Management Theories and Practices

Management Theories and Practices

Introduction 

A lot of management theories have been proposed over the last century. A number of them have been developed to modify previously determined theories, while others also take a different approach altogether. The organizations of today should understand what management theories they may want to apply (Carlone, 2017). The modern workplace has evolved, and organizations must try to adopt management theories that work well for the contemporary worker, even as they seek maximum productivity. The report analyses the contributions and limitations of various management theories. The styles of management practices that best suits the organization are also suggested. The process of management that would be undertaken to ensure that the organization objectives are met is also discussed.

Scientific management theory

F.W. Taylor proposed the theory. It analyses and synthesizes workflows as they are within a given organization. It mainly argues for improving economic efficiency and labor productivity among the employees. The theory states that employers will gain more by rewarding employees so that they could increase their productivity instead of scolding or punishing employees who make minor mistakes (Holmes, 2016). The main idea is supposed to make the management obtain the most form the workers. The bottom line is to increase productivity to the possible maximum. Put differently; the management secures maximum prosperity for the employer, and while at that, they are also supposed to ensure maximum success from each employee.

The maximum prosperity that the theory speaks about involves realizing large amounts of dividends for the company and its owners. It also consists in developing all company branches into the highest state of excellence. In that scenario, the company will be able to achieve its highest maximum productivity from all quotas within the organization. It supposes that productivity is a valuable result for a company. It is an activity that enables the company to stand or survive the market pressures (Waring, 2016). The theory was keen to note that people are working as hard as they could do not result in efficiency as optimization of how work was done. It is, therefore, important that an organization looks into how work is done instead of making people juts work hard for the sake of it. The optimization and simplification of jobs increase productivity among organizations.

The management theory proposed that work must be optimized and simplified so that maximum productivity is achieved. The workers within a company and the managers need to cooperate. The theory believes that workers are solely motivated by money (Oberoi, 2016). There is also a need for the company to identify the right people for the job. It helps in avoiding situations where people are working on duties that they cannot deliver their potential.

The theory has four principles. First, it suggests that assignments must be broken down into subtasks. In tasks that are broken down, the process becomes more organized and efficient. There will be many employees who will be working on the same assignments. Each of them will be taking care of their part of the job. Productivity is likely to increase since the employees are assigned tasks according to their abilities. The second principle is for an organization to delegate responsibilities and train workers. The workers should not just do any job that comes before them (Su, 2017). They are not supposed to be assigned any work. Their skills have to be matched to their jobs based on their motivation and capabilities.

The management, therefore, must train the workers so that they can improve their abilities to work in a specific task. The result is supposed to be an increase in productivity among the workers. The third principle of the scientific management theory is the monitoring of performance. The management must lay down measures that they will use to check the performance of their employees. It will help them to understand how the employees are faring on with work and what areas need adjustments as may be required. The management is supposed to provide instructions and supervision to the employees (Carlone, 2017). The reason is to ensure that the employees only use efficient ways to hand their duties so that they may be an overall increase in productivity across the organization. The fourth principle is the work allocation between managers and workers. The managers could spend time planning and training. In that sense, the employee would be able to perform their tasks more efficiently.

The theory has its limitations. First, it promotes the idea that there is only one way through which something can be done. It that sense, it forces workers to work in a certain way that does not allows them to think and make decisions depending on how they perceive the nature of the job. The theory also does not support teamwork. People are disintegrated among subtasks to the extent that they find themselves working alone within a complex process (Oberoi, 2016). The theory promotes extreme specialization, and that contradicts the modern ideals of a motivating and satisfying workplace. The theory separates manual from mental work. The employees cannot incorporate their idea, knowledge, and even experience into best practice.

Classical organization theory

The theory deals with the formal organization and concepts that help to increase management efficiency within an organization. Two of the many contributors to this theory are Fayol and Weber, whose works and propositions are analyzed in this section. Weber gave a bureaucratic approach while Fayol developed the administrative theory of the organization (Őnday, 2016). The theory emphasizes the organization. It does not regard employees as much as it does regarding the organization. The theory further pictures the organization as a machine. But the human beings who are the employees are considered as components or parts of the machine.

The analogy is dehumanizing the workers at the expense of the success of the organization that is supposed to be achieved at whatever costs. On the administrative theory that Fayol proposes, personal efforts and team dynamics create an ideal organization (Edwards, 2018). The individual employees must put on an effort into their work. At the same time, the team around the employees has to be dynamic enough to ensure that results are achieved. A manager will only be successful if he can understand his leading roles. These roles are planning, organizing, budgeting, controlling, coordinating, etc.

Max Weber proposed a bureaucratic approach to this theory. Taylor influenced him. His argument tries to understand the implication of bureaucracy within an organization. In this theory, there needs to be fixed and official jurisdictional areas that are ordered by company rules and regulations (Makbere, 2019). There needs to be an office hierarchy where the topmost people have the power that is designated and bestowed on him by virtue of the office that he holds. It promotes a firmly ordered system where junior employees seek the approval of the top managers for a decision on matters concerning their work. The modern office is guided by an act that is written on a document. The office management is also expected to follow general rules as stipulated within the organization.

There are limitations associated with the classical organizational theory. First, it mainly focuses on the company production process. It is a narrow approach to handling management duties. It reduces employees to mere components of a machine. The implication is that the organization does not promote the welfare of the employees. The employees are seen as a means to an end instead of being an end in themselves (Ferdous, 2016). The theory helped in the invention of the industrial revolution. But that had a grave consequence. It led to a considerable deterioration of individual craftsmanship. It is also only critical to economies that era capital intensive. The management theory is derived from intellect instead of empiricism.

The theory concerned with company structure. It disregards the needs of the employees. These are significant setbacks that the theory poses on the management practices that today’s organizations require. From these limitations, it is crucial to note that humans beings are not paid attention to in the proposed theory (Őnday, 2016). Only the production process is important, but that is not possible of the workforce is not motivated to perform and achieve their goals.

Behavioral science theory

The theory studies the attitudes and behaviors of human beings in the work settings. An employee will behave in a particular manner because he is motivated to select that behavior. The behavior is selected over others because of what the employee or the individual expects from having chosen the behavior. Lawler developed an expectancy model of behavior (Mohrman & Lawler, 2017). The theory makes a distinction between the expectancy that the efforts that an employee puts on a task will lead to success in the performance of the said task through behavioral action. The action is, therefore expected to produce an outcome. An effort applied towards the completion of a job will lead to the accomplishment of the task (Soyoung & Sungchan, 2017). Subsequently, successful achievements of the mission will result in an outcome that the individual desires. Job behavior is, therefore, a joint function of the abilities, roles, perception, and motivation of an employee.

The theory has several limitations. The first limitation is that effort does not lead to performance directly. The effort is moderated by abilities and traits and by role perceptions. Satisfaction does not depend on employee performance (Kiehne et al., 2017). However, it is determined by the probability that the employee or an individual will receive fair or equitable rewards.

The theory is not workable across all cultures around the world. It is supposed that the theory was premised on the American culture, where a reward is tied to effort ad performance. In other cultures, motivation is not mainly monetary, as is the case in the United States and West Europe. People join companies considering their needs. Individual behavior is a matter of conscious choice (Mohanty, 2018). People want different things from the companies that they work for. Among alternatives, people will choose to optimize the outcome for their personality.

Management theory –Systemic theory contingency approach

Systemic theory

The theory was developed in the 1960s. It attaches great significance to empirical research data. In this context, organizations are viewed as systems. A system is defined as an organized assemblage of parts that form a complex unitary whole (Teece, 2018). In this case, it would be an organization. The system consists of subsystems that are related to one another. There are open and closed systems. The open systems are living systems that interact with the environment.

The closed systems are the non-living systems that do not interact with the environment. The system theory offers an open system view of a company and recognizes its ability to interact with the environment. The theory is dynamic and adaptive (Schneider, Wickert, & Marti, 2017). It emphasizes lateral instead of vertical relationships within an organization.

The limitation is that it is not unified. It amalgamates several theories such as contingency theory etc. Not modern per se since it synthesizes the contribution obtained from theories developed earlier. It is too abstract in the sense that it does not specify the relationship between the company and the social systems (Cordero, Mascareño, & Chernilo, 2017). It is difficult, therefore, to put to practical use. Further, the theory does not have a framework that can be applied to all organizations across industries.

Contingency approach

The theory is an extension of the system organizational theory. It proposes that there is no particular organizational design or managerial action that is appropriate for all situations. It dismisses the “one size fits all” philosophy (Williams, Ashill, & Naumann, 2017). The managerial action is taken, or the organization designs adopted depends on the situation that a company finds itself in. The managerial action is contingent on the situation at hand.

The contingency theory, like the systems theory, considers an organization as systems with several subsystems (McAdam, Miller, & McSorley, 2019). The emphasis is on maintaining and adapting activities that are necessary for the growth and survival of the system.

The theory also has its limitations. The first is that minorities can dominate. The more powerful members can exert pressure on others so that they conform (Ha & Pasch, 2019). The theory is time consuming compared to others. The responsibility for the solution is also ambiguous since situations keep changing.

Styles of management practices that best suit an organization

The scientific management practice is a style of management that executives may still want to incorporate in the organization. The main idea behind it is the increased productivity objective. Employees must be productive in their work areas. The company has to improve its economic efficiency and labor productivity. The management needs to secure maximum prosperity to the employers as it also secures maximum prosperity to the employees (Waring, 2016). Organizations should still value productivity across its businesses. A management style that optimizes and simplifies jobs is one of the best that a company can utilize. The right people should be attached to the job that they deserve.

The approach should, however, be mixed with other styles of management to take care of the detrimental limitations that are given. The fact that it discourages teamwork and creativity makes it important for other styles to be incorporated. For instance, behavioral theory needs to be part of company culture. The management needs to ensure that its employees are motivated enough to perform highly in their jobs. Companies must evaluate the expectancy model of behavior. It will help them to figure out which employees are not motivated in which areas (Mohrman & Lawler, 2017). It will further help in diagnosing the problems so that the employee issues are solved in time. The management style should ensure that there is reward structures that will help the employee stay motivated as they try to achieve their goals.

The systems model is also a critical style. The fact that it attaches its significance to the empirical data shows that decisions are made based on available information. Management must realize that the entire system is made of subsystems that they have to pay attention to (Teece, 2018). The way the organization relates to its environment matters since it will give the organization the confidence that it understands its environment. The system theory emphasizes on lateral and not vertical relationships. The point is that it deservedly kills the office hierarchy that classical theory suggests. All in all, companies must embrace progressive theories that treat employees as part of the organizations rather than a means to an end.

Management processes to be undertaken to help a company meet its objectives

The processes take several steps. First, the management will have to identify a mission statement for its organization. It spells the foundation for all the strategic planning work. Secondly, the management will have to create a vision of the future. The company will have to think ahead of time and write its story. Put it in a sentence and share it. Thirdly, the management will have to develop core values and guiding principles (Ferdous, 2016). They will be accepted guidelines for the organization. Fourthly, the management will have to create long term goals and SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Time-bound) objectives. Goals will have strategies that help to achieve them and objectives must be SMART.

Fifthly, the management will establish an action road map. It has to be a visual presentation of strategic planning items. The items have to be high levels agenda. Sixth, the management will build a communication plan that is not complicated (Edwards, 2018). It will be shared throughout the organization. The best approach for getting people informed has to be determined. The employees must know what has been planned and ensure that they are aware of the impacts of not achieving the company objectives.

Lastly, the management will establish an implementation and monitoring plan (Holmes, 2016). It will assign a highly-skilled program manager tar put together the implementation plan. The rules of engagement will be established. A strong monitoring process will be developed to engage people in open dialogue that revolves around actions that need to be taken so that the implementation process is successful. These are management processes that must be followed to e nurse that everyone works towards attaining the objectives as set out by the organization.

Conclusion

The organizations of today should understand what management theories they may want to apply. The modern workplace has evolved and organizations must try to adopt management theories that work well for the modern worker even as they seek maximum productivity.

Scientific management theory argues for improving economic efficiency and labor productivity among the employees. The theory states that employers will gain more by rewarding employees. The main idea is supposed to make the management obtain the most form the workers. An organization looks into how work is done instead of making people juts work hard for the sake of it. The optimization and simplification of jobs increase productivity among organizations.

Classical organization theory emphasizes the organization. It does not regard employees as much as it does regard the organization. The theory further pictures the organization as a machine. But the human beings who are the employees are considered as components or parts of the machine. The analogy is dehumanizing the workers at the expense of the success of the organization that is supposed to be achieved at whatever costs.

The behavioral science theory examines the attitudes and behaviors of human beings in the work settings. An employee will behave in a particular manner because he is motivated to select that behavior. The behavior is selected over others because of what the employee or the individual expects from having selected the behavior.

Systemic theory attaches great significance to empirical research data. The organizations are viewed as systems. The system consists of subsystems that are related to one another.

The contingency approach is an extension of the system organizational theory. No particular organizational design or managerial action that is appropriate for all situations. The managerial action is taken, or the organization designs adopted depends on the situation that a company finds itself in. The process of management was laid in steps to ensure that the organization’s objectives are met.

References

Carlone, D. (2017). Scientific Management. The International Encyclopedia of Organizational Communication, 1-5.

Cordero, R., Mascareño, A., & Chernilo, D. (2017). On the reflexivity of crises: Lessons from critical theory and systems theory. European Journal of Social Theory, 20(4), 511-530.

Edwards, R. (2018). An Elaboration of the Administrative Theory of the 14 Principles of Management by Henri Fayol. International Journal for Empirical Education and Research, 1(1), 41-51.

Ferdous, J. (2016). Organization theories: from classical perspective. International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 9(2), 1-6.

Ha, S. Y., & Pasch, S. (2019). Design Thinking and Contingency Theory: Why Some Firms Benefit More from Design Thinking Than Others. Available at SSRN 3497575.

Holmes, L. (2016). Re-Tayloring management: Scientific management a century on. Routledge.

Kiehne, J., Ceausu, I., Arp, A. K., & Schüler, T. (2017). Middle management’s role in strategy implementation projects: a behavioral analysis. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence (Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 539-549). De Gruyter Open.

Makbere, U. J. (2019). Max Weber’s Bureaucracy and Job Performance in Bayelsa State Civil Service, Nigeria (from 1999-2018).

McAdam, R., Miller, K., & McSorley, C. (2019). Towards a contingency theory perspective of quality management in enabling strategic alignment. International Journal of Production Economics, 207, 195-209.

Mohanty, S. (2018). Porter and Lawler’s Model of Motivation: Hypes and Realities.

Mohrman, A. M., & Lawler, E. E. (2017). Motivation and performance-appraisal behavior. In Performance measurement and theory (pp. 173-194). Routledge.

Oberoi, R. (2016). Frederick Wilson Taylor’s Scientific Management Theory.

Őnday, Ő. (2016). Classical organization theory: from generic management of Socrates to bureaucracy of weber. International Journal of Business and Management Review, 4(1), 87-105.

Schneider, A., Wickert, C., & Marti, E. (2017). Reducing complexity by creating complexity: A systems theory perspective on how organizations respond to their environments. Journal of Management Studies, 54(2), 182-208.

Soyoung, P. & Sungchan, K. (2017). The linkage between work unit performance perceptions of US federal employees and their job satisfaction: An expectancy theory. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 13(52), 77-93.

Su, Y. (2017). Taylor scientific management theory carding and significance of organization management. Social Sciences, 6(4), 102-107.

Teece, D. J. (2018). Dynamic capabilities as (workable) management systems theory. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(3), 359-368.

Waring, S. P. (2016). Taylorism transformed: Scientific management theory since 1945. UNC Press Books.

Williams, P., Ashill, N., & Naumann, E. (2017). Toward a contingency theory of CRM adoption. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 25(5-6), 454-474.