The classical approach looks more towards getting the job done. Developed through the Industrial Revolution, the classical approach to management originated from having to deal with any complications that arose in the new factories. They were using this method to establish the most efficient way of completing the tasks that were set in front of them.
The classical approach was used to tell workers how to do their job in a way that gets the most amount of work done. In retrospect, the modern day has recognised that this was not sustainable to treat a workforce like they were merely another set of machines in the factory. The human relation approach took virtually the opposite spin on management. This method focuses much more on the workforce themselves and their needs. It was theorised that if the management were to find the best and most comfortable way for the employees to work, this in turn would promote a great degree of work ethic and productivity.
In doing this they focused very much on the needs of the workforce. They ensured that the environment they worked in was completely safe; that the workers were did not have their physical or mental health compromised as a result of their working environment.
They also worked on improving the self-esteem and self-confidence of their workforce. This would involve a great degree of encouragement and recognition for the work that they were doing. It was suggested that this was a far greater approach to securing more productivity because the workforce felt much more motivated and obliged to do their very best for the management. The classical management approach was developed during the Industrial Revolution in order to cope with the problems that arose in the factories. The classical approach attempted to find the best way form performing and managing tasks. It consisted of classical scientific school and the classical administrative school. This approach suggested the development of standard methods for doing jobs and the people were trained and they worked more like machines. Every person has his own specialized work and he had to do it. This approach emphasized on the work element and did not see the workers as human beings but machines.
The classical writers thought of the organisation in terms of its purpose and formal structure. They placed emphasis on the planning of work, the technical requirements of the organisation, principles of management, and the assumption of rational and logical behaviour. The analysis of organisation in this manner is associated with work carried out initially in the early part of the last century, by such writers as Taylor, Fayol, Urwick, Mooney and Reiley, and Brech. Such writers were laying the foundation for a comprehensive theory of management.
A clear understanding of the purpose of an organisation is seen as essential to understanding how the organisation works and how its methods of working can be improved. Identification of general objectives would lead to the clarification of purposes and responsibilities at all levels of the organisation and to the most effective structure. Attention is given PART 1 THE ORGANISATIONAL SETTING
to the division of work, the clear definition of duties and responsibilities, and maintaining specialisation and co-ordination. Emphasis is on a hierarchy of management and formal organisational relationships.
Sets of principles
The classical writers (also variously known as the formal or scientific management writers – although scientific management is really only a part of the classical approach) were concerned with improving the organisation structure as a means of increasing efficiency. They emphasised the importance of principles for the design of a logical structure of organisation. Their writings were in a normative style and they saw these principles as a set of ‘rules’ offering general solutions to common problems of organisation and management. Most classical writers had their own...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document