Compare and contrast of the classical school of management and the human relations school of management
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 classical management focuses on the efficiency and includes scientific, bureaucratic and administrative management.
The scientific approach required several major principles in its application to management: 1st – develops a science for each operation to replace opinion and rule-of-thumb. 2nd - it suggests that workers should be scientifically selected based on their qualifications and trained to perform their jobs in the most optimal manner. 3rd - it advocates genuine cooperation between workers and management based on mutual self-interest. 4th - it suggests that management should take total responsibility for planning the work and that worker’s primary responsibility should be achieving management's plans. Scientific management is a series of approaches aimed at improving the performance of individual workers through the use of analytical procedures to lift workplace efficiency”. The system was developed by Fredrick Taylor (1856-1915), in hope of providing the workplace with greater productivity and efficiency, which in turn gave individuals a greater understanding of management. Fredrick Taylor defined his theory as “the one best way for a job to be done” (Robins. S. et al, 2006). Scientific management brought many improvements to productivity, which was much needed and impressive. Highly repetitive jobs were re-designed, with remarkable increases in output, which contributed to the workplace greatly (Davidson. P. et al, 2000). Taylor’s production methods helped create the foundation for improved manufacturing efficiency, greater profits and higher wages (Parayitam. S, 2002). Scientific management eliminated, waste in human energy, waste in equipment, waste in machine power, and instead evolved into an extended planning department so better appliances, improved programs of work and recording of individual work can be introduced (Nyland. C, 2000). Taylor achieved improvements in productivity of 200 per cent or more (Smiths. A, 2000). Taylor stated, “The role of managers is to plan and control, and that of workers to perform as they are instructed”. However, scientific management can also lead to overspecialized jobs, resulting in worker resentment, monotony, poor quality, absenteeism and turnover. Overall, this theory has contributed greatly to the means of understanding management, as the theory is not simplistic better yet informational therefore educational to one.
Max Weber embellished the scientific management theory with his bureaucratic theory. Bureaucratic management developed an ideal model of an organization that is governed by a set of impersonal rules and policies, including merit as a basis for career advancement. Weber believed that bureaucratic management was the most efficient way to organize and govern an enterprise. Weber focused on dividing organizations into hierarchies, establishing strong lines of authority and control. He suggested organizations develop comprehensive and detailed EC040172
standard operating procedures for all routinized tasks. He formulated the characteristics of the ideal bureaucracy as 1.Hierarchy of authority, 2.Written rules of conduct 3.Impersonality, 4.Promotion based on achievement, 5.Specialized division of labor, 6.Efficiency. According to Weber, bureaucracies are goal-oriented organizations designed according to rational principles in order to efficiently attain their goals. Offices are ranked in a hierarchical order, with information flowing up the chain of command, directives flowing down....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document