More handpicked essays just for you.
Different theories in management
Comparing and contrasting management theories
Different theories in management
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Different theories in management
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).
Mary Ann was assigned two staff accountants to work under her supervision for a new client. The time frame of the job was short, so Mary Ann decided to take an efficient approach when managing her subordinates. Without consulting her subordinates’ opinion on the tasks for the job, Mary Ann decided her subordinates’ fate on the performance appraisal giv...
– Management follows a work to rule philosophy even at the expense of other stakeholders, such as employees and shareholders. They do not have the drive to succeed or change processes to generate more profit, simply because they receive large salaries and benefits for doing merely what their contracts
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? The twentieth century has brought in a number of management theories which have helped shape our view of management in the present business environment.
Lael is going to review the following three manager in the company: Liz, Roy, and Quang Yeh. Below is facts that I think might have a bearing on this problem, show as a table so make us easier to compare their difference, which is good for making utilitarian approach.
Section 1: The focus of many managers is most often on the wrong things. They focus on appraisal rather than planning. Performance appraisal is not performance management. Managers often focus on a one-way flow of words (manager to employee) rather than dialogue. Performance management and the end of the year appraisal are often seen as a necessary evil. They don’t realize that if carried out properly, performance management has the potential to fix many of the problems they’re facing.
Dessler. G. (2001). Management – Leading People and Organizations in the 21st Century. (2nd Edition). New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.
This research has asked us to look into three different styles of management and find real life examples of companies or individuals who have or are currently using such styles of management. To begin we will take a look into the use of an autocratic style of management versus a participative. In this portion we will look into Leona Helmsley and her chain of hotels. Once this potion is completed, our next section will be looking into a centralized style of management versus a decentralized style. In this section of the research, we will be looking into Apple Inc and how they have built an empire with a centralized style of managing philosophy. Finally, in the final section of the research we will be taking a look at how Google has created an informal environment in which employees have direct access to executives and have the ability to share thoughts and ideas that are taken serious and to the heart.
“Management is a process of planning, organisation, command, coordination, and control” (Morgan 2006, p.18). Rational organisation design is a bureaucratic method of management which emphasizes efficiency to achieve the end goal and the management of multiple companies have taken upon this system. Figures such as Frederick Taylor and Henry Ford have both shown and laid a path way for Rational Organisation which has become known as Taylorism and Fordism. The design has received criticism and both Taylor and Ford have been portrayed as villains with Taylor being called “enemy of the working man” (Morgan 2006, p.23) as the system dehumanised workers by taking all of the thought and skill from them and giving it to the managers this is because the tasks given were simple and repetitive. As staff needed little training they became an easily replaceable asset and thus more machine than human.
The evolution of management though the decades can be divided into two major sections. One of the sections is the classical approach. Under the classical approach efficiency and productivity became a critical concern of the managers at the turn of the 20th century. One of the approaches from the classical time period were systematic management which placed more emphasis on internal operations because managers were concerned with meeting the growth in demand brought on by the Industrial revolution. As a result managers became more concerned with physical things than towards the people therefore systematic management failed to lead to production efficiency. This became apparent to an engineer named Frederick Taylor who was the father of Scientific Management. Scientific Management was identified by four principles for which management should develop the best way to do a job, determine the optimum work pace, train people to do the job properly, and reward successful performance by using an incentive pay system. Scientifi...
The classical school of organization theory dominated administrations from the early 1900’s well into the 1930’s, and it is still relevant today in many of the contemporary organization theories. Shafritz states that classical organization theory was the first theory of its kind, and serves as the foundation of other schools organization theory (Shafritz, Ott, & Jang, 2011, p. 32). Classical organization theory includes scientific management approach, bureaucratic approach, and administrative management approach. Several major theorists of classical organization were Adam Smith, Frederick Taylor, Max Weber, Henri Fayol, and Luther Gulick.
The management and organizational approaches that are used by various firms play a critical role in their performance. The adopted management approach is important due to the fact that it determines the efficiency with which activities are performed. The organizational structure of the firm on the other hand determines the delegation and application of authority. The organizational structure is developed by the management. The structure facilitates effective interaction among employees and helps in directing resources towards achieving the goals of the organization. The behavior of employees is also influenced by the management and organizational approach (Mullins 3). Thus a firm will only be successful if it adopts the best management and organizational approach. This paper will focus on analyzing two management approaches namely, scientific and bureaucratic theories of management.
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.
Miles, R. (1975) Theories of Management: Implications for Organisational Behaviour and Development. McGraw-Hill, New York.
The organizational culture of an organization is typically reflected in its type of management structure. Three common types of organizational management structure are classical theory, neo-classical theory, and systems theory. This paper will first provide a brief background and explanation of the three theories. Then, this paper will compare and contrast the design features of two organizational groups that use a classical or systems theory approach to management. Finally, this paper will identify how the respective theoretical approach reflects the organization’s culture.
The human relations perspective is a way to manage a corporation where the employees are viewed as social beings with complex needs and desires as opposed to just units of production. It is based on the works of Abraham Maslow and Douglas McGregor in the mid twentieth century. This perspective places an emphasis on the social networks found in a corporation and uses gratification, not depravation, to provide motivation in the workplace.
Classical approach of management professes the body of management thought based on the belief that employees have only economical and physical needs and that the social needs and need for job satisfaction either does not exist or are unimportant. Accordingly it advocates high specialisation of labour, centralised decision making and profit maximisation.