Evaluation of Classical and Human Relation Approach of Management Theories - Term Paper Example

Evaluation ical and Human Relation Approach of Management Theories Evaluation ical and Human Relation Approach of Management Theories Introduction Management theory has been a well-contributed field of interest for theorists over the years because of the shift in its development. The aim of this paper is to critically undertake an evaluation concerning classical and human relations approaches of management theory. In order to understand the distinctive characteristics of human relations and classical management theory, it is imperative to note that varying industrial examples will be discussed in the paper. An in-depth assessment will be conducted to create a comparison between the two different management theories in the paper i.e. classical and human relation approaches towards management. Background to the Context The production of goods or varying products was undertaken solely by workers before the industrial revolution. It means that it was the task of the worker to bring different pieces and parts of a product himself without the aid of machinery. However, with the passage of time, machines took over some of the tasks of the workers. Herein, it should be noted that the workers were still responsible for most of the tasks but the approach towards production changed to a great extent. Industrial revolution broke down the production process of a good in various steps. The advancement of technological infrastructure resulted in large groups working together to produce increased amounts of goods in a very short span of time (Lumley & Wilkinson, 2013). Throughout the process of development of production of goods, the nature of work and the approaches to get the work done also changed drastically. Researchers and management theorists also undertook a number of experiments to find out the impact that the change in working conditions had on the working conditions of the employees as well as their motivation towards getting the work done. It was this era when a boom within the exploration of management theories and paradigms was observed. The major purpose of the management theory was to suggest or recommend business giants to strategically make their employees work for the interests of stakeholders. It involved the manner in which they organized the employees and their tasks. At this point, two distinctive approaches of management were found out that were later termed as classical management theories and human relation theories. Before critically evaluating the purpose of the two different approaches of management, a light will be shed on the term management theory (Gallagher, 2012). Understanding Management Theory: As discussed above, organizations need a road map or a guiding model when it comes to managing the organizations. Management theory is a term that covers all the aspects that generalize rules for business enterprises to manage their workforce. The relationships between the workforce and the managers can easily be managed by following and practicing the management theories. The focus of the management theories is mainly on the motivational aspect of employees that would make them approach their targets. The standards can be settled by the companies with the help of specific management theory that would regulate the pace of production as well as motivate its employees at the same time (Gallagher, 2012). Understanding Classical Management Theory: The origin of the classical management theory is dated back to the era of industrial revolution. The evolution of the classical management theory was undertaken mainly to overcome the issues of the factories. The main purpose of the classical management theory was to find out solution for people who were not able to come up with effective motivational prospects for the workforce. As a matter of fact, the classical management theory was based on the models of administrative and scientific schools. There were no specific standards of working before the implication of the classical management theory. It is rather classical management theory that suggested certain rules and regulations for the employees concerning their tasks. Furthermore, employees were trained to perform their tasks based on the standards as settled by the classical management theories. Critics claim that the classical school of management theory solely focused the interests of the stakeholders while keeping employees aside. In other words, there was no value given to the employees and were mainly looked at as machines (Lumley & Wilkinson, 2013). Understanding Human Relations Approach towards Management: There was an avid need of a management theory that was allowing employees to feel motivated. The main focus of the human relations was noted to be on the interests of employees. Human relations approach to management considered employees to be the sole reason of effective production. As per the human rights approach, it was marked that the employees had to work in collaboration and that the productivity had to be increased while assigning people into smaller groups. Critics claim that the human relations approach towards management greatly dependent on the Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs. The reason behind the inclusion of the aforementioned theory was because human relations approach marked that every human has respective interests that needs to be fulfilled. It is due to the personal interests that individual show distinctive performance when it comes to performing their assigned tasks (Lumley & Wilkinson, 2013). Furthermore, under the human relations management theories, the workers are considered to have needs that are categorized in terms of preference. For instance, there are physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, self-esteem needs etc. that the employees look forward to achieve. Some of the significant contributions that were made to the human relations management theories include Elton Mayo. As per Mayo, employees are surely in need of a good wage or salary but at the same time, there are other needs as well that make them motivated towards performing well. Employees can be given social platform at work so that they can undertake self-actualization. The approach towards management under the human relations umbrella specifically notes that managers must take interest in the social needs as well as other needs of the workers. In this way, employees would feel that they are given attention. Employees need to be felt important for the organization for which they should be communicated regularly by the managers of supervisors. It is significant to note that the employees need to feel that they are comfortable as well as enjoying company of their workers because that will keep them motivated towards meeting their targets of performance. The human relations approach of management is different in many ways when compared to the classical approach towards management of employees (Gallagher, 2012). A number of researches were conducted after the publication of internal memos was noted following the human relations approach of management. Mayo also conducted various assessments to find out the impact of the human relations management style. It was marked that two different groups of women were created in a factory that were given different light settings as well as working conditions. It was found out that there was a great difference or change in the performances of the employees (Lumley & Wilkinson, 2013). In the wake of human relations towards management of employees, it was observed that various theories were also drawn. For instance, theory X and theory Y by Douglas McGregor brought new notions concerning the organizational function and the role of managers to communicate with the employees. Herein, an industry example can be undertaken in order to understand the management theory and implication of the classical and human approaches towards management. As per the classical theory, a car engine has many parts that are destined to work differently as a team. There are other processes that would be dependent upon one of the parts of the car engine. The example can be further drawn by noting that the carburetor or fuel injector is responsible for mixing gasoline which is further ignited by the spark plug. Finally, the car would be driven using fuel injector that would allow combustion in the engine. In the similar manner, classical management theory claimed that the parts or different process of the human resource can end up in managing the machine as well. Herein, the employees were rather considered as machines as discussed above (Lumley & Wilkinson, 2013). Another example can be drawn from the burger makers who would slice the buns and further cut vegetables in different shapes. Another person would be responsible for compiling and creating the final touch for the product. In this manner, production is undertaken in a team work where every worker needs to know the duty that has to be performed (Gallagher, 2012). The aforementioned examples are quiet practical and are implied in the present day management styles. However, the personal interest or needs remains suspended for which newer management styles were observed. In the present times, good examples can be seen where human approach towards management is making successful changes in the working environment for workers. Major companies such as Tesco PLC, IBM, Zara, Coca Cola etc. are using the machine metaphor with amalgamation of the human approach towards management. The fusion of the approaches is certainly bringing effective changes in the manner of working experience of employees. It is clearly visible that both the management schools of theory have some of the weaknesses. However, they can be used and implied in such a manner that it could bring the most effective changes within the organizations at the same time. List of References Gallagher, K., 2012. Skills Development for Business and Management Students. Oxford: OUP. Lumley, M. & Wilkinson, J., 2013. Developing Employability for Busines. Oxford: OUP. Read More