Is the Classical approach to management obsolete?
Critically discuss your views on this matter
This essay argues the validity of the classical approach to management today. We cannot deny that businesses and organisations have evolved and changed a lot since the classical theorists, which date from the early twentieth century, but yet the main ideas about management that they gave to society are still sustainable today.
The classical organisation theory represents the merger of scientific management, bureaucratic theory, and administrative theory. (Walonick,1993). Classical theorists suggested a “one best way” to organise and manage, which is called “structural universalism” (Organisational Behaviour). These theorists were really
…show more content…
It is true that in his article (Mintzberg, 1975), Mintzberg categorises managerial activities into three different groups –interpersonal, informational and decisional- but at the end he doesn’t really contradicts what Fayol said. In fact, as M.J. Fells argued in his article (Fayol stands the test of time) Mintzberg “tends to confirm rather than deny the classical views.”
Therefore, having explained the classics’ and the contemporaneous’ views of management, we can confirm that the real and basic statements are the ones given by the first ones. Furthermore, if this idea doesn’t really convince the reader, Fayol said that there was no limit on the number of management principles and that they should be flexible and adaptable to any need (Fells, 2000), so that makes his definition even more general and suitable as time goes by.
Thus, to sum up and in accordance to everything explained above, the reflexion made by Fells in his article “Fayol stands the test of life” fits quite well to conclude this essay:
“Fayol’s principles may indeed be relevant today and should not be ignored until they have been superseded or refuted”
So as they haven’t actually been superseded nor even refuted we can continue trusting them.
References:
Boland, A. (2012, October). Introduction to Management and Organisations. Lecture 3 – The classical theorists.
Brooks, I., (2009), Organisational Behaviour –
Classical organizational theory supports two views. Scientific management which focuses on managing work and employees and administrative management which addresses issues which
His 14 universal principles of management, listed in Table 1.1, were intended to show managers how to carry out their functional duties. Fayol’s functions and principles have withstood the test of time because of their widespread applicability. In spite of years of reformulation, rewording, expansion, and revision, Fayol’s original management functions still can be found in nearly all management texts. In fact, after an extensive review of studies of managerial work, a pair of management scholars
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 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 twentieth century has brought in a number of management theories which have helped shaped our view of management in the present business environment. These emerging theories have enabled managers to appreciate new patterns of thinking, new ways of organising and new ways of managing organisations and people. Over the years these different theories have enabled the study
Since Fayol left his general manager office, separated management from business operation and studied it, management has become an independent subject. A number of academics and entrepreneurs are desirous to find what management is and how to be a successful manager. Therefore, through varied approaches, many different views about management has been appearing such as Fayol’s function theory (1949) which based on his owe managing experience and Mintzberg’s 10 roles theory (1973) which came from observing five chief-executive officers. Furthermore, Mintzberg regarded Fayol’s theory as “folklore”. It seems that Fayol’s theory has been made redundant by Mintzberg’s study. The purpose of this paper, however, is to present that
The classical management has two basic drives namely scientific and general administrative management. Scientific management focuses on how to increase productivity whiles the administrative management theory looks at organizations in general and concentrate on how to make them effective and efficient.
The history of management includes multiple theories and understanding them can help individuals identify the ideas their organization is built upon. Classical organizational theory encompasses several major approaches to management that continue to be influential even today. The early to mid-twentieth century included the introduction of many concepts of management theory such as scientific management, bureaucratic and administrative theory. Most of these early approaches revolved around control of employees and processes in order to achieve more
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).
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
Henri Fayol (1841-1925), was ‘’famous for the classical school of management, which emphasises command and control’’. (Robinson, 2005) He is deemed to be one of the founders of general management; also referred to as the administrative theory and later on becoming known as ‘Fayolism’.
Classical organization theory evolved after the first half of the 20th century. This theory represents the merger of scientific management, bureaucratic theory, and administrative theory. Scientific management synthesizes workflows by focusing on getting the best resources for production tasks. Bureaucratic theory is an authority structure that is a system of organization and administration to ensure workplace efficiency. Administrative theory worked to establish a set of management principles that applied to all organizations (Chon, 2016). An advantage of the classical theory is that it is a hierarchical structure. The top level of management is board of directors and chief executives who are responsible for the organization’s long term goals. Middle management is responsible for goals of their specific department and the budget. Lower level supervisors oversee day-to-day operations. Bart is considered a low level supervisor; he implements processes so workers are trained to efficiently perform their jobs.
By the time Henri Fayol had finished his theory, General Industrial Management, in 1916, which was based on his reminiscence as a successful turnaround of a major mining company from depths of failure; he set out to illustrate management as being a separate entity to other jobs within an organisation as he would say although “technical” and “commercial” “function” were “clearly defined”, “administrative” education was lacking. In his theory he introduced his five duties a manager had to follow to be called effective: plan, organise coordinate, command, and control and added to this fourteen principles he felt managers should use as reference to conduct the five duties. However Fayol was very much an idealist his theory was based on what a complete manager should be like and gave the view of managers taking control from behind a desk, yet critics, most influential being the academic Henry Mintzberg, who released his work in 1973, were more realists and saw a manager life as chaotic, involved and interactive, arguing what Fayol was portraying is not possible, and outdated.