BBA GROUP PRESENTS
2. Flory Rinu
5. Shankar Murali
WHAT IS MANAGEMENT?
Management is the process through
which an organization get things done
through its people which eventually
helps in achievement of the common
objectives of the people and the
organization as a whole.
• MANAGEMENT IN ANCIENT CIVILIZATION
• CLASSICAL MANAGEMENT SCHOOL
• NEO CLASSICAL MANAGEMENT SCHOOL
• FROM 1950
• MODERN MANAGEMENT SCHOOL
MANAGEMENT IN THE ANCIENT
Management existed even during the ancient
civilization. People of the olden days where
food gatherers, making their living by hunting,
fishing and collecting nuts and berries. Even
during the primitive period some aspects of
management was prevalent.
Primitive society had its codes for the
conduct of business, rules regarding the roles
of parents, punishments for wrong doing,
rites for the worship of gods etc.
CONTRIBUTORS TO ANCIENT
Egyptian government: The study of
Egyptian government through different
periods showed their recognition of the
principal of control of an extended
operation through centralised
Babylonian Empire: The most
significant contribution of Babylonians to
management thought was the codes of
law which gave us a real sight into their
thinking on management. The concept of
responsibility was well recognized in the
Hebrews: The Hebrews had a great
contribution in the field of management. It
was clearly stated in the book of Exodus in
Bible that Moses made use of the principal
of delegation and exception, personnel
selection and training.
Chinese: The Chinese were aware of
certain principals bearing in organizing,
planning, directing and controlling.
Records indicate that the Chinese
government started the scientific selection
of workmen by means of examination
One of the first schools of management
thought, the classical management
theory, developed during the Industrial
Revolution when new problems related to the
factory system began to appear.
Managers were unsure of how to train
employees (many of them non‐English
speaking immigrants) or deal with increased
labour dissatisfaction, so they began to test
solutions. As a result, the classical
management theory developed from efforts to
find the one of the best ways to perform and
“Father of scientific management.”
Taylor believed that organizations
should study tasks and develop precise
He proposed an objective and
systematic method for doing the work in
the best way possible using scientific
selection and training methods.
He ensured that there is co-operation
and clear division of responsibility
between managers and workers and
proper pay for performance.
Principles of Scientific
1.Replacement of Rule of Thumb
3.Development of Workers
5.Distribution of Work
Gantt is often seen as a disciple
of Taylor and a promoter of the scientific
school of management. In his early career,
with the influence of Taylor - and Gantt’s
aptitude for problem solving - resulted in
attempts to address the technical problems of
Like Taylor, Gantt believed that it was only the
application of scientific analysis to every
aspect of work which could produce industrial
efficiency, and that improvements in
management came from eliminating chance
Frank and Lillian Gilbert, a husband‐and‐wife team, studied
In Frank's early career as an apprentice bricklayer, he was
interested in standardization and method study. He
watched bricklayers and saw that some workers were slow
and inefficient, while others were very productive. He
discovered that each bricklayer used a different set of
motions to lay bricks. From his observations, Frank isolated
the basic movements necessary to do the job and
eliminated unnecessary motions. Workers using these
movements raised their output from 1,000 to 2,700 bricks
This was the first motion study designed to isolate the best
possible method of performing a given job. Later, Frank and
his wife Lillian studied job motions using a motion‐picture
camera and a split‐second clock. When her husband died at
the age of 56, Lillian continued their work.
Thanks to these contributors, the basic ideas
regarding scientific management developed. They
include the following:
Developing new standard methods for doing each
Selecting, training, and developing workers
instead of allowing them to choose their own tasks
and train themselves.
Developing a spirit of cooperation between
workers and management to ensure that work is
carried out in accordance with devised
Dividing work between workers and management
in almost equal shares, with each group taking
Employees should be loyal to the organization
rather than to individual supervisors.
He believed that organizations should be
managed impersonally and that a formal
organizational structure, where specific rules
were followed, was important. In other words, he
didn't think that authority should be based on a
He thought authority should be something that
was part of a person's job and passed from
individual to individual as one person left and
another took over. This non personal, objective
form of organization was called a bureaucracy.
Weber believed that all
bureaucracies have the following
characteristics: A well‐defined hierarchy. All positions within a bureaucracy are
structured in a way that permits the higher positions to supervise
and control the lower positions. This clear chain of command
facilitates control and order throughout the organization.
Division of labour and specialization. All responsibilities in an
organization are specialized so that each employee has the
necessary expertise to do a particular task.
Rules and regulations. Standard operating procedures govern all
organizational activities to provide certainty and facilitate
Impersonal relationships between managers and
employees. Managers should maintain an impersonal relationship
with employees so that favouritism and personal prejudice do not
Competence. Competence, not “who you know,” should be the
basis for all decisions made in hiring, job assignments, and
promotions in order to foster ability and merit as the primary
characteristics of a bureaucratic organization.
Records. A bureaucracy needs to maintain complete files regarding
A French mining engineer
Developed 14 principles of management
based on his management experiences.
These principles provide modern‐day
managers with general guidelines on
how a supervisor should organize her
department and manage her staff.
Although later research has created
controversy over many of the following
principles, they are still widely used in
14 PRINCIPLES OF
Division of work: Division of work and specialization produces
more and better work with the same effort.
Authority and responsibility: Authority is the right to give orders
and the power to exact obedience. A manager has official authority
because of her position, as well as personal authority based on
individual personality, intelligence, and experience. Authority creates
Discipline: Obedience and respect within an organization are
absolutely essential. Good discipline requires managers to apply
sanctions whenever violations become apparent.
Unity of command: An employee should receive orders from only
Unity of direction: Organizational activities must have one central
authority and one plan of action.
Subordination of individual interest to general
interest: The interests of one employee or group of
employees are subordinate to the interests and goals of
Remuneration of personnel: Salaries — the price of
services rendered by employees — should be fair and
provide satisfaction both to the employee and employer.
Centralization: The objective of centralization is the
best utilization of personnel. The degree of centralization
varies according to the dynamics of each organization.
Scalar chain: A chain of authority exists from the
highest organizational authority to the lowest ranks.
Order: Organizational order for materials and personnel is
essential. The right materials and the right employees are
necessary for each organizational function and activity.
Equity: In organizations, equity is a combination of kindliness
and justice. Both equity and equality of treatment should be
considered when dealing with employees.
Stability of tenure of personnel: To attain the maximum
productivity of personnel, a stable work force is needed.
Initiative: Thinking out a plan and ensuring its success is an
extremely strong motivator. Zeal, energy, and initiative are
desired at all levels of the organizational ladder.
Esprit de corps: Teamwork is fundamentally important to an
organization. Work teams and extensive face‐to‐face verbal
communication encourages teamwork.
MARY PARKER FOLLETT(1841-1925)
Stressed the importance of an organization establishing
common goals for its employees. However, she also
began to think differently than the other theorists of her
day, discarding command‐style hierarchical
organizations where employees were treated like
She began to talk about such things as ethics, power,
and leadership. She encouraged managers to allow
employees to participate in decision making. She
stressed the importance of people rather than
techniques — a concept very much before her time.
As a result, she was a pioneer and often not taken
seriously by management scholars of her time. But
times change, and innovative ideas from the past
suddenly take on new meanings. Much of what
managers do today is based on the fundamentals that
Follett established more than 80 years ago.
CHESTER BARNARD (1841-1925)
Chester Barnard felt that it was important for managers to
develop a sense of common purpose where
a willingness to cooperate is strongly encouraged.
He is credited with developing the acceptance theory of
management, which emphasizes the willingness of
employees to accept that managers have legitimate authority
Barnard felt that four factors affected the willingness of
employees to accept authority:
The employees must understand the communication.
The employees accept the communication as being
consistent with the organization's purposes.
The employees feel that their actions will be consistent with
the needs and desires of the other employees.
The employees feel that they are mentally and physically
able to carry out the order.
NEO CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF
The Neoclassical approach began with the Hawthorne
studies in the 1920s. It grew out of the limitations of the
Under classical approach, attention was focused on
jobs and machines. After some time workers resisted
this approach as it did not provide the social and
psychological satisfaction. Therefore, attention shifted
towards the human side of management.
George Elton Mayo (1890-1949) is considered to be the
founder to the neoclassical theory. He was the leader of
the team which conducted the famous Hawthorne
Experiments at the Western Electric Company (USA)
NEOCLASSICAL SCHOOL OF
Human Relation Movement
The Hawthorne studies, which were conducted by Elton
Mayo and Fritz Roethlisberger in the 1920s with the
workers at the Hawthorne plant of the Western Electric
Company, were part of an emphasis on socio-
psychological aspects of human behaviour in
Hawthorne researchers hypothesized that choosing
one's own co-workers, working as a group, being
treated as special (as evidenced by working in a
separate room), and having a sympathetic supervisor
were reasons for increases in worker productivity.
The Hawthorne studies found that monetary incentives
and good working conditions are generally less
important in improving employee productivity than
meeting employees' need and desire to belong to a
group and be included in decision making and work.
HUMAN RELATIONS MOMENT
People are social beings are motivated
by social needs. A sense of identity is
derived from inter personal relationships.
Workers are more receptive to social
forces of peer groups than monetary
intensives and management controls.
Workers respond positively to attention
from management, co workers and
The psychological needs of the individual
significantly impact group performance
as well and therefore there was a need
for the Human Relations Movement.
As management research continued in the 20th century,
questions began to come up regarding the interactions and
motivations of the individual within organizations.
Management principles developed during the classical period
were simply not useful in dealing with many management
situations and could not explain the behaviour of individual
employees. In short, classical theory ignored employee
motivation and behaviour. As a result, the behavioural school
was a natural out growth of this revolutionary management
The behavioural management theory is often called the
human relations movement because it addresses the human
dimension of work. Behavioural theorists believed that a
better understanding of human behaviour at work, such as
motivation, conflict, expectations, and group dynamics,
The theorists who contributed to this school viewed
employees as individuals, resources, and assets to be
developed and worked with — not as machines, as in the
MODERN SCHOOL OF
The Modern Period (1950 to present). After, 1960
management thought has been turning somewhat away from
the extreme human relations ideas particularly regarding the
direct relation between morale and productivity. Present
management thinking wishes equal emphasis on man and
The modern business ideologists have recognized the social
responsibilities of business activities and thinking on similar
lines. During the period, the principles of management
reached a stage of refinement and perfection. The formation
of big companies resulted in the separation of ownership and
This change in ownership pattern inevitably brought in
‘salaried and professional managers’ in place of ‘owner
managers’. The giving of control to the hired management
resulted in the wider use of scientific methods of
management. But at the same time the professional
management has become socially responsible to various
sections of society such as customers, shareholders,
suppliers, employees, trade unions and other Government
APPROACHES TO MODERN
Quantitative or Mathematical Approach
Evolving from the Decision Theory School, the
Mathematical School gives a quantitative basis for
decision-making and considers management as a
system of mathematical models and processes. This
school is also sometimes called, ‘ Operations Research”
or “Management Science School’. The main feature of
this school is the use of mixed teams of scientists from
several disciplines. It uses scientific techniques for
providing quantitative base for managerial decisions.
The exponents of this school view management as a
system of logical process.
The contributions of mathematicians in the field of
management are significant. This has contributed
impressively in developing orderly thinking amongst
managers. It has given exactness to the management
discipline. Its contributions and usefulness could hardly
be over-emphasized. However, it can only be treated as
a tool in managerial practice.
In the 1960, an approach to management appeared which
tried to unify the prior schools of thought. This approach is
commonly known as ‘Systems Approach’. Its early
contributors include Ludwing Von Bertalanffy, Lawrence J.
Henderson, W.G. Scott, Deniel Katz, Robert L. Kahn, W.
Buckley and J.D. Thompson.
They viewed organization as an organic and open system,
which is composed of interacting and interdependent parts,
called subsystems. The system approach is to look upon
management as a system or as “an organised whole” made
up of subsystems integrated into a unity or orderly totality.
System approach is based on the generalization that
everything is inter-related and inter-dependent. A system is
composed of related and dependent element which, when in
interaction, forms a unitary whole. A system is simply an
assemblage or combination of things or parts forming a
Contingency approach is an improvement over the systems
approach. The interactions between the sub-systems of an
organisation have long been recognised by the systems
approach. Contingency approach also recognises that
organisational system is the product of the interaction of the
sub systems and the environment. Besides, it seeks to
identify exact nature of inter-actions and inter-relationships.
This approach calls for an identification of the internal and
external variables that critically influence managerial
revolution and organisational performance. According to this,
internal and external environment of the organisation is made
up of the organisational sub-systems. Thus, the contingency
approach provides a pragmatic method of analysing
organisational sub-systems and tries to integrate these with
Contingency views are ultimately directed towards suggesting
organisational designs situations. Therefore, this approach is
also called situational approach. This approach helps us to
evolve practical answers to the problems remanding