Critically compare and contrast theories of management (classical, Essay

Critically compare and contrast theories of management (classical, human relations, systems, contingency, Marxist labour process - Essay Example In 1911, Taylor suggested management a process in which that he suggested that if planned scientifically, would direct to success. His guidelines of scientific management started a revolution in the ways we assumed the procedures and the status of a manager. Numerous early writers in management challenged that there was an appropriate way of organizing work and completing tasks. Others established on the engineering approaches to approve the effects of bureaucracies. Mintzberg elaborated the responsibility and role of a manager in leading the organizations to attaining goals in a logical manner. The informational, interpersonal, and decisional roles he distinguished are equally practicable to the managers operating in private, public or nonprofit organizational set up (Buchanan and Huczynski 2010). Classical Management Theory Classical management theory engages making multiple standards of workers to enhance profitability. Employees working at the lower levels find their jobs supervi sed by managers, who in turn, are supervised by upper level management. At each level, employees are required to perform jobs according to particular procedures created to boost productivity. Moreover, this theory concentrates on a distant side of the business. Employees and managers are advised to resist friendly and personal communications within the organization. Rules and regulations must be followed with precision, and the recruitment of employees must associate only to the potentials they attain. However, classical management theory is not employed in many organizations because some of its loopholes. As few elements of the theory, like crafting procedures for accomplishing tasks and keeping personal matters out of business, assist an organization concentrate on the current job, the theory fails to identify the disparity among employees. When employee emotions and opinions are not considered, the business may not flourish or may confront high ratios of employee turnover. Since, the employee feels deprived of establishing a relationship and they leave the organization in search of a more fulfilling job. The classical management theory highlights on the ways management can be or designed to acquire productivity. Henri Fayol, an eminent name in management science, crafted several management theories directed towards success, like designing a unified way among managers, discipline, and centralization. Numerous other management theories focused on establishing team confidence (Buchanan and Huczynski 2010). On the other hand, the major weakness of the classical management theory emerged from its difficulty, and stubborn structure. One of the core principles of the classical management theory is to raise productivity and performance; however, acquiring these objectives often came at the cost of human bonds and creativity. For instance, managers would utilize assemble line procedures and project management theories that concentrated on successful division of jobs . However, employers overlooked the relational factor in employees, in the procedure of attempting to forecast and manage human behavior. In reality, the human relations movement raised in reaction to the classical management theory, as a method to understand the responsibility of human motivation in efficiency. Also, too much depending on previous experience is another flaw of the theory. The theorists of this era only examined their