The Relevance of Historical Developments in Management for Contemporary Workplace - Essay Example

Running header: To Demonstrate an Understanding of the Relevance of Historical Developments in Management to the Contemporary Workplace Name of Student: Institution: Instructor: Course Code and Name: Date of Submission: To Demonstrate an Understanding of the Relevance of Historical Developments in Management to the Contemporary Workplace Introduction The modern management theories were born in the 19th century and the use of scientific methods of management were described as the best ways of performing various tasks. However with time these management theories proved to be ineffective in the long run and inadequate for explaining organizations satisfactorily. Fredrick Taylor published a book on this principles and he mainly focused on the private sector and the use of modern technology. The models and theories of management failed to address human nature and the ever changing environment. They comprised several elements. First, there would be substitution of a certain science for the individual judgment. Secondly, development and selection of the workman was scientific and lastly, cooperation between the workman and the management was encouraged by these theories. Taylor’s framework being a theoretical one implied that the management be responsible for planning all aspects of operation in the organization. It also suggested that management was charged with the responsibility of training the workmen who would in turn follow the directives and work towards the organization goals. It was the duty of the manager to think and make all decisions and the workman was to follow directives. Taylor’s framework formed a base for the government by defining the model of an organization as a rational and institutionalized relationship involving people who are formally managed to accomplish predetermined goals, objectives and set purposes (Sapru, 2010). Management can be defined as planning, coordinating, controlling, organizing and forecasting. Administrative management on the other hand is one of the existing departments, sections or functions in any given organization. The main aim of this function is to provide managers with the best and most reliable information that is needed for the proper management of the firm or organization. With such information, managers and top level stakeholders are able to make meaningful decisions. Without this kind of information, it becomes difficult to operate any function or department in the organization. Administrative management gives a lot of importance to communication. As much as communication is important in most facets of life, so is it in any particular organization. Administrative management encompasses the processes that are used to collect, manipulate and retrieve information used for the good of the organization. The administrative manager, whose authority is delegated by top management, has functions and runs supportive functions for the organization. The administrative function is one of the most basic in any organization. These functions include marketing, general management, public relations, human resources and financial management (Edmund, Annatjie & Darelle, 2010).Te administrative function does not generate any income for the organization. On the contrary, it renders a service to the organization. The entire management is involved in the administrative function and is not the sole function of a single department. The administration function covers a wide scope of activities. They are quite diverse and involve the handling of information in all manner of form for instance mails, filing, and word processing and also duplicating. A key objective of the administrative manager is the ensuring that organizational activities are designed to maximize both individual as well as unit productivity. Helping employees achieve a certain level of effectiveness and making sure that office personnel are well supervised are also some roles of the administrative manager. In the recent past, the need for the administrative function in organization has been ion the rise and has been a characteristic of the successful organization Henri Fayol was the main practitioner of administrative management theories. His theories were the original foundation of modern management as a profession and also as a discipline. His management theories are valuable and important to management and organizational leaders since his work was documented and worked for both him and his workers. In Fayol’s opinion, administration calls for the application of wide knowledge and other personal attributes. It is the art of handling men and as such requires practice. He emphasized on the difference between technical and administrative skills. He argued that doing work and managing others at work required a retooling of an individual’s attributes and qualities. He observed that all employees have administrative duties in their capacities. The only element that brought the difference was that as one moved up the hierarchy, the time spent in administrative activities increased. He further observed that the success of any enterprise depended upon the wise application of administrative skills. From his experience, he noted that manager’s needed to learn the art of communicating with the outside world. He then established various principles of administration First; unity of command is the first principle. It implied that all actions must be received equally from one person to ensure unity of purpose and avoid conflict of interest. Separation of powers was the second principle and it stated that the division of any enterprise into sections and departments brings diverse growth in any organization and ensures that there is productivity. The third principle was hierarchical command of orders. This was followed by the centralization principle. Order was another principle that involves placing everything at the right place and making sure that activities have been properly delegated. Discipline and planning were also principles of management as proposed by Fayol. He further defined the roles of a manager as planning, organizing, controlling, coordinating and staffing (Daniel, Arthur & John, 2002). Organizations in the modern world using Fayol’s theory of management are able to achieve organizational order and activities follow the hierarchical order. All skills are incorporated and integrated to do various tasks and the result is a masterpiece. Management according to this theory is based on written records. This ensures that fraud and other malpractices are avoided especially by top management. The kind of bureaucracy advocated by this theory of management was envisioned as the largest machine for attaining organization’s goals in the most efficient and effective manner. Management and staff following knowable and set rules ensure that organizations activities are transparent. The organizations that follow this theory are centralized in the fact that the decisions and the orders are given by a central authority. Unity of command is also achieved as a result of using this theory. The organization thus has common goals and objectives and unity of purpose is achieved. This theory ensures hat there is no conflict of interest among the parties involved in running the organization. Fayol’s critics observed that the more bureaucracy is fully realized, the more it depersonalizes itself. This means that it excludes other personal feelings from the execution of official tasks. It implies a very impersonal organization with very little human interaction between its members. This theory also focuses too much on the management layer since the main focus of his theory included personal duties of managers at a higher level (Yasin, 2002).Fayol believed that personal effort and teams were part of an ideal model of an organization. His principles of management cannot therefore be realistic in the modern setting. The rising needs to recognize, motivate and inspire employees do not create the environment for such an organization. The structure of matrix management in today’s organizations violates Fayol’s principle of unity of command and unity of direction. In a nutshell, the ideal organization portrayed by Fayol cannot exist in today’s dynamic environment. This can be clearly seen in regard to the management styles of international organizations like Apple Inc. The success of this organization is in its management style. It emphasizes on minimal bureaucracy and taking care of its employees. It has learned to view the employee as an asset and not as an expense. A culture of respect has been built between the employees and the organization. Employees have been given the freedom to own and improve the products and hence empowering them. Employees are challenged to grow and are trained to be passionate about the products (Bianca, 2010). Conclusion Administrative management is vital in organizations and especially in the modern setting. Fayol’s principles of management are still very greatly practiced today. The modern environment that is characterized by many changes has seen the theories and practices of management change too. Business thinking has drastically changed and the traditional theories that were bureaucratic and systematic procedures have since failed to appeal to the modern organization. The modern management paradigm has led to various advantages. Employees have been more recognized in organizations as a very important asset of the organization. They have been empowered and motivation mechanisms are being put in place in today’s environment. Productivity in today’s environment is not related to rules and regulation but on the level of employee satisfaction. Employee satisfaction is a major improvement from bureaucratic model of management. Achievement of organization goals and objectives is now the objective of all departments of the organization. This consequently leads to customer satisfaction and hence achievement of desired goals and objectives (Weidema, 2008). References Bianca, M. (2010) Management Lessons I Learned Working at Apple Business Insider Journal 77(6), p.80-85 Daniel, W., Arthur, B. & John, B. (2002) The Foundations of Henri Fayol’s Administrative Theory Management Decision Journal 90(6) p. 918-925. Edmund, F., Annatjie, E. and Darrel, G. 2010. Administrative Management, Johannesburg, SA. Juta and Company Ltd. Sapru, 2010 Administrative Theories and Management Thought New Delhi, PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Weidema, B. (2008) A Synthesis of Modern Management Theories Modern Management Theories Journal 89(7), p. 95-100 Yasin O. (2002) Modern Management Theories and Practices: A modern overview Management Theories Journal .37(8), p. 40-50. Read More