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? H...
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 shaped our view of management in the present business environment. These emerging theories have enabled managers to appreciate new patterns of thinking, new ways of organising and new ways of managing organisations and people. Over the years these different theories have enabled the study of trends that have taken place in the management field. The major management viewpoints- which include the classical, behavioural and contingency approaches- have assisted in the formation of the contemporary twenty-first century management theory and techniques (S. C. Certo & S. T. Certo, 2006). Although, there are significant differences among all these approaches they seem to be unified by the efforts of improving an organisation’s efficiency in terms of proper human resources management. Furthermore, the dissimilarities seen in these approaches are due to the always changing organisations and environments which demand new management practices and techniques be applied to maintain the efficiency of an organisation.
The classical approach to management was the result of an effort to develop a body of management thinking and the management theorists who participated in this effort are considered the pioneers of management study. The classical viewpoint emphasises efficiency in managing work and organisations in order to increase production (S. C. Certo & S. T. Certo, 2006). The classical approach to management can be categorised into three areas: scientific, administrative and bureaucratic management. Frederick Taylor,
The twentieth century has brought in a number of management theories which have helped shaped our view of management in the present business environment. These emerging theories have enabled managers to appreciate new patterns of thinking, new ways of organising and new ways of managing organisations and people. Over the years these different theories have enabled the study of trends that have taken place in the management field. The major management viewpoints- which include the classical, behavioural and contingency approaches- have assisted in the formation of the contemporary twenty-first century management theory and techniques (S. C. Certo & S. T. Certo, 2006). Although, there are significant differences among all these approaches they seem to be unified by the efforts of improving an organisation’s efficiency in terms of proper human resources management. Furthermore, the dissimilarities seen in these approaches are due to the always changing organisations and environments which demand new management practices and techniques be applied to maintain the efficiency of an organisation.
The classical approach to management was the result of an effort to develop a body of management thinking and the management theorists who participated in this effort are considered the pioneers of management study. The classical viewpoint emphasises efficiency in managing work and organisations in order to increase production (S. C. Certo & S. T. Certo, 2006). The classical approach to management can be categorised into three areas: scientific, administrative and bureaucratic management. Frederick Taylor,
References: Certo, S. C & Certo, S. T. (2006), Modern Management, Pearson Prentice-Hall, New Jersey. Cole, G. A. (1986), Management Theory and Practice, DP Publications, New York. Fayol, H Hagen, R. (1988), “Is there a better way?”, SAM Advanced Management Journal, Vol. 53, No. 2, pp. 43 – 48. Holloman, C. (1974), “What McGregor Really Said”, Business Horizons, Vol. 17 Issue 6, p87 – 92. Karlöf, B. & Lövingsson, H. (2005), The A to Z of Management Concepts and Models, Thorogood, London. Kermally, S. (2005), Gurus on People Management, Thorogood, Sydney. Longenecker, J. & Pringle, C. (1978), “The Illusion of Contingency Theory as a General Theory”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 3 Issue 3, pp. 679 -682. Lorsch, J. W. (1987), “Organisation Design: A Situational Perspective”, Academy of Management Review, January Issue, pp. 117 – 132. Luthans, F. & Stewart, T. (1977), “A General Contingency Theory of Management”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 2, pp. 181 – 195. McGregor, D. (1960), The Human Side of Enterprise, McGraw-Hill, New York. Rodrigues, C. (2001), “Fayol’s 14 Principles of Management then and now: a framework for managing today’s organisations effectively”, Monclair State University, New Jersey. Taylor, F. (1947), The Principles of Scientific Management, Harper & Bros, New York.