The major theme prevalent throughout this week’s readings is a detailed look at the study of public administration through different forms of management.
The two main forms of management discussed in the passages by Shafritz & Hyde (2012) and Chester Barnard (1968) are scientific management and human relations school of management. The theory of scientific management, first introduced by Frederick W. Taylor (1912, pp. 37-39) proposes that the driving force behind a man’s work is receiving a monetary reward. On the other hand the theory of human relations, as suggested by Mary Parker Follet (1926, pp. 58-65) and later validated by the Hawthorne experiments conducted in the 1930s (Shafritz and Hyde, 2012) propose that the driving force
…show more content…
He (Barnard, 1968, pp. 65-81, 114-123, 186-199, 215-234) emphasized on the point that there was a mutually dependent relationship between a formal and informal organization, and in order to achieve a successful running organization (whether formal or informal) the executive/superior should ensure that both the needs of the organization as well as the needs of the employee are met equally.
William Willoughby (1918, pp. 40-43), did prominent work in the field of public administration. One of his most prominent work is on budgetary reform. Willoughby shared a similar school of thought as Frederick Taylor, based on the principles of scientific management. Both Willoughby and Taylor, through their own school of thoughts concluded on the same point that the driving force behind management/administrative/individual ultimately is monetary/financial. Years later came along the Luther Gulick, with the “Theory of Organization” (1937, pp. 81-89), who again shared Frederick Taylor’s ideology of taking a scientific approach to management. Gulick (1937, pp. 81-89) was famously known for his mnemonic on the seven major functions of management: “planning, organizing, staffing, directing, coordinating, reporting and budgeting.”
Weber’s work on bureaucracy (1922, pp. 44-49) is considered the basis for the subject. Weber’s main idea of organizations being
Max Weber was a German sociologist who first described the concept of bureaucracy, an ideal form of organizational structure. He defines bureaucratic administration as the exercise of control on the
On a macro level, public administration and business management are similar in their overall functions. “At the broadest level, some organizational theorists contend that administration is administration whatever its setting, and that the problems of organizing people, leading them and supplying them with resources to do their jobs are always the same (Kettl, 2012, p. 38).” In his paper, “Public and Private Management: Are They Fundamentally Alike in All Unimportant Respects?,” Graham T. Allison explains that in comparing public and administration and business management, “it is possible to identify a set of general management functions (Allison, 2012, p. 4).” Regardless of their end goal, each administration must form strategies by setting goals, priorities and creating procedures. Public and private organizations must manage internal components by organizing staff, defining job responsibilities, hiring and managing personnel and creating budgets. Furthermore, they must manage external constituencies such as other agencies, the press and public (Allison, 2012, p. 5). His observations stem from Wallace Sayre’s famous words, “public and private management are fundamentally alike in all unimportant respects (DiIlulio, 1993).”
Some have seriously misinterpreted Weber and have claimed that he liked bureaucracy, that he believed that bureaucracy was an "ideal" organization. Others have pronounced Weber "wrong" because bureaucracies do not live up to his list of "ideals". Others have even claimed that Weber "invented" bureaucratic organization. But Weber described bureaucracy as an “ideal type” in order to more accurately describes their growth in power and scope in the modern world. His studies of bureaucracy still form the core of organizational sociology.
The environment and the state of affairs in which Max Weber developed the theory of bureaucracy were different from the present welfare states. Modern states are complex and difficult to maintain thus the validity of bureaucracy is questioned in the face of these challenges.
Weber states that organizations regulations are formed by few people and this people are the boss, administration employee who tends to have representation powers (Roth and Wittich, 1968). Weber states that the state tends to use bureaucracy on its people in order to establish authority. Bureaucracy is present in various areas in the environment and once bureaucracy is produced then it becomes difficult to
Understanding the pillars of public administration is a vital way for leaders to gain perspective when leading successfully. Among these six pillars of public administration, the leadership style addresses a connection with any civic organization.
The year 1911 saw Frederick Winslow Taylor publish a book titled ‘The principles of scientific management’ in which he aimed to prove that the scientific method could be used in producing profits for an organization through the improvement of an employee’s efficiency. During that decade, management practice was focused on initiative and incentives which gave autonomy to the workman. He thus argued that one half of the problem was up to management, and both the worker and manager needed to cooperate in order to produce the greatest prosperity.
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.
Scientific Management Theory by Frederick W. Taylor – Throughout the industrial world employees are the large part of the organisation and Fundamental interests of employees are necessarily aggressive. So as a manager it is necessary to arrange mutual relations with employees so their interests become identical. In case of any single individual the greatest prosperity can exist only when that individual has reached his highest state of efficiency and that is, when he is turning out his largest daily output (Frederick Winslow Taylor, 2007).
Before compare the two different models TPA and NPM, I will illustrate what is the
With those evocative words, Frederick W. Taylor had begun his highly influential book; “The Principles of Scientific Management” indicating his view regarding management practices. As one of the most influential management theorists, Taylor is widely acclaimed as the ‘father of scientific management’. Taylor had sought “the ‘one best way’ for a job to be done” (Robbins, Bergman, Stagg & Coulter, 2003, p.39). Northcraft and Neale (1990, p.41) state that “Scientific management took its
There are a number of management theories that have changed the management business environment in the twentieth century. The theories have assisted managers to come up with better ways of management and organization of people. Managers have been able to increase profits, reduce costs and maximize efficiency. The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast the contributions of scientific management and the human relations movement to the modern management. This essay will use Frederick Winslow Taylor’s theory on scientific management and Elton Mayo’s human relations theory. These two movements have been proven to increase productivity in the workplace (Mullins, 2005).
Throughout history, there have been many different approaches of management theories. Some theories longer exist because they are no longer relevant in today’s environment, but some theories are still implemented like Scientific Management and Human Relations. Scientific management emphasizes on efficiency productivity by motivating workers with monetary rewards. Human relations emphasize on motivation of workers by both financial rewards and a range of social factors (e.g. praise, a sense of belonging, feelings of achievement and pride in one’s work).
The purpose of Part Two is to begin with the work of Frederick W. Taylor and trace developments in management thought in Great Britain, Europe, Japan, and the U.S.A. up to about 1929. Taylor is the focal point, but we will see his followers as well as developments in personnel management and the behavioral sciences. Henri Fayol and Max Weber will be discussed, although their main influence came later, and we will conclude with an overview of the influence of scientific management in its environment.