Taylor, Fayol and Webers Management Theories - Coursework Example

Comparing and Contrasting Three Management Theories University’s Name: Submitted by Names: Tutor: Date: Comparing and Contrasting Taylor, Fayol and Weber’s Management Theories The success of any business relies largely on the efficiency of management, which makes management an important part of any organization (Cole, 2004). Management basically refers to the coordination of both physical and human resources to achieve the set objectives by an organization. There are many theories that explain the concept of management. However, this essay focuses on three theories, which are associated with three famous management theorists. Fredrick Taylor is known as the father of scientific management and is one of the pioneer management theorists whose theories still apply even today. The other two theorists are Max Weber and Henry Fredric whose management theories are still used in the modern society. The purpose of this essay, therefore, is to compare and contrast Taylor, Fayol and Weber’s management theories by first looking at their biography and then compare and contrast their management perspectives. Frederick Winslow Taylor is referred to as the father of scientific management because of its role he played in coming up with scientific management theory, which sometimes is referred to as Taylorism. Taylor was born in 1856 in Germantown located in Pennsylvania and he passed on in the year 1915. He was an American engineer and a profound inventor who specialized in the industrial management (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). Even though he had no formal training in management, he relied on his experience, which he gained while working from the shop floor at Midvale to come up with scientific management perspective. Taylor is one of the first people to study work process scientifically. His philosophy was based on a belief that creating a system that make employees work as hard as they can is less efficient compared to the work is done. Therefore, he came up with an idea that reduces the time an employee take doing a particular task by optimizing the way that particular task is done (Taylor, 2004). Consequently, in 1909, he published a book known as The Principles of Scientific Management, which he used to advance the idea that optimizing and simplifying tasks increase productivity. He proposed that workers and the management should cooperate with one another and he believed that workers are motivated by money. His interest in efficiency, therefore, led to Taylor coming up with scientific management perspective. Another management theorist who played a vital role in coming up with the management perspective that is applied even in the current modern world is Henry Fayol. Fayol was born in 1841 and he died in 1925. He was a French mining engineer who studied at a mining school in Saint-Entiene where he graduated as a mining engineer (Peaucelle & Guthrie, 2013). He came to fame after successfully fighting underground coal mine and his principles was based on resource acquisition and centralization. His book titled General and Industrial Management became a fundamental management reference that is used even today. Fayol believed in the arrangement and coordination of production, sales, and accounting (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). Fayol had many contributions to the field of management, which are still applied in the modern economies. He came up with the five functions of management and the fourteen principles of management. He also developed administration management theory and he took management as a profession where managers can be trained and developed (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). In addition, Fayol believed in the anticipation of the future through preparation and planning. He, therefore, believed in the administrative management school of thought. The third theorist whose management school of thought is part of this essay is Max Weber who is referred to as the father of sociology. Weber was born in 1864 in Germany in an affluent family with both social and political influence in the whole of Germany. He had interest in four discipline, including sociology, religion, economics and political science (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). He is best remembered for the thesis of Protestants ethics and the concept of bureaucracy in management. Weber is also associated with organization theory. Max Weber contributed in management practices by coming up with Max Weber theory of management, which is also referred to as bureaucratic management theory. Weber did not associate bureaucracy with the red-tape or inefficiency; rather he considered it the most efficient way managing an organization (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). He came up with the theory, which he believed was essential in organizing and evaluating the performance of an organization. Even though Taylor, Fayol and, Weber contributed in the management principles and practices that are used today, their management perspectives, ideas and thoughts have both similarities and differences because they belonged to different schools of thought. Taylor developed scientific management theory, which basically refers to the application of industrial engineering perspectives in developing a system where there is minimal wastage of resources, improvement in productivity, and efficient and fair distribution of goods and services (Witzel & Warner, 2015). The improvements that come with the application of scientific management in organization, according to Taylor, serve the interest of investors, employees and the society in general. Taylor’s theory is based on four basic principles. First, it emphasized on the application of scientific approach in selecting training and developing workers. The second principle is actively acquiring, analyzing and transforming to rules and mathematical formulas for doing various tasks (Aitken, 2014). The third principle is the coordination of workers and science so that workers are able to apply scientific techniques when doing their assigned tasks (Huang et al., 2013). The fourth principle is application of work equally between management and employees where the former applies scientific methods in assigning the task (Shafritz, Ott & Jang, 2015). The four principles sum up scientific management theory by Taylor. Taylor differentiated two types of soldiering, natural and systematic, which he used to explain scientific management theory. Natural soldiering refers to the habit of individual employees to take it easy when working in a particular organization. Systematic soldiering, on the other hand, refers to the tendency of employees to conform to the societal norms, which defines their relationship with other people in the society (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). Even though natural soldiering can be solved by motivating or forcing employees to adhere to the set rules and standards, systematic soldiering is more complex and it needs new techniques for it to be solved. Fayol theory, on the other hand can be said to be a model that shows how management relates with personnel in an organization. Therefore, Fayol theory can also be referred to as administrative management theory. He took a top-down management approach by focusing on management activities that can be used to increase efficiency and productivity in an organization (Sapru, 2013). Fayol, therefore, differentiated managerial capability from the technical skills and knowledge. He argued that technical knowledge and skills could easily be destroyed by an ineffective administration. Consequently, Fayol developed fourteen principles of management, which can be summed as labor, authority, discipline, unity of command, unity of discretion, remuneration, centralization, order, and equity. Others include preference of general interests to individual interests, scalar chain, initiatives and promotion of team work. He also came up with functions of management, which include forecasting, planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating and controlling (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). In short, Fayol’s management theory is about training and equipping management with the relevant knowledge and skills instead of individual employees’ efficiency. Fayol, therefore, was a strategist who believed in the efficiency of the management in improving the productivity of both employees and organization in general. Bureaucratic management theory, on the other hand, is Weber’s management model focusing on impersonal management. The theory has two major elements that define it. First is the hierarchical structuring of organizations, which include the hierarchy of authority as well (Shaikh, 2014). Secondly, enterprises are and all its stakeholders are governed by rational legal rules, which guide decision-making in an organization. According to Weber’s theory, bureaucracy stems from a formal legal entity that is guided by the written rules and procedures accepted by everybody in an organization (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). Managers, therefore, have the authority to enforce the written rules by the virtue of their positions in an organization. In addition, authority respect specific rules and not individual. Further, according to Weber’s management theory, recruitment and promotion of employees should only be based on merit and competence (Shaikh, 2014). The three theories have common similarities that apply to all of them. First, all the three theories are essential in scientific management of organizations across the industries because they are used to make management decisions (Mahmood, Basharat & Bashir, 2012). Scientific solutions are important for the success of organizations because they result in rational and quick decision-making. Secondly, the theories were developed based on practical experience and research (Chand, 2015). Taylor, Fayol, and Weber used their experiences to come up with scientific management theory, administrative management theory, and bureaucratic management theory respectively. They used their experiences to improve management practices. The three theories also emphasized on the importance of cooperation between investors, management and employees. They stressed the importance of mutual cooperation between employers if organizations are to realize success in their operations (Gladwin, Kennelly & Krause, 1995). Regardless of the management model and practices, beneficial relationships between workers, management, investors, and all the stakeholders lead to improved productivity of organizations. Therefore, they highlight the importance scientific management technique and mutual cooperation between employers and employees. There is also close similarities between Weber’s theory and Taylor’s theory. Both theories emphasized the importance of a system of standardized rules and procedures and a clearly defined chain of command (Terry, 2011). Even though they stressed the importance of technology in improving the efficiency and productivity of organizations, they also warned about putting much efforts and emphasis at the expense of the emotions of workers. The three theories also encourage management to develop efficiency in organizations for them to succeed and have competitive advantage in their respective industries. Despite the similarities, the three theories are also different. Taylor’s theory is more concerned about work, time, and improvement of efficiency of workers (Rahman, 2015). Taylor believed that efficient workers increase the productivity and efficiency in an organization. Fayol, on the other hand was concerned about the efficiency of management and the behaviors of human beings (Chand, 2015). Taylor believed in efficiency of workers in improving the productivity while Fayol believed in the efficiency of management in improving the productivity of an organization (Tavana, 2013). Taylor favored bottom-up management techniques while both Fayol and Weber favored top-down management perspective. Both Weber and Fayol argued that efficient management minimizes the misunderstandings and conflicts in an organization, leading to increase efficiency and productivity (Dalkir, 2013). There is also a difference between Fayol’s theory and Weber’s theory. Fayol based his arguments on the planning and organizing and training of managers as the most efficient way of improving the productivity and efficiency of organizations. Contrary, Weber emphasized on the importance of sound leadership skills, which is guided by rational-legal entity. Weber further stated that the leadership should neither be traditional nor charismatic if organizations are to achieve their set objectives (Mansouri & Rowney, 2014). In addition, scientific management theory by Taylor and the bureaucratic theory by Weber ignore human element (Akrani, 2011). Taylor only emphasized on the importance of improving the productivity of employees, physical materials and management techniques. He disregarded human aspects like social and psychological aspects of human beings (Caldari, 2007). Fayol, on the other hand, incorporated human element in his theory. Further, Taylor concentrated on the productivity while Fayol and Weber came up with general theories that can apply to all types of management. In conclusion, Taylor, Weber, and Fayol developed scientific management theory, bureaucratic management theory, and administrative management theory respectively. Scientific management theory focuses on the improvement of labor efficiency, Weber’s theory focuses on the hierarchical structure of an organization based on the rational legal entity, and Fayol theory is about the administrative process in an organization. All the theories aim at improving the efficiency of organizations and the mutual cooperative relationship between employers, management and employees through scientific methods. However, they theories differ on some practices because they belong to different schools of thought. Reference List Aitken, H. G. 2014. Scientific Management in Action: Taylorism at Watertown Arsenal, 1908- 1915. Princeton University Press. Akrani, G. 2011. Criticism of Taylor’s Scientific Management-Limitations. Retrieved from http://kalyan-city.blogspot.co.ke/2011/06/criticism-of-taylor-scientific.html Caldari, K. 2007. Alfred Marshall's critical analysis of scientific management∗. The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 14(1), 55-78. Chand, S. 2015. Comparison between Taylor and Fayol Theory of Management (Similarities and Dissimilarities). Retrieved from http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/management/comparison-between-taylor-and-fayol- theory-of-management-similarities-and-dissimilarities/25625/ Cole, G. A. 2004. Management theory and practice. Cengage Learning EMEA. Dalkir, K. 2013. Knowledge management in theory and practice. Routledge. Gladwin, T. N., Kennelly, J. J., & Krause, T. S. 1995. Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: Implications for management theory and research. Academy of management Review, 20(4), 874-907. Huang, K. P., Tung, J., Lo, S. C., & Chou, M. J. 2013. A review and critical analysis of the principles of scientific management. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 5(4), 78-85. Mahmood, Z., Basharat, M., & Bashir, Z. 2012. Review of classical management theories. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education, 2(1), 512-5120. Mansouri, M., & Rowney, J. 2014. The Dilemma of Accountability for Professionals: A Challenge for Mainstream Management Theories. Journal Of Business Ethics, 123(1), 45-56. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1788-x Peaucelle, J. L., & Guthrie, C. 2013. The life of Henri fayol. The Oxford Handbook of Management Theorists, 49. Rahman, H. 2015. Henry Fayol and Frederick Winslow Taylor’s Contribution to Management Thought: An Overview by Hasebur Rahman. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/4462403/Henry_Fayol_and_Frederick_Winslow_Taylor_s_Co ntribution_to_Management_Thought_An_Overview_by_Hasebur_Rahman Sapru, R. K. 2013. Administrative theories and management thought. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Shafritz, J., Ott, J., & Jang, Y. 2015. Classics of organization theory. Cengage Learning. Shaikh, A. 2014. Reexamining Capitalism: Exemplifying the question of the division of labor and the problems of bureaucracy: projecting on management discourse using some of the writings of marx, durkheim and max weber in understanding some aspects of social theory. Kuwait Chapter of the Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 3(5), 33. Tavana, M. 2013. Management Theories and Strategic Practices for Decision Making. Hershey, Pa: Business Science Reference Taylor, F. W. 2004. Scientific management. Routledge. Terry, L. 2011. The Management Theory of Max Weber. Retrieved from http://www.business.com/management/management-theory-of-max-weber/ Witzel, M., & Warner, M. 2015. Taylorism revisited: culture, management theory and paradigm-shift. Journal Of General Management, 40(3), 55-69 Wren, D. A., & Bedeian, A. G. 1994. The evolution of management thought. Read More