CHAPTER

2
Change is an inevitable.
[Please insert any Evolution, however is optional
relevant photo – Tony Robbins
around this box]

Management
Evolutions
Subtopics:-
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Scientific Approach
2.3 Behavioral Approach
2.4 System Approach
2.5 Scholars in Management
2.6 Discussion questions

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Through planning, manager attempt to investigate the future and make decision that will
facilitate goal accomplishment. Planning thus serves as the primary management function,
setting the stage and providing a foundation for the managers efforts to organize, lead,
and control. This chapter explores the fundamentals of planning. It discusses the three major
steps of the planning process and different types of goals and plans. Finally, management
by objectives (MBO) is explaining in this chapter.

5|P a g e C h a p t e r 2 : M a n a g e m e n t E v o l u t i o n s
2.2 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH

Scientific Management theory arose in part of from the need to increase productivity. In
the United States especially, skilled labour was short supply at the beginning of the twentieth
century. To increase the productivity was to increase efficiency of workers. There for,
Frederick W.Tylor and Henry L.Gantt devised the body of principle know as scientific
management theory.

Frederick w. Tylor (1856-1915)

Taylor’s famous work principle of scientific Management was published in 1911.The

fundamental principles that Taylor saw underlying the scientific approach to management
are as follows:

• Replacing rules of thumb with science (organised knowledge)

• Obtaining the harmony, rather than discord, in group action.
• Achieving cooperation of human being, rather than restricted output.
• Working for maximum output, rather than restricted output.
• Developing all workers to the fullest extent possible for their own and their
company’s highest prosperity.
• His philosophy on four basic principal.
• The development of a true science of management, so that the best method for
performing each task could be determined.
• The scientific selection of workers, so that each workers would be given responsibility
for the task for his or her was best suited.
• The scientific education and development of the worker.
• Intimate, friendly cooperation between management and labour.

Taylor believed that a high division of labour was needed to produce more output, and he
was introduced a differential rate system (this meant that the workers received more an
amount of wages per ‘piece’ that encourage employer to pay more productive workers
at the higher rate than others that would profit both company and workers.

This method of management paid close attention to ‘time and motion ‘studies. (e.g. if it
took a worker 2 minutes to perform a task, then this could be done 30 times per hour, and
240 times in an 8 -hour day).

6|P a g e C h a p t e r 2 : M a n a g e m e n t E v o l u t i o n s
Henry l. Gannt (1816-1919)

Henry L.Gantt worked with Taylor on several project. He believed that every worker who
finished a day’s assigned workload would win a 50-cent bonus.

After he added a second motivation. The supervisor would earn a extra bonus for each
worker who reach the daily task, plus an extra bonus if all workers reached it. He was made
individual bar chart which show workers performance that rated and publicly and
recorded on chart.

2.3 BEHAVIORAL APPROACH

i. Researcher at Ohio State University in 1940s and 1950s identified two basic kinds on
leader behaviors that many managers engaged in to influence their subordinate as
below:
• Initiating Structure: the role of the leader in defining his or her role and the roles
of group members
• Consideration: the leader’s mutual trust and respect for group members’ ideas
and feelings.

ii. Research findings: mixed results

• High-high leaders generally, but not always, achieved high group task
performance and satisfaction.
• Evidence indicated that situational factors appeared to strongly influence
leadership effectiveness.

iii. Researcher from University of Iowa Studies (Kurt Lewin), Identified three leadership
styles:
• Autocratic style: centralized authority, low participation
• Democratic style: involvement, high participation, feedback (employee
involvement in decision making)
• Laissez faire style: hands-off management (freedom)

7|P a g e C h a p t e r 2 : M a n a g e m e n t E v o l u t i o n s
 iv. Research findings: mixed results
• No specific style was consistently better for producing better performance
• Employees were more satisfied under a democratic leader than an autocratic
leader.

2.4 SYSTEM APPROACH

Systems approach in one way is an extension of mathematical approach whereby, the

entire working of an organization is modeled and its working over a period of time is
visualized through repeated cycles.

Many times the outputs of the system feed into the system as inputs for the next period and
system behavior can change based on these inputs. For example, profits are ploughed
back and capital of the organization increase enabling the organization to grow.

Customer happiness or unhappiness becomes an input for the next period. Similarly job
satisfaction of the employees is also a variable which is an output in one period and
becomes input for the next period. Government, general public and media may also
become stakeholders and have their impact on the organization.

2.5 SCHOLARS IN MANAGEMENT

A. HENRI FAYOL Henri Fayol

• HENRI FAYOL Henri Fayol (1841‐1925) is generally hailed as the founder of the
classical management school not because he was the first to investigate
managerial behavior, but because he was the first to systematize it.
• Fayol believed that sound management practice falls into certain patters that
can be identified and analyzed. From this basic insight, he drew up a
blueprint for a cohesive doctrine of managers one that retains much of its
force to this day.
• With his faith in scientific methods, Fayol was like Taylor, his contemporary.
While Taylor was basically concerned with organizational functions, however
Fayol was interested in the total organization and focused on management,
which he felt had been the most neglected of business operations.

8|P a g e C h a p t e r 2 : M a n a g e m e n t E v o l u t i o n s
 • Fayol’s 14 Principles of management:

i. Division of Labor.
• The more people specialize, the more efficiently they can perform their
work. This principle is epitomized by the modern assembly line.

ii. Authority.
• Managers must give orders so that they can get things done. While their
formal authority gives them the right to command, managers will not
always compel obedience unless they have personal authority (such as
relevant expertise) as well.

iii. Discipline.
• Members in an organization need to respect the rules and agreements
that govern the organization. To Fayol, discipline results from good
leadership at all levels of the organization, fair agreements (such as
provisions for rewarding superior performance), and judiciously enforced
penalties for infractions.

iv. Unity of Command.

• Each employee must receive instructions from only one person. Fayol
believed that when an employee reported to more than one manager,
conflicts in instructions and confusion of authority would result.

v. Unity of Direction.
• Those operations within the organization that have the same objective
should be directed by only one manager using one plan. For example,
the personnel department in a company should not have two directors,
each with a different hiring policy.

vi. Subordination of Individual Interest to the Common Good.

• In any undertaking, the interests of employees should not take
precedence over the interests of the organization as a whole.

9|P a g e C h a p t e r 2 : M a n a g e m e n t E v o l u t i o n s
 vii. Remuneration.
• Compensation for work done should be fair to both employees and
employers.

viii. Centralization.
• Decreasing the role of subordinates in decision making is centralization;
increasing their role in decentralization. Fayol believed that managers
should retain final responsibility, but should at the same time give their
subordinates enough authority to do their jobs properly. The problem is
to find the proper degree of centralization in each case.

ix. The Hierarchy.

• The line of authority in an organization often represented today by the
neat boxes and lines of the organization chart runs in order of rank from
top management to the lowest level of the enterprise.

x. Order.
• Materials and people should be in the right place at the right time.
People, in particular, should be in the jobs or positions they are most
suited to.

xi. Equity.
• Managers should be both friendly and fair to subordinates.

xii. Stability of Staff.

• A high employee turnover rate undermines the efficient functioning of an
organization.

xiii. Initiative.
• Subordinates should be given the freedom to conceive and carry out
their plans, even though some mistakes may result.

10 | P a g e C h a p t e r 2 : M a n a g e m e n t E v o l u t i o n s
 xiv. Espirit de Corps.
• Promoting team spirit will give the organization a sense of unity. To Fayol,
even small factors should help to develop the spirit. He suggested, for
example, the use of verbal communications instead of formal, written
communication whenever possible.

Source:
Henri Rayol Industrial and General Administration, J.A.Caubrough, trans.(Geneva International Management Institute, 1930)

B. Frederick W. Taylor

• Frederick W. Taylor (1856‐1915) rested his philosophy on four basic principles:

i. The development of a true science of management, so that the best

method for performing each task could be determined.
ii. The scientific selection of workers, so that each worker would be given
responsibility for the task for which he or she was best suited.
iii. The scientific education and development of the worker.
iv. Intimate, friendly cooperation between management and labor.

• Taylor contended that the success of these principles required "a complete
mental revolution" on the part of management and labor. Rather than quarrel

• Over profits, both sides should try to increase production; by so doing, he

believed, profits would rise to such an extent that labor and management
would no longer have to fight over them.

• In short, Taylor believed that management and labor had a common interest in
increasing productivity. Taylor based his management system on production‐line
time studies. Instead of relying on traditional work methods, he analyzed and
timed steel workers' movements on a series of jobs.

• Using time study as his base, he broke each job down into its components and
designed the quickest and best methods of performing each component.

11 | P a g e C h a p t e r 2 : M a n a g e m e n t E v o l u t i o n s
• In this way he established how much workers should be able to do with the
equipment and materials at hand. He also encouraged employers to pay more
productive workers at a higher rate than others, using a "scientifically correct"
rate that would benefit both company and worker.

• Thus, workers were urged to surpass their previous performance standards to earn
more pay Taylor called his plan the differential rate system.

C. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory

Frederick Herzberg’s two factor theory also called as motivation-hygiene theory. He

proposed that intrinsic factors are related to job satisfaction, while extrinsic factors are
associated with job dissatisfaction. He concluded that the replies people gave when they
felt good about their jobs were significantly different from the replies they gave when they
felt badly. These finding are shown in Figure 8.2.

Figure 8.2: Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory

Certain characteristics were consistently related to job satisfaction (factors on the left side
of figure) and others to job dissatisfaction (factors at the right side of figure. The extrinsic
factors that create job dissatisfaction were called hygiene factors. When these factors
adequate, people won’t be dissatisfied, but they won’t be motivated. To motivate people,
Herzberg suggested emphasizing motivators, the intrinsic factors having to do with the job
itself.

12 | P a g e C h a p t e r 2 : M a n a g e m e n t E v o l u t i o n s