Influence of Classical and Human Relations Approaches in Management Today - Research Paper Example

Influence of classical and human relations approaches in management today Table of Contents Introduction 2 Review of Literature 3 The Classical Approach towards management 4 Administrative Theory 4 Scientific Management Theory 5 Bureaucracy Theory 5 Human Relations Approach 6 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs 7 Contemporary Examples 8 Examples of Classical Approach adopted by organization 8 Examples of Human Relation Approach adopted by organizations 10 Conclusion 13 References 15 Introduction Organizational management can be considered as an important aspect for the business organization in this contemporary era of globalization and competitive business environment. Organizational management can be recognized as the process, which organizes and manages the employee activities to meet organizational goals and objectives (Ledeen, 1999, p.65). Organizational management helps an organization to follow developed policies by planning, controlling, organizing and directing organizational resources. Classical and human relation approaches have great impact on the management of the organization in this contemporary global business environment (Lukes, 1974, p.102). Organizations generally focus on these approaches in order to maintain sustainable business practices and effective business output (Barak, 2010, p.98). On the other hand, effective human relation and classical approaches help an organization to develop and effective relationship between the employees and employers, which is important for good and profitable business performances (Law, 1991, p.29). Earlier, the employers used to only focus on effective business performance and positive business output. The organizational leaders were hardly bothered about employee motivation and employee job satisfaction (Campbell, 2007, p.91). But, growth of competition in global business environment and introduction of strict business regulations forced the organizational as well as industry leaders to consider employee welfare and employee motivation in business operation process (Draft, 2008, p.16). Human relations approach generally focused on value, needs, welfare and motivation of employees. On the other hand, classical theory approach focuses on the development and implementation of valuable strategies to enhance effective organizational business operation (Gitman and McDonald, 2008, p.9). Major objective of this report is to analyze the impact of these approaches on the management of the organizations in this contemporary world. This essay is fundamentally based on history and background of management theory that lead to the introduction of human relation and classical approaches. Several examples and cases have been considered in the later part of the study in order to provide a clear picture of the impact on the today’s management of the organizations. Several theories and related studies have been considered to meet the objective of the study. Review of Literature This part of the essay will try to investigate several literatures and related studies to determine the impact of human relation and classical approaches on the organizational management (Latour, 1988, p.26). Earlier, the theories regarding management practices were not really considered as theories. These were considered as discrete practices (Hamilton, 2013, p.119). The classical approach can be considered as a specific approach for the field managers to help them to focus on the effective employee performance management process (McCabe, 2007, pp.243-266). After this, several theorists and organizational leaders introduced human relations approach based on the concept of the classical approach. Human relation approach focuses on employee motivation and values (Lumpe, 2012, p.32). It generally helps the managers in organizations to maintain a good relationship with employee to improve organizational performance (Mullins, 2009, p.82). The Classical Approach towards management Classical approach can be considered as one of the important management approaches that help an organization to improve management as well as organizational performance (Krause, 1995, p.93). It actually helped organizations to focus on economical and physical needs of employees. According to this approach, physical and economic needs of employees are more important than the social needs of employees (Rothwell, 2007, p.53). However, classical approaches can be divided into three major classical theories that were proposed by the theorists during industrial revolution. These are administrative theory, scientific management theory and Bureaucracy theory. These theories have been discussed in details (Thiederman, 2008, p.187). Administrative Theory Administrative theory was proposed by Henri Fayol. This specific theory basically focuses on the study of managers and the management activities as well as abilities of those managers (Walker, 2011, p.25). Basically this theory focuses on the efficiency of the organization and performance of the managers. This theory has been divided into fourteen different principles, such as expert, work, discipline, union of command, union of direction, compensation, scalar chain, order, central brain, equality, stability of individuals, delegated authority and individuals’ subordination of particular interest within the workplace (Hill, 2013, p.37). This administrative theory generally presents the principle and philosophy of the management practices. There are specific divisions of this theoretical approach that helps to analyze coordinating, organizing, controlling, commanding and planning process (Leonard, 2012, p.29). Scientific Management Theory Scientific management theory was proposed by Fredrick Taylor (Grint, 2001, p.21). This theory generally helps the management of an organization to find and implement an effective pathway to meet organizational goals and objectives quite successfully. Scientific management theory generally focuses on lower level management practices (Moshal, 2009, p.37). It helps the managers of an organization to conduct a research at each and every organizational level. This specific theory also consists of four different principles. These are mentioned below. Employees should be taught and trained significantly so that the organization can increase their skills and competency (Charan, 2006, pp. 60-70). All the employees should follow organizational principles and will ensure effective collaborative workplace performance (Backer, 2003, p.9). The management of the organization should try to ensure equal distribution for the employees in order to enhance effective organizational workplace performance (Cook, 2010, p.16). The traditional thumb rule of management process should be replaced by contemporary scientific approaches in order to maintain competency in this competitive global business environment (Fox, 2001, p.5). Bureaucracy Theory Bureaucracy theory was proposed by Max Weber. This classical approach theory can be considered as a formal organizational system defending the hierarchies and levels of the organizational structure in order to maintain efficiency (Guest, 2006, p.3). This specific theory is being adopted and implemented in both private and public sector organizations in order to keep entire control of each and every business operation practice (Greetz, 1983, p.181). This specific theory is based on four different principles, such as hierarchical positions, labour division, system rules and impersonal relationships (Hwang, 2001, p.7). However, all the above mentioned theories were highly criticised as these theories have provided limited value to the social needs of the employees (Kervin, 2008, p.14). According to the critiques, it is highly important for the management of the organization to focus on effective employee satisfaction and motivation in order to increase business productivity and reduce contemporary workplace issues (Luthans, 2001, p.12). Human Relations Approach Human relations approach can be considered as one of the important strategic management theoretical approaches that are effectively implemented by the leading organizations in this world in order to improve employee performance as well as organizational performance (Rogers, 2002, p.6). It is true that previous classical approaches have only talked about the performance of organization and different organizational principles (Thomas, 2010, p.18). Apart from the physiological and economic needs, it is also important for the organizations to consider the importance of social needs of employees within the organizations. It is true that global business environment is becoming highly competitive (Turnley, 2000, p.8). Therefore, it is highly important for the management of the contemporary organizations to focus on skilled and experienced workforce to enhance effective workplace performances (Bell, 2002, p.16). This specific approach has helped several organizations to maintain their competitive edge in global business environment. Abraham Maslow has proposed an effective theoretical approach to enhance human relations within the workplaces (Chaturvedi and Chaturvedi, 2009, p.81). This theoretical approach is recognized as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs of theory. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs This human relations theory of needs consists of five hierarchies, such as physiological needs, safety needs, needs for social recognition, needs for self-esteem and needs for self-actualization (Coper, Johnson and Holdsworth, 2012, p.53). Physiological needs of people focuses on needs of shelter, food and clothes. These are regarded as basic and fundamental needs of human beings. Each and every people want to get employed in professional life in order to fulfil this needs (Marturano and Gosling, 2008, p.90). Safety needs of individuals generally focuses on job safety or employment safety in which people try to secure their jobs in organizations through good and effective workplace performance (Mathis and Kackson, 2011, p.12). Needs for social recognition is the third hierarchy of this model. After fulfilling safety needs, employees of an organization expect to gain social value and social recognition within the organization from their sub-ordinates, colleagues, lower-level employees and top-level management (Phillips, 2009, p.74). Employees generally want to get effectively social value against their good workplace performances in organizations. Needs for self-esteem is the fourth level of hierarchy within the theoretical model (Bass and Avolio, 1994, p.89). Each and every employee of an organization tries to take control over certain organizational practices and activities after the fulfilment of needs for social value and social recognition (Bratton, Grint and Nelson, 2004, p.71). Several inner emotional aspects, such as ego, power, joy and sorrow direct an individual to some specific actions. Needs of self-actualization is the last level of hierarchy of this theoretical model. People generally fulfil their all needs, expectations and wants in the first four level of the hierarchy (Bryman, 1992, p.19). In this stage, people generally try to experi8ence some new things or aspects in order to make that aspect memorable for entire life (Conger, 1989, p.99). It is clear from the above discussion that management should consider this theoretical aspect while adopting and implementing human relations approach in workplace management process (Coopey and Hartley, 1991, p.17). According to several experts and critiques, an organization cannot survive for long without the consideration of effective human relation approaches in the management process in such competitive global business environment (Foucault, 1980, p.86). Contemporary Examples This part of the report will provide some real life examples of organizations that are adopting and implementing classical approaches and organizations that are implementing human relations approaches in the business operation process to gain potential competitive advantages over the competitors. Examples of Classical Approach adopted by organization The Coca Cola Company can be considered as one of the US based multinational soft drink manufacturing and distributing organizations across the globe. This specific organization is continuously adopting and implementing classical approaches in the organizational management process. This process focuses on the organizational performance and performance of employees. Similarly, the Coca Cola Company has adopted scientific management approaches in business operation process to enhance effective business growth rate. The management of the organization hardly bothers about social needs of employees as the organization always want its employees to follow the organizational rules, policies, values and disciplines (Northhouse, 1997, p.198). It is true that management of the organization has implemented centralized decision making approach in order to keep entire control over each and every business operation activities. In addition to this, the organization has also implemented top-down organizational communication approach in order to maintain discipline across each and every organization department. This aspect has helped the management of the Coca Cola Company to enhance organizational business performance as well as effective performance of employees. But, this specific approach has failed to motivate the employees socially (Nye, 2004, p.36). McDonalds Corporation can be considered as an effective example of adoption and implementation of scientific classical management practices in organizational management process. This specific organization also focuses on effective organizational value and discipline in organizational management processes. The organization never compromises with the quality of the products and customer services (Pareto, 1966, p.109). But, lack of employee engagement and social values for employees has created several ethical issues for the organization. Long working hours, high workplace stress and inadequate performance appraisal have forced several employees of this organization to look for new employment opportunities (Proctor and Mueller, 2000, p.9982). This specific approach has helped the organization to fulfil the needs of customers. But, inadequate employee performance management aspect of McDonalds Corporation has been criticised by several organizational leaders (Yukl, 1998, p.14). US military defence and police department can be considered as effective examples of adoption and implementation of classical approaches in organizational management process. These organizations are following administrative and bureaucracy classical approaches in organizational performance in order to maintain efficiency of the organizational process. These organizations generally focus on discipline and values. Administrative approach helped UD military and police department to follow strict rules and regulations (Avolio, Walumba and Weber, 2009, pp.421-449). According to this approach, each and every employee is bound to follow the principles and rules developed by the organizational leaders. These specific approaches have helped the organization to enhance effective security of country and states respectively. The above mentioned organizations also follow effective and centralized hierarchical structure in management process. Moreover, job responsibilities of the employees used to differ from each other based on the hierarchical differences. Efficiency, skill and experience help to determine the job responsibility of each and every employee (Bass, 1990, pp. 421-449). However, it is clear that this classical management approach can become successful based on the nature of the organizations’ roles, functions and responsibilities. Examples of Human Relation Approach adopted by organizations It is important for each and every organization across the globe to consider human relations approach in order to enhance effective organizational management performances. Human relations approaches generally focus on the values, motivation and job satisfaction of employees. It is true that global business environment is becoming highly competitive. Each and every employee as well as job seeker is trying to gain effective employment opportunity in order to enhance his or her professional career (Bennis, 2007, pp. 2-5). On the other hand, several organizations are trying to focus on recruitment and selection of skilled and experienced employees to make a strong and efficient workforce. Looking into this specific market situation, it is highly important for the organizations to focus on the implementation of human relation approaches in management practices to enhance employee motivation and employee job satisfaction (Gardner, Cogliser, Davis and Dickens, 2011, pp. 1120-1145). This process will help the organizations to develop and effective and strong workforce. PepsiCo can be considered as one of the leading multination soft drink manufacturing and distributing organization. The management of this organization has effectively adopted and implemented human relations strategy in order to enhance employee motivation. According to the organizational value of PepsiCo, employees are the real growth drivers of an organization (Hirschhorn and Gilmore, 1992, pp. 104-115). Therefore, it is the responsibility of the management of the organization to focus on both personal and professional needs of employees. Apart from this aspect, the managers and leaders of the organization has significantly implemented democratic leadership style in business operation process in order to motivate employees and support them in each and every difficulty (Bjugstad, Thach, Thompson and Morris, 2006, p.5). Wal-Mart is another organization that has adopted and implemented human relations approach in business operation process. It is true that global retail industry is becoming highly competitive as well as saturated (House and Aditya, 2009, pp. 409-473). Therefore, the management of Wal-Mart is trying to focus on the social needs of employees to motivate them to perform effectively. Effective performance appraisal and rewards based on performance level of employees are examples of the adoption of human relations approach in business operation process (Bolden, 2011, pp.251-269). It is true that employee poaching has become a serious threat for several organizations in this competitive global business environment. Adoption and implementation of human relations approach generally helps the organization to overcome this threat and issue. Tesco is another organization that has adopted and implemented human relations approach in business operation process in order to gain potential competitive advantages over its competitors. This specific approach has advantages for both the employees and employers (Conger, 2004, pp. 136-139). In terms of employees, human relations approach helps the management of the organization to focus on implementation of decentralized decision making process. It improves organizational communication process between employees and employers. In addition to this, this specific approach helps employees to het satisfied with assigned job roles and job responsibilities due to adequate care of social needs of employees. On the other hand, employers can get huge advantage through this approach as it increases brand image and brand value of the organization among the stakeholders and shareholders of the organization (Caldwell, 2003, pp.285-293). This specific approach has helped several organizations, such as PepsiCo, Wal-Mart and Tesco Plc. to motivate employees and develop effective relationship with the employees. It has also helped the organization to overcome several employment related legal and ethical issues. Conclusion It is clear from above literature review and provided examples that classical management approaches and human relation approaches have helped several organizations to enhance effective business growth rate. Global business environment is becoming highly competitive as well as saturated. Each and every organization in this contemporary global business environment is trying to develop and implement unique strategies in business operation process in order to gain potential competitive advantages over competitors. However, there are several management approaches that can be considered by the organizations in order to gain potential competitive advantages over the competitors. But, the effectiveness of the classical management approaches and human relations approaches should be considered by the organizations in order to enhance organizational management practices. It is clear from the above discussion that human relations approaches generally focuses on the employee motivation, employee values and employee job satisfaction. According to this approach, the management of the organization generally focuses on the social needs of the employees. In addition to this, this specific approach helps an organization to develop effective relationship between employees and employers. On the other hand, classical management approaches generally focuses on organizational principles, employee performance and organizational performance. According to this approach, employers generally focus on the economic needs of employees and business performance of the organization. However, it is important for the management of the organizations to focus on the effectiveness of both these approaches and implementation of these approaches in the organizational management process. It is also important for the management of the organization to implement the approaches considering business environment and internal environmental situation of the organization. Discipline and organizational values are highly important for organization to enhance effective management process. On the other hand, it is also important for the organizations to ensure effective human relations within the organization. These aspects can be cleared from the above examples of the Coca Cola Company, PepsiCo and Wal-Mart Company. References Avolio, B. J., Walumba, F. O., and Weber, T. J., 2009. “Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions”. Annual review of psychology, 60(5), pp. 421-449. Barak, M., 2010. Managing Diversity. London: Sage. Bass, B. M., 1990. “From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision”. Organisational dynamics, 18(3), pp. 19-31. Bass, B. M., and Avolio, B. J., 1994. Improving Organizational Effectiveness through Transformational Leadership. London: Sage. Becker, B., 2003. The Impact of Human Resource Management on Organizational Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 81(2), p.9. Bell, L., 2002. Managing Teams in Secondary Schools. London: Routledge. Bennis, W., 2007. “The challenges of leadership in the modern world”, American psychologist, 62(1), pp. 2-5. Bjugstad, K., Thach, E. C., Thompson, K. J. and Morris, A., 2006. “A fresh look at followership: A model for matching followership and leadership styles”: Organisational behaviour, 7(3), p.5. Bolden, R., 2011. “Distributed leadership in organisations: A review of theory and research”. International journal of management reviews, 13(3), pp.251–269. Bratton, J., Grint, K., and Nelson, D., 2004, Organizational Leadership, London: Thomson/ South-western Press. Bryman, A., 1992. Charisma and Leadership in Organizations. London: Sage. Caldwell, R., 2003. “Change leaders and change managers: different or complementary”? Leadership and organisation development journal, 24(5). Pp. 285-293. Campbell, J., 2007. Motivation, Attitude, Goal Settings, Performance and Interactive Effects of Pay for Performance. London: ProQuest. Charan, R., 2006. Home Depot’s Blueprint for Culture Change. Harvard Business Review, 84(4), pp. 60-70. Chaturvedi, P., and Chaturvedi M., 2009. Communication Skills. New Jersey: Pearson. Conger, J. A., 1989 The Charismatic Leader: Behind the Mystique of Exceptional Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Conger, J. A., 2004. “Developing leadership capability: what’s inside the black box”? Academy of management executive, 18(3), pp. 136-139. Cook, D., 2010. Service Typologies. International Journal of Management, 29(1), p.16. Cooper, C., Johnson, S., and Holdsworth, L., 2012. Organisational Behaviour for Dummies. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Coopey, J., and Hartley, J., 1991. Reconsidering the case for Organizational Commitment. Human Resource Journal, 1(3), p.17. Draft, R., 2008. The Leadership Experience. Stamford: Cengage Learning. Foucault, M., 1980. Power/Knowledge. Brighton: Harvester. Fox, S., 2001. A Model of Work Frustration. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 8(1), p.5. Gardner, W.L., Cogliser, C.C., Davis, K.M. and Dickens, M. P., 2011. “Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda”. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), pp.1120–1145. Geertz, C., 1983. ‘Centers, kings and charisma: reflections on the symbols of power’ in Geertz, C., Local Knowledge. New York: Basic Books. Gitman, L., and McDanniel, C., 2008. The Future of Business. Stamford: Cengage Learning. Grint, K., 2001. The Arts of Leadership. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Guest, D., 2006. Human Resource management and Performance. Journal of Human Resource Management, 65(2), p.3. Hamilton, C., 2013. Communicating for Results. Stamford: Cengage Learning. Hill, L., 2013. Becoming a Manager: How New Managers Master the Challenges of Leadership. New York: Harvard Business Press. Hirschhorn, L., and Gilmore, T., 1992. “The new boundaries of the “Boundary-less” company”, Harvard business review, 70 (3), pp. 104 – 115. House, R.J., and Aditya, R.N., 2009. “The social scientific study of leadership: Quo vadis”? Journal of management, 23(3), pp. 409-473. Hwang, S., 2001. Relationships among Internal Marketing, Employee Job Satisfaction and International Hotel Performance: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Management, 22(2), p.7. Kervin, J., 2008. Explaining Nursing Turnover Intent. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 56(1), p.14. Krause, D. G., 1995. Sun Tzu, The Art of War for Executives London: Nicholas Brealey. Latour, B., 1988 ‘The prince for machines as well as machinations’ in Elliott, Technology and Social Process. Edinburgh: EUP. Law, J.,1991. A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. London: Routledge. Ledeen, M. A., 1999. Machiavelli on Modern Leadership. New York: Truman Talley. Leonard, E., 2012. Supervision: Concepts and Practices of Management. Stamford: Cengage Learning. Lukes, S., 1974. Power: A Radical View. London: Macmillan. Lumpe, M., 2012. Leadership and Organization in the Aviation Industry. London: Ashgate Publishing. Luthans, F., 2001. The Need for and Meaning of Positive Organizational Behavior. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 21(1), p.12. Marturano, A., and Gosling, J., 2008. Leadership: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge. Mathis, R., and Jackson, J., 2011. Human Resource Management: Essential Perspectives. Stamford: Cengage Learning. McCabe, D., 2007. “Individualization at Work?: Subjectivity”. Team working and Anti-Unionism’ Organization, 14(2), pp. 243-266.  Moshal, B., 2009. Organizational Theory and Behavior. New Delhi: ANE Books Pvt. Ltd. Mullins, L., 2009. Management and Organizational Behaviour. New Jersey: Pearson. Northouse, P.G., 1997. Leadership: Theory and Practice. London: Sage. Nye, J. S., 2004. Power in the Global Information Age. London: Routledge. Pareto, V., 1966. Sociological Writings. London: Pall Mall Press. Phillips, J., 2009. Strategic Staffing. New Jersey: Pearson. Pierce, J., 2011. Leaders & Leadership Process. New York: McGraw-Hill. Proctor, S., and Mueller, F., 2000. Team working. London: Macmillan Rogers, E., 2002. Measuring organizational performance in strategic human resource management: Problems, prospects and performance information markets”. Human Resource Management Review, 41(2), p.6. Rothwell, J., 2007. In Mixed Company: Communicating in Small Groups and Teams. Stamford: Cengage Learning. Thiederman, S., 2008. Making Diversity Work. London: Kaplan Publishing. Thomas, D., 2010. Coordinated supply chain Management. European Journal of Operational Management, 18(1), p.18. Turnley, W., 2000. Re-Examining the Effects of Psychological Contract Violations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19 (1), p.8. Walker, A., 2011. Organizational Behaviour in Construction. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Yukl, G., 1998. Leadership in Organizations. London: Prentice Hall International. Read More