Classical Managment

Historical Foundations of management have been around for years and were first introduced by Fayol around the turn of the century . This essay will discuss three main points and questions around management, the first question will cover how modern management practices have evolved from the “classical approaches to management”. The second question will cover the challenges contemporary managers face in 2013 compared to managers in the era of the classical approaches and the third question will be around comparing and contrasting bureaucratic management to a style of management I have been faced with. This discussion will pay particular attention to Frederick Taylor’s scientific approach to management.

How Modern Management Practices have evolved from the “Classical Approaches to Management”? The classical management approaches focus on developing universal principles for use in various management situations. There are 3 three major theories within the classical approaches. Scientific management, administrative principles and Bureaucratic organisations and these theories are still widely used in management today. Modern management approaches focus on the systems view of organisations and contingency thinking in a dynamic and complex environment.

The modern management approaches to management grew directly from foundations established by the classical approaches. It has been proven in today’s working world you need to have a mix of the classical approaches and the modern management approaches to succeed in today’s environment. According to McDonalds case study the restaurants operate on classical management theory – there are elements of “scientific management from a former era (to maintain efficiency), as well as up-to-the minute human relations approaches to maintain the motivation of the “crew”. .

Challenges contemporary mangers face in 2013 compared to mangers in the era of Classical approaches. A contemporary business environment refers to management trends in the 21st century – the year 2000 to now. . Globalisation plays a missive part in the changing challenges for contemporary mangers. Most companies move into international markets and by moving into different international markets there are different rules and regulations that need to be learned when doing business. It was Cited in that it is important for global organisations to employ people from other cultures who understand the customs and traditions of other countries and to deal appropriately with customers.

This then brings different beliefs and cultural beliefs into the work place and contemporary mangers need to understand the needs of their employees. In today’s working environment multiculitlism is a growing factor and plays a big part in contemporary mangers needing to adapt to different management styles to help create the rights at work for its people, for example if your religion requires you to pray at certain times of the day, a manger would need to respect these religious beliefs and allow you to do so, back in the time if the classical era this would have not even been considered. It wasn’t until 1920s; an emphasis on the human side in the workplace began to establish its influence on management thinking .

It was also cited in people are interacting with others who are different from themselves with biological, political, religious or cultural differences. This causes for the contemporary mangers to learn and adapted to new skills. If we look at the evolution of management practices over a period of time off from the era to now. It has changed dramatically and there are more practices to consider and adapt as a contemporary manger. Referring below outlines the evolution of management practices from the era to now and how much more a contemporary manger needs to consider then a manger in the era had to. Evolution of management practices

Period /YearClassical Approaches
1890 Systemic Management
1900Bureaucratic Management
1920Administrative Management
1930Human Relations
1940Behavioural perspective
Contemporary Approaches
1940Quantitative Management
1950Organisational Behaviour
1960System Theory
1970Contingency Theory
1990Total Quality Management
1990Learning Organisation
2000Business Reengineering
CurrentStrategic Management

Diversify in the workplace has also grown from the 1890’s to now. The amount of women workers in the work place has doubled over time; women in particular needs are diifernm It was cited in the journal article that Daft and Samson (2009) argued that rganisations are encountering new challenges to deal with diversity as more women and people from minority backgrounds are entering the workforce in the contemporary business environment

PART B (some personal reflections)

Scientific Management compared and contrast with current management style of what I have been faced with. Fredrick W. Taylor published the Scientific management emphasises careful selection and training of workers, and supervisory support. It has four guiding action principles: 1.

if you check your presentation guidelines on page 7 of the Subject Outline and the extra information provided in Resources folder under Assignment Help in MGT100 Interact site you will see that subheadings are quite appropriate in business assessments. You could set you work out with meaningful headings to help guide the reader through your discussion. For example,

· INTRODUCTION (introducing both parts of the discussion) · PART A – (optional heading)
· PART B – (optional heading)
SUBHEADING 4 (e.g. “some personal reflections . . “)
· CONCLUSION (concluding both parts of the discussion) · REFERENCES

If your writing is very clear then it may not be necessary to include the
Part A & B headings. Your primary responsibility is to make sure that your essay is clear and understandable to the reader. The best way to ensure this is to get someone else to read your work (preferably not a business student) before you submit.

Question 2: I chose option two for the essay, Historical Foundations to Management. When considering ‘classical approaches to management’ is it suggestible that I mention (or cover) all theories, or just a select few which represent a cross section of the range of classical theories? Or, should I focus on only one or two theories? Suggestion:

When in doubt put yourself in the reader’s position.
The question asks about ‘classical approaches’, think about what you would want to know if you were reading a response to this question from a position of little or no knowledge of management theory. Also think about how many words you have available. That is, the more theories you include the less adequately they will be explained. It’s up to you to work out the balance between scope and detail. You can get away with most things if you explain to the reader in either the Introduction or very early on what your intended scope is (e.g ‘This discussion will pay particular attention to Fayol’s fourteen principles and Taylor’s four principles of management . . . etc). Then the reader doesn’t get disappointed to find his or her favourite theory has been omitted. This is what I think I would be silently asking myself:

· What is meant by a ‘classical approach’? and by implication . . . · How is a ‘classical approach’ different to other approaches? · How is the writer (you) going to make his case that classical approaches are still/not relevant today? Asking these questions would lead you to the sort of answers you are looking for with regard to ‘required theoretical content’: · You really need to mention at least briefly the three big names of Taylor, Fayol, and Weber · You really need to give a nod to the other big approaches such as quantitative, HRM, contemporary · This is your choice and will be determined by personal interest, the sorts of case examples you use and word limits. You need to include enough material to be convincing. You won’t have to look very far with any of those big names to make a case. I imagine you will only have space for about 2 specific theories

Carroll, S. J & Gillen D. J. (1984). The Classical Management Functions: Are They Really Outdated? P132-136. doi:10.5465/AMBPP.1984.4978715

Ambang, T, (2009). Challenges of contemporary management in Papua New Guinea, 10(2), p1-16.

What do you think?

Written by admin


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



PTLLS Unit 012 Principles of Assessment in Lifelong Learning

The man he killed analysis