The world of organizations is practical. As previously discussed, management can be regarded as a simple micro approach where the rule a + b = c is a model. The theoretical side is used to understand how specific management theories relate to learning organizations. According to Kimani, and his work on the background of organizations, we show that organizations have existed in society for many years, as found in the pre-twentieth-century works of Adam Smith[1], commonly referred to as the ‘Father of Economics.’ Understanding organizations comes from understanding management theory, and Kimani outlines four major management theories for the basis of organizations: bureaucratic theory, scientific management theory, behavioural management theory, and human relations theory. These four theories are generalized as the classical theories of managing organizations[1].

When an organization is formed, it usually sets its rules based on its structure. Similar to what was discussed in chapter 1 with regard to formal and informal, mechanistic and organic organizations; one theory relates to the role of the formal and mechanistic organizations more than the others. relates to the formal hierarchy in which many tasks are delegated to individuals and departments. They are also held together by a central administration[1]. This theory was developed by Max Weber (1864-1920), who was a German historian and sociologist, and is regarded as the “father of bureaucracy”[4].

This theory is quite popular, and is used by a host of both private and public institutions. Kimani states that universities and other schools rely on bureaucracies to function, as the compatibility of this function is relevant in the delegation of tasks[1]. The compatibility decided upon (usually by a central command) is passed down to subordinates who carry the same compatibility to their subordinates and so on. The bureaucratic model, theoretically, has a hierarchical structure along with the specialized departments, making a clear outline for , which is the defining and break-down of work into well-defined tasks, and delegated to be manageable[1]. The idea of division of labour is a key factor in the bureaucratic theory.

He focused on management philosophy, emphasized the necessity of high wage and low cost per unit, and therefore. Taylor’s “Scientific Management Principles”: Contemporary Issues in Personnel Selection Period. Journal of Economics, Business and Management, Vol. 11, November 2015. DOI: 10.7763/JOEBM.2015.V3.342 1102. Management is an art, science as well as a profession Management is an art because certain skills, essential for good management, are unique to individuals. Management is a science because it has an organised body of knowledge. Management is also a profession because it is based on advanced and cultivated knowledge.

In the modern world of technological advancement, it is no surprise that the push for understanding within organizations is the key to success. When looking at the sport of baseball in 2019, compared to the sport of baseball in 1999, there is a great influence of statistical probability and analytics introduced to the game, compared to a decade earlier. This is due to the popularity of Sabermetrics, which is the application of statistical analysis to baseball records to evaluate and compare the performance of individual players.. This idea relates to , developed by Fredrick Taylor. It helps to improve an organization’s level of task completion through scientific, engineering, and mathematical analysis[1]. Much like how Sabermetrics cuts through the aesthetics of baseball and focuses on the numbers, scientific management theory cuts through the aesthetics of production and focuses on the increase of production and value.

This theory can be used in learning organizations due to its ability to be mathematically savvy to produce the best results for an institution. Colleges and universities may use statistics such as graduation rates, acceptance rates, and research tracking to develop, change or keep their current methods, in addition, the use of the statistics helps to compare against other institutions.

The scientific management theory is closely related to the definition of management discussed in chapter one. The theory can be harsh, as employees are considered more widgets than humans. However, Henri Fayol came along and developed the six roles of management. This brought in a more humanistic approach to the understanding of scientific management, allowing humans to be humans and focusing more on managing situations and using people to help in the process. The six roles of management are as follows[2]:

1. Forecasting
2. Planning
3. Organizing
4. Commanding
5. Coordinating
6. Controlling

In the mid-twentieth-century, one theory was presented that has worked to completely remove itself from scientific theory. , also known as the social science movement, uses the concept that all approaches to the workplace should be in the best interest of both company and workers[3]. This theory was developed by Chester Barnhard, in the 1940’s, as a way for workers to be viewed as psychological and social beings[3]. Essentially, there is no separation between ‘human being’ and ‘worker’ as they are one in the same, and that, by following this concept, it would lead to success within a workplace.

The idea of behavioral management is about understanding the idea that managers should comprehend human or worker needs within an organization. Many theorists wanted to find out how the use of behavioral management theory would function within workplaces. One of the main theorists being Elton Mayo, and his groundbreaking experiment: The Hawthorne Studies, which will be discussed further in chapter ten about communication. The Hawthorne experiment essentially used special privileges, pay rewards, even company provided lunches in ways to increase employee psychological well-being, and eventually employee productivity[3].

Behavioral management theory had a great impact on learning organizations, as it provided a new view on how administrators come into learning organizations. There are two factors which are integral to the introduction of behavioral management within learning organizations, such as administrators at colleges and universities[3]:

1. Administrators can emerge from different disciplines (i.e. business, social sciences, and the arts), not specifically from education.
2. Along with specialized knowledge of education, administrators must have an grasp of social sciences, such as economics and government.

In most education faculties, both undergraduate and graduate students develop content that is considered interdisciplinary (i.e. covering multiple branches of knowledge and understanding). This allows educational administrators the ability to take on a more holistic approach, which will lead to a better understanding of the ‘human-worker’. Even when administrators and professors develop courses, interdisciplinary theory is used in development (Figure 4).

Now that the worker has become less of a product with no needs, to a human worker with needs and desires, it surprising that it took until the twentieth-century to realize that the people who work in a factory do not become less of a psychological being inside or outside the factory. Mary Parker Follet developed the human relations theory with regard to employees having a more satisfying life, and they can solve conflicts through a process of democracy and conversation. There are six points in which democratic problem solving happen in human relations theory[3]:

1. Listening to each other’s views
2. Accepting other view points
3. Integrating viewpoints in pursuit of a common goal
4. Coordinating must be achieved in the early stages
5. Coordinating must have reciprocal understanding
6. Coordinating is a continual process.

Within learning organizations, we have seen the advancement of programs to help with human relations inside the walls of the establishments. From seminars discussing productivity, improving morale, and good ethical actions, to open meetings where brainstorming happens, the impact has given employees a chance to offer a holistic influence on organizations.

The idea of human relations draws comparisons to Abraham Maslow, and his theory on self-actualization (Figure 5), which was discussed in chapter one. Human relations theory allows employees to develop a sense of self-awareness to understand their places within a company and their influence.

Review Questions:

1. What are the four different classical management theories?
2. What was the famous study conducted to develop an understanding of behavioural management theory?
3. What is the final and highest step in Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory?

Classical management theory
There are three well-established theories of classical management: Taylor,s Theory of Scientific Management, Fayol’s Administrative Theory, Weber’s Theory of Bureaucracy. Although these schools, or theories, developed historical sequence, later ideas have not replaced earlier ones. Instead, each new school has tended to complement or coexist with previous ones.
Theory recognizing the role that management plays in an organization. The importance of the function of management was first recognized by French industrialist Henri Fayol in the early 1900s.
In contrast to the purely scientific examination of work and organizations conducted by F W Taylor, Fayol proposed that any industrial undertaking had six functions: technical; commercial; financial; security; accounting; and managerial. Of these, he believed the managerial function, ‘to forecast and plan, to organize, to command, to coordinate, and control’, to be quite distinct from the other five. Fayol also identified general principles of management: division of work; authority and responsibility; discipline; unity of command; unity of direction; subordination of individual interest to general interest; remuneration of personnel; centralization; scalar chain of authority; order; equity; stability of tenure of personnel; initiative; and esprit de corps. Fayol's views on management remained popular throughout a large part of the 20th century.
Evolution of Classical Approach to Management
Traditional process of learning is either through obsevation and experiment. Nature or environment is considered uniform and when we observe certain phenomenon or events uniformly leading to the same result or results, we conclude a cause and effect relationship between the two. This is learning by observation or in other words by experience.
Earlier thinkers on management followed this approach in developing theories of management. Learning principally is through emphirical process and through analysis of the data collected through observation. Draw the principles of managment by looking at and anyalysing the jobs that all managers commonly do. This approach served as a starting point for pioneers on management science to verify the validity and improve the applicability of the principles and practices of management. Analysis of observd data is what constitute a case study. The observational method of case study helps arriving at logical conclusions about past experience and to test the same as standards for future events.
The German sociolists, Max Weber followed the classical approach and developed his theory of Bureaucracy, which portrays the structure anddesign of organisation charqacterised by a hierarchy of authority, formalised rules and regulations that serve to guide the coordinated functioning of an organization.
Basic Postulates of the Classical Approach by Max Weber
1. Management of an organization is considered as a chain of inter-related functions. The study of the scope and features of these functions, the sequence through which these are performed and their inter-relationship leads one to draw principles of management suitable for universal application
2. Learning principles of management is done through the past experiences of actual practicing managers
3. As business environment consists of uniform cycles exhibiting an underlying unity of realities, functions and principles of management derived through process of empirical reasoning are suitable for universal application
4. Emerging new managers through formal education and case study can develop skill and competency in management concepts and practices
5. The clasasical approach also recognised the importance of economic efficiency and formal organizational structure as guiding pillars of management effectigveness.
6. Business activity is based on economic benefit. Organizations should therefore control economic incentives

Pre Classical Management Theory Pdf

Neoclassical theory of management
There are 3 neoclassical theories:
Human Relations theory :

Pre Classical Management Theory Pdf Download

Explains the modern advancement of Human Relations Management theory which takes into account human factors like the employer-employee relationship. Human relations theory is largely seen to have been born as a result of the Hawthorne experiments which Elton Mayo conducted at the Western Electrical Company.

Pre Classical Management Theory Pdf Free

The important strand in the development of modern management was the increase in attention to the human factors, which has become known as the 'human relations school of management.’ The core aspect of Human Relations Theory is that, when workers were being observed and included in the research, they felt more important and valued by the company. As a result, their productivity levels went up significantly. This represented a significant departure from many of the classical theories, particularly Fordism, as it went against the notion that management needed to control workers, and remove their autonomy at every step. Instead, it showed that by engaging with workers and considering their requirements and needs, company’s could benefit from increased productivity.
Behavioral theory :
The behavioral management theory is often called the human relations movement because it addresses the human dimension of work. Behavioral theorists believed that a better understanding of human behavior at work, such as motivation, conflict, expectations, and group dynamics, improved productivity.
The theorists who contributed to this school viewed employees as individuals, resources, and assets to be developed and worked with — not as machines, as in the past. Several individuals and experiments contributed to this theory.
Social systems theory.:
Developed by Niklas Luhmann is an option for the theoretical foundation of Human Resource Management (HRM). After clarifying the advantages of using a grand (social) theory as the basic theoretical perspective, the roots of this social systems theory - the deterministic view of systems as machines, the open systems approach and non-linear systems theory - are addressed. Based on the view of social systems as autopoietically closed systems, five major contributions to a theoretical foundation of HRM are identified: (1) the conceptualisation of organising and managing human resources as social processes, thus overcoming an individualistic angle; (2) the new importance of individuals as essential element in the system's environment; (3) the abstention form far reaching or highly unrealistic assumptions about the 'nature' of human beings; (4) the interaction between various levels and units of analysis built into the theory which is essential for comprehensive and in-depth analyses of HR phenomena and (5) the openness for additional theories for which social systems theory provides the overall framework.
George Elton Mayo was in charge of certain experiments on human behavior carried out at the Hawthorne Works of the Western Electric company in Chicago between 1924 and 1927. His research findings have contributed to organizational development in terms of human relations and motivation theory.
Elton Mayo's contributions came as part of the Hawthorne studies, a series of experiments that rigorously applied classical management theory only to reveal its shortcomings. The Hawthorne experiments consisted of two studies conducted at the Hawthorne Works of the Western Electric Company in Chicago from 1924 to 1932. The first study was conducted by a group of engineers seeking to determine the relationship of lighting levels to worker productivity. Surprisingly enough, they discovered that worker productivity increased as the lighting levels decreased — that is, until the employees were unable to see what they were doing, after which performance naturally declined.
A few years later, a second group of experiments began. Harvard researchers Mayo and F. J. Roethlisberger supervised a group of five women in a bank wiring room. They gave the women special privileges, such as the right to leave their workstations without permission, take rest periods, enjoy free lunches, and have variations in pay levels and workdays. This experiment also resulted in significantly increased rates of productivity.
In this case, Mayo and Roethlisberger concluded that the increase in productivity resulted from the supervisory arrangement rather than the changes in lighting or other associated worker benefits. Because the experimenters became the primary supervisors of the employees, the intense interest they displayed for the workers was the basis for the increased motivation and resulting productivity. Essentially, the experimenters became a part of the study and influenced its outcome. This is the origin of the term Hawthorne effect, which describes the special attention researchers give to a study's subjects and the impact that attention has on the study's findings.