Page 1 of 5

Compare and Contrast of the Classical School of Management and th...

Continues for 4 more pages »
Read full document

Compare and Contrast of the Classical School of Management and the Human Relations School of Management

  • By
  • August 7, 2008
  • 1531 Words
  • 68 Views
Page 1 of 5
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...