Management Theory Note

Management: Definitions, meaning and concepts

Management as a discipline has many definitions, suggesting that there is no universally

acceptable definition of what management is. But some notable definitions of management are:

• Management is the process of planning, organising, and controlling the efforts of

organisational members, and using all other organisational resources to achieve stated

organisational goals.

• Management is the process by which individual and group efforts are coordinated towards the

achievement of group goals.

• Management involves the coordination of both human and non-human resources toward the

accomplishment of goals/objectives.

• Mary Parker Follet defined management as ‘the art of getting things done through people.’

This means that managers use their employees to perform tasks which will help achieve

organisational goals without themselves performing the tasks and that managers and

subordinates should fully collaborate.

• Management can be said to be the process of getting things (planning, organising, staffing,

controlling etc. done through people in order to achieve the stated objectives of the

organisation. It is the task of management to determine how resources should be utilised for a

given purposes. Similarly, it involves the efficient and effective coordination of both human

and non-human resources.

Concept of Management

Management can be looked:

As a science

As a process

As a profession

As a function- management activities are planning, organising, motivating, controlling etc.

Organisation

Organisation refers to the enterprises as a whole or of group activity. Often it is also referred to as

a synonym of management. It is the classification of activities of the enterprise and arrangement

of personnel to perform these diverse activities so that job is successfully done. Additionally, it is

the process of arranging work of men, materials, methods; machines, equipment etc. in a

systematic and effective way to accomplish some desired objectives. It is also the process of

dividing work into convenient task or duties in the form of posts and appointing qualified personnel

to carry them out.

It has the following features:

a. It is the framework of management process,

b. It is a social entity,

c. Organisations are intricate human strategies designed to achieve certain objectives,

d. Are system of interdependent human beings,

e. It should provide means of working with others to achieve goals/objectives.

All organisations should have:

a. Mission/goals/objectives

b. People

c. Structure
 Characteristics of management.

i. Universal application: suggesting that management is a universal activity and should be

applied to any form of activity, to the economy etc.

ii. Goal oriented: management has the task of attaining certain objectives. The Process or failure

depends on how far it can be able to attain the desired goal. Furthermore it is judged by the

extent it achieve its target.

iii. Guidance: the main task is the guidance in the utilisation of material and human resources in

the best possible manner.

iv. Divorced from ownership: this follows the business entity concept, meaning most often, it’s

divorced from the ownership.

v. Management as a human activity: management functions are discharged only by individuals.

vi. Management signifies authority: since its essence is to direct, guide and control, it has to have

control. Management cannot discharge its function without authority.

The Development of Management Thought

Management thought has to do with management thinking/ practice by people in antiquity either

consciously or unconsciously. The development thought is the evolution of managerial practice

through historical investigation as practised by people of old. There had been serious thinking

about management prior to modern management theories which began to emerge in the early 20th

century. The scientific managers, early management theories and human relations all made

significant contributions to management and were all complementary to one another. Taylor and

his associates conducted important time and motion study in late 1880 to 1920 era. Then along
came the early theorists in the years 1915 and 1945, providing information about administrative

side of Management. Finally from 1924 to 1954 there were the human relations theorists.

Management school of thought are the different views and opinions on management.

The early theorist can be divided into two main groups- the practising managers such as Taylor

and Fayol, and the social scientists such as Mayo and McGregor. They tend to reflect upon their

personal experience of management. These theorists were concerned primarily with structuring of

work and organisations rather than with human motivation or organisation culture. They are

ascribed to as ‘classical’ or in some cases ‘scientific managers’. Their approaches to management

were generally prescriptive. While the human relations theorists were concerned about efficiency,

working conditions of the workers, the human factor at work that is social relationships and

individual behaviour at work. Those whose work were grounded on the idea of organisations as

social systems; such variables as structure, tasks, technology and the environment are the

contingency theorists.

Classical /Scientific School:

These early management theorists approach to management were primarily concerned with the

structure and activities of formal or official organisation rather than with human motivation or

organisation culture. i.e. issues such as the division of work, establishment of hierarchy of

authority, span of control were seen to be of the utmost importance in the achievement of an

effective organisation. They were labelled as the classical; in some case as scientific managers.

Their approach were generally prescriptive. That is they set out what managers ought to do in order

to fulfil their leadership function within their organisations e.g. Henri Fayol and F.W Taylor. These

two managers laid the foundation on the organisation of people at work and the organisation of

work itself.
Bureaucracy: while Fayol and Taylor were grappling with the problems of management, a

German sociologist, Max Weber was developing a theory of authority structures in which he

identified a form of organisation he called ‘bureaucracy’. The distinguishing features of a

bureaucracy were a definition of roles within a hierarchy, where job-holders were appointed on

merit, and subjected to rules and were equally expected to behave impartially.

The Human Relations School

These theorists (managers) were concerned about human behaviour in the work place; the idea

here is that people’s need are the decisive factor in achieving organisational effectiveness.

Additionally, they were also concerned about the human factor in the work place, thus they

concentrated their attention on issues such as employee motivation, interpersonal communication,

leadership style, individual satisfaction in the efficient utilisation of resources etc. The figure in

this school is Elton mayo, whose association with the ‘Hawthorne Studies’ provided an enormous

impetus to considerations of the human factor at work. Also an early major influence here was

Abraham Maslow’s work on motivation based on hierarchy of needs, ranging from basic

physiological needs to higher psychological needs. Other important contributors were McGregor,

Argris, Likert and Herzberg.

Systems/Contingency School

Another group whose work were grounded on the idea of the organisation as social system

produced a more comprehensive view of the behaviour of people at work based on interaction of

a number of variables(factors) as structures, tasks, technology and the environment. These

managers challenged the dominance of the human relations school; they viewed organisations as

complex systems of people, tasks and technology. They were of the opinion that human or social
 factors alone were not the most important consideration in achieving organisational effectiveness;

they recognised that organisations are part of a larger environment with which they interact and in

particular were affected by technical and economic factors just as much as social ones. Here we

have Fred Fiedler (in his style of leadership).

Frederick Taylor-features of scientific management

i. He was interested in the efficiency of working methods.

ii. That managers should develop a science for each operation to replace opinion and rule-of-
thumb (initiative)

iii. Managers should determine accurately from science the correct time and method for each job

iv. Managers should set up a suitable organisation to take all responsibility from the workers

v. Managers should select and train workers and be trained in the best possible way

vi. Managers should fin the “one best person” for each job.

And having scientifically measured the workers’ jobs and rates set accordingly, then efficient

workers should be rewarded for their productivity. His work was concentrated at the shop floor.

Shortcomings

i. It reduced the workers role to that of rigid adherers to methods and procedures over which
they have no control (discretion).

ii. It also led to fragmentation of work.

iii. Also, it generated a “carrot and stick” approach to the motivation of workers i.e. pay tied
to productivity

iv. It puts planning and control of workplace activities on management hands; thus
subordinated workers to work system and so divorced the ‘doing aspect of work from the
planning and controlling aspects, and as such, this led to:
 a. the creation of boring, repetitive jobs

b. the introduction of systems for tight control over work

c. alienation of shop-floor employees from management.

Henri Fayol’s 14 Principles of Management

1. Division of work • Work should be divided among individuals and groups to

2. Authority • The right to give orders and exert obedience.

3. Discipline • Mark of respect i.e. there should be discipline in the

from one superior at a time.

5. Unity of direction
• One head and one plan for group of activities with the same
objectives i.e. the entire organisation should be moving
towards a common direction in a common objective

The interest of one individual or group should not prevail over the
6. Subordination of
individual interest to the general good.
general interest.
[Link] Pay should be fair and paid as at when due

8. Centralisation Always present, depending on the organisation.

9. Scalar chain Line of authority from top to bottom of the organisation.

10. Order A place for everything and everything in its place-the right man in
the right job.
11. Equity All employees should be treated as fairly as possible

12. Stability of tenure of Retaining productive workers should always be the priority of
management.
personnel.
Within the limits of authority and discipline, all staff should be
[Link]
encouraged to show initiative.

Team work i.e. management should encourage harmony and general

Max Weber’s Bureaucracy

Weber identified three types of legitimate authority- traditional, charismatic and legal-rational.

Traditional- where acceptance of those in authority arises from traditions and customs eg

traditional rulers, chiefs etc.

Charismatic- where acceptance arises from loyalty and confidence in the personal quality of the

ruler

Legal- rational: acceptance arises out of the office or position of the person in authority as bound

by rules and procedures of the organisation.

Features

1. A continuous organisation of functions bound by rules

2. Specified spheres of competence

3. A hierarchical arrangement of offices (jobs) where one level of job is subject to control by the
next higher level.
4. Appointment to offices should be made on grounds of technical competence and expertise.

5. The separation of officials from the ownership of the organisation

6. Official positions exist in their own right and job holders have no right to a particular position.

7. Rules, decisions and actions should be formulated and recorded in writing.

Thus, authority is legitimate, not arbitrary. It was this point that made Weber to comment that

bureaucratic organisations were capable of attaining the highest degree of efficiency and were in

that sense the most rational known means of carrying imperative control over human beings”.