Classical Management Approach During The 19th Century

Management as a concept was developed in the last 100 years partly due to the booming industrial revolution. “The definition of management is to

After the end of the Industrial Revolution, large corporations were beginning to grow in size and power in order to satisfy what seemed the endless demands for new goods and services. As corporations and labor forces grew, there was a need to develop a more systematic study of organization and management, known as management theory, the significant being Frederick Taylor's Principles of Scientific Management which involved the development of training workers through special incentives and compensation (Boone p.33). In general, early management scientists tended to believe that there was a single way to organize companies and manage employees. By the beginning of the 20th century, there were initial attempts for launching a systematic and

The industrial revolution, which emerged between the 18th and 19th century, brought about new technology allowing for mass production (Hudson, 1992). These technologies brought new problems and so managers had to respond quickly. The response was the emergence of the classical perspective (Samson, Catley, Cathro, & Daft, 2012).

In the beginning of the twenty century, classical management theory was proposed. This classical management theory maintains labours’ high level specialization, centralized decision making, as well as maximize profit. (www.businessdictioary.com ) The main two thoughts of classical theory are bureaucracy and scientific management. Nowadays some people argue that the classical management theory is no longer suitable for modern world and they are outmoded because of the business environment has changed. This management theory is not that feasible since it is inflexible and dehumanized which should be modified. However, there is another voice that classical management theory is the foundation of numerous modern management methods, so it is not out of date and it just need some improvement. The aim of this essay is to discuss two kinds of classical theory bureaucracy and scientific management theory and demonstrate that they are not out of date and they develop into the cornerstone of some modern management theories.

The old economy that developed during the Industrial Revolution represented a working system that was based on unionized labor, mass production, and labor that was divided by gender. Frederick Winslow Taylor introduced a different way to manage in order to increase productivity. “He advocated the benefits of redesigning work to wrest control from workers and place it in the hands of management” (Sweet, 10).

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.

The classical management theory, which came about during the Industrial Revolution, focused on the single best way to perform and manage tasks. This enabled factories to operate year round and mass production of goods. But as the revolution went on, the factories divided into separate schools of thought regarding management yet still considered it to be a part of classical. The emphasis on manufacturing and

Classical management theory was rigid and mechanistic, and overall focused heavily on structure, not the individual. The shortcomings of classical organization theory quickly became apparent during industrialization of companies. Its major deficiency was that it attempted to explain peoples' motivation to work strictly as a function of economic reward. Recognizing this, a need for human resources became important which initiated focus into neoclassical organization theory.

Historically, the Industrial Revolution was a critical time in the formation of early rational organisation (Smelser, 2013). To begin with; work was moving from self-employment in the homestead to migration of a workforce to a centralised workplace whereby the building, tools and technologies were owned and controlled by capitalists (Ibid). The aim of the capitalists was to increase productivity and the output through utilising this new concept of an employed workforce whilst trying to maintain a relatively low level of expenditure in order to maximise profits, however, this inevitably required ever improving technologies, incentives for employees and methods of control as they moved from the flexibility that they previously enjoyed, to working a set schedule as arranged by their superiors (ibid). Consequently commanding and controlling each individual employee became a very real consideration with the everincreasing magnitude of the industrial workspace; something essentially needed to be done as it was becoming impractical and arguably impossible for the owners of businesses to manage their workforce and maintain order (King and Lawley, 2013). A result of this was the integration of a managerial structure within organisations.

Management theory has been a topical issue in several organizational fields for centuries. Both classic and modern styles organizations have reinforced management principles to fulfil goals efficiently and effectively. From the industrial to post-industrial evolution of organizations, the emergence of several management theories and their components have been infused in business polices, protocols and regulations that transfer onto the organisation’s operations (Aldrich, 2008). Today’s literature on such practices informs the existence of two major styles of management theories: classical and contemporary.

Classical management theory or scientific management came to prominence in the early 1900 hundreds and Fredrick Taylor’s work was pioneering in this area of management theory (Taneja, 2011). One definition of scientific management that Taylor endorsed was that it is “a system devised by industrial engineers for the purpose of serving the common interests of employers, workmen and society at large through the elimination of avoidable wastes, the general improvement of the processes and methods of production, and the just and scientific distribution of the product” (Hoxie, 1915:140). Delving deeper into classical management theory, this paper looks at two more recent proponents of management theory, namely Henri Fayol and Henry Mintzberg. Both had their theories on classical management theories which will be critically analysed. It will also be shown how these theories apply to modern day organisations.

In a historical aspect the evolution of management consist of six approaches starting with America’s Industrial Revolution in the late 19th century to the present: Classical, Behavioral, Quantitative, Systems, Contingency and Quality. Before the creation of factories the need for managerial skills was not needed, since products and services were delivered on a small scale and by hand. But with the invention of engines that did not require rivers to make them run, companies started to create factories to produce products in mass quantities requiring a need for more knowledge in the field of management.

Managers today have many different options when choosing a managerial theory to implement for their organizations. Knowledgeable managers must be aware of the different historical approaches and also able to determine which approach would be most effective for their unit. The established work structure of my unit currently utilizes elements of classical organizational theory, more specifically scientific management and bureaucratic theory. More recent theories, such as those that focus on human relations, are not applied as frequently. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the historical management theories utilized by my organization and determine whether they are appropriate. When areas in which my organization could be improved upon are identified, the recommendations of other management theories are considered for their possible effectiveness.

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.

The history of management has been grouped into phases of development. Classical Management was introduced in the beginning of the 201th century. This addresses the organization’s search for efficiency on the basis that people will work for themselves and be economically beneficial. In other words, they work because they are determined by the economic concerns. Workers are expected to accept every opportunity that comes and they must work for it to achieve a personal and financial improvement. All of this has been supported by 3 theories in which the companies still used it today.