employees to provide tasks according to their standards regardless of the degree of hesitancy. These three problems affected and encouraged low output among employees. It is obvious that even in the description that some of these causes had administration at fault rather than the personnel because they allowed it. As a result, Taylor invented a scientific management methodology to overcome the complications that caused low output and incompetence.
“The Scientific Management Approach” exploited four major ideologies. In the administered structure, the administration ought to have distinct power and control over employees directed by the scientific technique and can build an accommodating environment with the staffs so that they are stimulated to perform by the scientific approaches that have been created. The substituting of “rule-of-thumb” with a scientific technique was yet an additional principle. Taylor utilized various scientific tests to define the most competent and industrious way to complete and regulate responsibilities. This substituted the “rule-of-thumb” where personnel was eligible to their individual view on how to labor founded on their knowledge and practice. Views of executives and employees could now be replaced with proofs from the scientific examination (Parker & Lewis, 1995). Taylor piloted work-study where he evaluated each work process by skilled employees with a stopwatch. In this research, pointless movements were reduced so that most precise time and best technique to do a task is acquired. Additionally, recruitment and selection of employees was a principle created by Taylor concerning scientific management. Employees with the correct talents and capabilities needed for the task were chosen and training plan for their individual growth by management. This further enhanced skill attainment and in-turn intensified output and competence. Division of labor was also aided in the understanding the scientific management. Executives were to assume the accountability from the employees of generating initiatives on ways to get the job done with the execution of the scientific method. Workers were to be accountable for job performance. Scientific Management approach is prevalent in manufacturing industries, workshops, assembly lines and many others.
“Max Weber’s bureaucratic theory” and “Henri Fayol’s administrative theory” are the other main classical approaches to management. Weber hypothesized that western sophistication was shifting from “value-oriented thinking,” emotional and customary action to the technocratic way of thinking. He supposed that refinement was shifting to seek theoretically optimal outcomes at the expenditure of emotive or humanistic content. He then established a range of ideologies for a “perfect” bureaucracy to include fixed and authorized jurisdictional parts, a firmly orderly pyramid of super and subservience, administration founded on printed records, exhaustive and proficient training, official action taking precedence over other actions and that administration of a given association follows steady and understandable instructions (Morgan, 1980). The bureaucracy was projected as a big machine for accomplishing its objectives in the most competent way possible. Conversely, he was careful of bureaucracy when he witnessed that the more completely understood, the more officialdom “depersonalizes” itself in that, the more fully it thrives in accomplishing the elimination of love, detestation, and every decently personal, particularly irrational and multitudinous feeling from the accomplishment of official responsibilities. Hence, he foretold a very impersonal business with diminutive human level collaboration among its members.
With these observations, he highlights the basic principles of bureaucracy and emphasizes the division of labor, hierarchy, rules and impersonal relationship. Max Weber came up with six core principles to govern the bureaucratic theory such as task specialization where jobs are divided into simple, repetitive groupings, the foundation of abilities and functional concentrations (Houghton, 2010). Specialization of workers abilities directly affects the productivity of the organization. As a result, there is a delimitation of jobs and executives can approach their workers more easily when on other responsibilities. Secondly, the hierarchical authority that involves the organization of administrators into ranked levels, with each level of administration having a director who is accountable for its workers and general performance. In officialdom, there are numerous hierarchical posts. This is fundamentally the brand and basis of a bureaucracy. Thirdly, a formal selection where most workers are chosen based on technical abilities and competence that has been attained through training, teaching, and knowledge. One of the elementary principles is that workers are remunerated for their efforts, and wage level is reliant on their rank. Fourthly, official instructions and requirements are needed to ensure equality, so that workers know the managers’ expectations of them. All management procedures are determined by the formal rules. By imposing strict regulations, the association can easily accomplish equality, and all worker efforts can be synchronized better. Fifth, rules and clear necessities generate distant and detached associations among workers, with the extra advantage of avoiding nepotism or participation from strangers. These detached associations are a protuberant characteristic of bureaucracies. Finally, workers are chosen based on their proficiency. This aids in the placement of the right persons in the right spots and thereby optimally using human resources. In a bureaucracy, it is likely to shape a career based on knowledge and proficiency.
“Henri Fayol’s administrative theory” mostly emphasizes on the individual obligations of management at a greater granular level. In simpler words, his effort is more steered at the administration layer. Fayol alleged that administration had five core roles that include forecasting, organizing, instructing, synchronizing and monitoring (Fayol, 2016). Projecting and forecasting where the deeds of forestalling the forthcoming and performing accordingly. The organization was the improvement of the organization’s resources, both physical and financial. Instructing was ensuring that the organization’s activities and procedures were running. Direction involved configuration and synchronization of the group’s labors. Finally, monitoring made sure that the actions above were done in agreement with suitable rules and processes. Fayol established fourteen principles of supervision to go alongside the management’s five core roles. These principles included specialization that involved dividing and setting workers in various departments according to their qualities and abilities, power with duty, discipline, unity of instruction that ensured all workers were following similar instructions from one leader and unity of direction in that all workers were working towards the accomplishment of the organizational goals (Koontz, 1980). Additionally, the subordination of personal importance to the general importance, remuneration of staff that included motivation tokens, increment and payment of wages, monopolization, scalar series of power, order, fairness, the stability of occupancy in that the workers felt their jobs were safe, creativity and esprit de corps. He assumed individual effort, and group dynamics was a portion of a “perfect” institute (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). Fayol’s five core roles of administration are aggressively practiced nowadays. The idea of bestowing the right authority with accountability is also broadly cited on and is well practiced. Regrettably, his ideologies of “unity of direction” and “unity of command” are steadily disrupted in “matrix administration,” the structure of decision for most of today’s organizations.
McDonald’s, for example, reveals several different features of classical administration, including parts of Taylor’s scientific management and Fayol’s administration principles. McDonald’s also exhibits ways in which administration styles compare to their competitors and its effect on an operative institute. Taylor’s organization style is manifested through McDonald’s teaching and training, detailed systems, and tutoring, while Fayol’s supervision style is exhibited through its division of work and power. For instance, every teller at McDonald’s has a series of standard queries such as “Small, large, or medium” and “What accompaniment would you like?” McDonald’s also utilizes a register to approve, gather, and crisscross the order in addition to utilizing computer systems to convey the requested order into the holding boxes for the kitchens usage. To intensify competence, McDonald’s has a precise method for producing its food. For instance, the cakes are scorched on each side and then detached from the gratings when the computer system shows, accompanied by the condiments being smeared in premeasured amounts, and the snack being covered. Various persons do all of these responsibilities to make each job as operative as possible. Lastly, Taylor trusts in boosting high yields through inducements. Offering a set salary will only promote low output because the worker is getting the same wage irrespective of their industrious rate. To solve this issue, Taylor stimulated creating enticements through a recompense system. McDonald’s stimulates its workers through packages such as “Employee of the Month and the recognition program”; where the workers get acknowledgment for their good performance. It also has packages that inspire motivated effort through access to free food and produce. Finally, McDonald’s will offer top workers bonuses founded on the performance of their industry.
Elton Mayo is one of the major scholars who contributed a lot to the understanding of the human relations management approaches. The source of behaviorism is the human relations association that was an outcome of the “Hawthorne Works Experiment” conducted at the “Western Electric Company” in the USA in the late 1920s. Mayo and his comrades’ trials invalidated Taylor’s theories that science verbalized that the greatest yield was found in ‘the one finest manner,’ and that method could be attained through a controlled test (O’Connor, 1999). The Hawthorne studies tried to define the effects of illumination on worker efficiency. When these tests indicated no clear association between light amount and efficiency, the trials then began looking at other influencers. The reasons that were regarded when Elton Mayo was operating with a collection of women encompassed relaxation breaks, no relaxation breaks, no allowed meals, more or fewer hours of performing tasks each day. With these variations, efficiency increased (Millward, 2005). When the females went back to their normal working hours and situations, they set an output record. These tests verified five things like work gratification, and hence performance is essentially not economical as it relies more on working environments and approaches like good communications, optimistic management reaction, and reassurance environment. Second, it excluded Taylorism and its prominence on worker self-importance and the demanded over-riding inducement of monetary recompenses. Third, large-scale tests involving over 30,000 workers indicated highly optimistic reactions to, for instance, developments in working surroundings like proper lighting and expressions of gratitude and inspiration as opposed to pressure from directors and administrators. Fourth, the effect of the peer group is quite high hence, the significance of informal clusters within the office. Finally, it condemns ‘rabble theories’ that community is a crowd of unorganized persons acting in a way intended to secure their self-conservation or self-importance.
These outcomes indicated that the cluster dynamics and social composition of an institute were a very significant power either for or in contradiction of higher output. This result led to the call for more involvement for the employees, improved trust and honesty in the working situation, and a greater consideration to groups in the office. Finally, although Taylor’s influences were the creation of the manufacturing, industrial, quality regulation and personnel divisions, the human relations association’s greatest effect came in what the administration’s management and employees department were undertaking. The apparently new ideas of “cluster dynamics,” “collaboration,” and administrative “communal systems,” all shoot from Mayo’s effort in the early 1920s.
For instance Google, an information technology corporation prominent character, respects and reassures individual relaxation hobbies. They offer a ‘beautification budget’ for each worker; as every worker displays their creativity and beautifies all the operational areas. Consequently, the workplace here looks totally unlike an organization, but the bliss of the workers. Fairness is the most significant part of Google functioning style. All managers and workers are treated equally. A short story occurred at Google where a fresh secretary had no thoughts or experience with the printer. A man who was in line to utilize it decided to teach her the operations of the printer. After she completed printing, she learned that the man who helped her was the CEO (chief executive officer) of the organization. In such a situation, you constantly have an identical chance with the others and improve the working interest of workers. Google offers identical returns to their workers. The award at Google is offered according to the prominence of plans rather than the job performance. Additionally, at the conclusion of every quarter, it displays to the employees all the schemes they were operating on at that time. All projects at Google are linked to the lifeblood of the organization. Therefore, each person that associates with the forthcoming of the organization should be appreciated. Also, the workers that act as examples need to act accordingly for the others to follow.
Conclusively, management acts as a very significant part of a company in that it incorporates many activities like organizing, directing, coordinating and forecasting among others. Classical and human relation approaches form the core part of management theory with Scientific and Bureaucratic forming the classical theories and Hawthorne Studies constituting the human relations theory. These theories involve major themes and principles like specialization of labor, the unity of command and direction, uniformity and many others. The influence of these theories is manifested in the ways the companies use the themes in directing the organization’s operations.
References
Fayol, H. (2016). “General and industrial management.” Ravenio Books.
Houghton, J. D. (2010). Max Weber’s notion of authority in the twenty-first century. Journal of management history, 16(4), 449-453.
Koontz, H. (1980). “The management theory jungle revisited.” Academy of Management Review, 5(2), 175-188.
Mahmood, Z., Basharat, M., & Bashir, Z. (2012). “Review of Classical Management Theories.” International Journal of Social Sciences & Education, 2(1)
Millward, L. J. (2005). “Understanding occupational & organizational psychology.” Sage.
Morgan, G. (1980). “Metaphors, Paradigms and puzzle solving in organization theory.” Administrative science quarterly, 605-622.
O’Connor, E. (1999). “Minding the workers: The meaning of human’ and human relations’ in Elton Mayo.” Organization, 6(2), 223-246.
Parker, L. D., & Lewis, N. R. (1995). “Classical management control in contemporary accounting and management. The persistence of Taylor and Fayol’s world.” Accounting, Business & Financial History, 5(2), 211-236.
Waddell, D., & Sohal, A. S. (1998). “Resistance: a constructive tool for change management.” Management decision, 36(8), 543-548.
Wren, D. A., & Bedeian, A. G. (1994). “The evolution of management thought.”