A Comparison of Classical Management Theorists and Contingency Theorists

Classical organization theory evolved during the first half of this century. It represents the merger of scientific management, bureaucratic theory, and administrative theory.

"Classical Organizational Theory deals with the 'systematic processes necessary to make bureaucracy more efficient and effective.' Name three scholars that are credited with the development of classical organization thought that most correctly fit into this definition of Classical Organizational Theory. What were the basic arguments articulated by each in their contributions to the development of Classical Organizational Theory?"

The fundamental of orthodox management literature is concerned with the efficiency and effectiveness of an organisation. It copes with several problems such as the classical and human relations theory, motivation and leadership. It also assumes that employees are a key asset as well as the society has moved to a Post-Fordism and post-bureaucratic approach. However, orthodox management is only concerned with how the organisation is behaving instead of why the business is conducting in a certain way. Another limitation is that the theory is merely a group of people’s idea so it is always contestable. In this essay, I will describe how the conventional management theory apply to today’s organisations; demonstrate the reality of work through

This paper analyzes five great management theorists: F. W. Taylor, Max Weber, Mary Parker Follett, and Douglas McGregor. Each theorist will be compared by four management functions: planning, organizing, leading, and controlling as detailed in the textbook: The Essentials of Contemporary Management-Sixth Edition from Gareth Jones and Jennifer M. George. We begin by discussing commerce prior the industrial revolution and then we define the key management functions, followed by an examination of each theorist, applying a template of analysis and critique.

The Contingency theory, developed in 1950s, argues that there is no 'one best way ' to structure an organization and we face different possibilities when determining how it should be structured and how it should be managed. Successful organizations adopt structures that are an appropriate response to a number of variables, or contingencies (Enoch, 2006).

The classical or traditional approach to management was generally concerned with the structure and the activities of formal organization. The utmost importance in the achievement of an effective organization were seen to be the issues such as the establishment of a hierarchy of authority, the division of work, and the span of control.

This essay will discuss the relevance of the ideas of classical theorists in today’s work and organisations. I will evaluate why these ideas gained popularity when they were published by looking at the influences that classical theorists were surrounded by at the time of their development. I will then focus on bureaucracy and scientific theories, by looking at the organisations and countries that have adopted this style and how a negative reputation has been

Compare and contrast the management theories of Frederick Taylor, Henri Fayol, Elton Mayo and Douglas McGregor. In what sense(s) are these theories similar and/or compatible? In what sense(s) are these theories dissimilar and/or incompatible? How would a contingency theorist reconcile the points of dissimilarity and/or incompatibility between these approaches?

Based on this right, the bureaucracy designed by Weber has clear division of labor; thoroughly indicated hierarchical relationship and pointed out impersonal relationship (Crozier, 1964). In the course of history, there have been various more perfect organizational systems, therefore, bureaucratic theory was questioned and criticized by many scholar. However, there are still certain organizations that use bureaucracy theory to design the corporate structure despite many critical views.

With the support of relevant examples, examine the development of management theories and how these theories may affect the management practices in PRIMARK:

Taylorism is a management system which was popular in the late 19th century. It was designed to increase efficiency by breaking down and specialising repetitive tasks. This is exhibited as mentioned in ‘Selection and Development: A new perspective on some old problems’ that several jobs presently no longer consist of clusters of similar tasks, but are now process based collections of activities (Harrington, Hill & Linley 2005). According to Weber’s foundation of organisation theory; bureaucracy was portrayed as an “instrument or tool of unrivalled technical superiority which entailed charismatic, traditional and rational authority” (1978, cited in Clegg 1994). Thereafter, other theories derived based on the instrument being used as a form of manipulation. This is evident in Knights & Roberts’ (1982) concept of human resource management and staff misunderstanding the nature of power, treating it as if it were an individual possession, as opposed to a relationship between people (Knights & Roberts 1982). Subsequently, this led to the establishment of unions and increasing cooperative resistance in the workplace as employees seek change in the occupational structure (Courpasson & Clegg 2012). The change in this occupational structure was based around the ‘superior-inferior’ concept where managers prioritise their own success

In the early 1900’s, some of the first ideas were thrown together to allow an organization to flourish in the upcoming modern era. The first theories were known as scientific and classical management, which focused on three separate theories from Frederick Taylor, Henri Fayol, and Max Weber. The three theories have similar ideology in the fact that organization is driven by management authority, employees only source of motivation is money, and organizations are machinelike with employees making up the parts of the machine (Papa, Daniels, & Spiker, 2008). In the Prophecy Fulfilled case study, Mary Ann (senior auditor) takes on a management role with subordinates similar to that of Weber’s Bureaucratic Theory (Daniels 1987, pp. 77-78).

The main focus behind the development of management theory is the quest for good ways to make use of managerial means. Management theory evolves constantly with the continuous stream of new ideas that come from the attempts to transform theory into practice, and vice versa (Aguinaldo & Powell, 2002). Progression in management theory normal happen as key personnel discover great methods to accomplish the most important management responsibilities: planning, organiz-ing, leading, and controlling human and other managerial means. This paper will show how man-agement theory having to do with suitable management processes has emerge in modern times, and view the main aspects that have led to its prosperity.

Between 1770 and 1850, during the Industrial Revolution in England, huge changes occurred in society. In this time, huge Industrial growth occurred due to advancements in power, transport and communication. Inventions such as the steam engine allowed industries to expand and transport goods and materials with ease. Communication improved also due to the arrival of the telegraph, telephone and radio. This industrialisation continued at a rapid pace with the economy in the western world shifting from mainly agricultural to being involved with manufacturing goods and industrial markets. This change required more structured and coherent management methods to be created. It wasn’t until the early 1900s however that formal theories of management started to be formulated with the arrival of classical schools of management.

Early management theories adopted by such proponents as Henri Fayol, Mary Parker Follett and Max Weber are relevant in todays’ world. In this essay I am going to discuss about all three theorists and how their theories are still relevant for managers in the 21st century in meeting the challenges. In the classical approach to management there are three branches under it. They are, scientific management, administrative principles and bureaucratic organisation. Henry Fayol and Mary Parker Follett developed theories for administrative principles and Max Weber developed a theory for bureaucratic organisation (Schermerhorn et al. 2014, p.36). First we will be going through Henri Fayol and then Mary Parker Follett as they both made theories