Modern views on the theory of management, the foundation of which was laid by scientific schools of management, are very diverse. The article will tell about the leading foreign management schools and the founders of management.
The origin of science
Management has an ancient history, but management theory began to develop only at the beginning of the 20th century. The emergence of management science is considered the merit of Frederick Taylor (1856-1915). The founder of the school of scientific management, Taylor, along with other researchers, initiated the study of means and methods of leadership.
Revolutionary thoughts about management, motivation arose earlier, but were not in demand. For example, the project of Robert Owen (beginning of the 19th century) turned out to be very successful. His factory in Scotland made great profits by creating working conditions that encourage people to work efficiently. Workers and their families were provided with housing, worked in better conditions, and were encouraged with bonuses. But the businessmen of that time were not ready to follow Owen.
In 1885, in parallel with the Taylor School, an empirical school arose, whose representatives (Drucker, Ford, Simons) were of the opinion that management is an art. A successful leadership can be based only on practical experience and intuition, but it is not a science.
It was in the United States at the dawn of the 20th century that favorable conditions developed in which the evolution of scientific management schools began. In a democratic country, a huge labor market has formed. The availability of education has helped many smart people to show their qualities. The development of transport and the economy contributed to the strengthening of monopolies with a multilevel management structure. New ways of leadership were required. In 1911, Frederick Taylor's book Principles of Scientific Management was published, which laid the foundation for research in the field of a new science - leadership.
Taylor School of Scientific Management (1885-1920)
Frederick Taylor, the father of modern management, proposed and systematized the laws of rational organization of work. With the help of research, he conveyed the idea that labor must be studied by scientific methods.
- Taylor's innovations include motivation methods, piecework wages, rest and breaks in production, timekeeping, rationing, professional selection and training of personnel, the introduction of cards with the rules for performing work.
- Together with his followers, Taylor proved that the use of observations, measurements and analyzes will help to facilitate manual labor, to make it more perfect. The introduction of feasible norms and standards made it possible to increase the salary of more efficient employees.
- Supporters of the school did not ignore the human factor. The introduction of incentive methods has increased the motivation of workers and increased productivity.
- Taylor dismembered labor methods, separated management functions (organization and planning) from actual labor. Representatives of the school of scientific management believed that people with this specialty should perform managerial functions. They were of the opinion that focusing different groups of employees on what they are more capable of makes the organization more successful.
The system created by Taylor is recognized as more applicable to the lower level of management in diversification, expansion of production. The Taylor School of Scientific Management has created a scientific foundation to replace obsolete practical methods of work. The school's supporters included such researchers as F. and L. Gilbert, G. Gantt, Weber, G. Emerson, G. Ford, G. Grant, O.A. Yermansky.
School of Science Management
Frank and Lilian Gilbrets studied factors affecting labor productivity. To record the movements during operations, they used a movie camera and a device of their own invention (microchronometer). Studies have allowed to change the course of work, eliminating unnecessary movements.
Gilbrets used standards and equipment in production, which subsequently led to the emergence of working standards, which were introduced by scientific management schools. F. Gilbret investigated the factors that influence labor productivity. He divided them into three groups:
- Variable factors related to health, lifestyle, physique, cultural level, education.
- Variable factors associated with working conditions, conditions, materials, equipment and tools.
- Variable factors associated with the speed of movement: speed, efficiency, automaticity and others.
As a result of research, Gilbert concluded that motion factors are the most significant.
The main provisions of the school of scientific management were finalized by Max Weber. The scientist formulated six principles for the rational functioning of the enterprise, which consisted of rationality, instruction, rationing, division of labor, specialization of the management team, regulation of functions and submission to a common goal.
The school of scientific management of F. Taylor and his work were continued by the contribution of Henry Ford, who supplemented the principles of Taylor by standardizing all processes in production, dividing operations into stages. Ford mechanized and synchronized production, organizing it on the principle of a conveyor, due to which the cost price decreased by 9 times.
The first scientific management schools became a reliable foundation for the development of management science. Taylor’s school is distinguished not only by many strengths, but also by its shortcomings: the study of management from the angle of a mechanical approach, motivation through meeting the utilitarian needs of workers.
Administrative (classical) school of scientific management (1920-1950)
The administrative school laid the foundation for the development of the principles and functions of leadership, the search for systematic approaches to improve the efficiency of managing the entire enterprise. A significant contribution to its development was made by A. Fayol, D. Mooney, L. Urvik, A. Ginsburg, A. Sloan, A. Gastev. The birth of the administrative school is associated with the name of Henri Fayol, who worked for more than 50 years for the benefit of the French company in the field of coal and iron ore processing. Dindall Urvik served as management consultant in England. James Mooney worked under the direction of Alfred Sloan at General Motors.
The scientific and administrative schools of management developed in different directions, but complemented each other. Supporters of the administrative school considered their main goal to achieve the effectiveness of the entire organization as a whole, using universal principles. Researchers were able to look at the enterprise from the point of view of perspective development and determined common characteristics and patterns for all firms.
In Fayol’s book “General and Industrial Administration”, management was first described as a process that included several functions (planning, organization, motivation, regulation and control).
Fayol formulated 14 universal principles that allow the company to achieve success:
- division of labor;
- combination of authority and responsibility;
- maintaining discipline;
- one-man management;
- community of direction;
- subordination of own interests to collective interests;
- employee compensation;
- centralization;
- chain of interaction;
- order;
- justice;
- job stability;
- promotion of the initiative;
- corporate spirit.
School of Human Relations (1930-1950)
Classical scientific management schools did not take into account one of the main elements of the organization’s success - the human factor. The disadvantages of previous approaches were resolved by the neoclassical school. Her significant contribution to the development of management was the application of knowledge about interpersonal relationships. Movements for human relations and behavioral sciences are the first scientific schools of management, which used the achievements of psychology and sociologists. The development of the school of human relations began thanks to two scientists: Mary Parker Follett and Elton Mayo.
Miss Follett first came to the conclusion that management is ensuring the execution of work with the help of other people. She believed that the manager should not only formally relate to subordinates, but should become a leader for them.
Mayo proved on the basis of experiments that clear guidelines, instructions and decent pay do not always lead to increased productivity, as Taylor, the founder of the School of Scientific Management, believed. Team relationships are often superior to leadership efforts. For example, the opinion of colleagues may become a more important incentive for an employee than instructions from a manager or financial rewards. Thanks to Mayo, a social management philosophy was born.
Mayo carried out his experiments for 13 years at the plant in Horton. He proved that changing the attitude of people to work is possible thanks to group influence. Mayo advised using spiritual incentives in management, for example, the employee’s communication with colleagues. He urged managers to pay attention to relationships in the team.
The Horton Experiments began:
- study of collective relationships in many enterprises;
- accounting for group psychological phenomena;
- identification of labor motivation;
- research on relationships between people;
- identifying the role of each employee and a small group in the work team.
School of Behavioral Sciences (1930-1950)
The end of the 50s was the period when the school of human relations was transformed into a school of behavioral sciences. Not methods for building interpersonal relationships came to the first place, but the effectiveness of the employee and the enterprise as a whole. Behavioral scientific approaches and management schools have led to the emergence of a new management function - personnel management.
Significant figures in this direction include: Douglas McGregor, Frederick Herzberg, Chris Arjiris, Rencis Likert. The object of research of scientists were social interactions, motivation, power, leadership and authority, organizational structures, communications, the quality of working life and work. The new approach departed from the methods of establishing relations in teams, and focused on helping the employee to realize his own capabilities. The concepts of behavioral sciences began to be applied in the creation of organizations and management. Supporters formulated the goal of the school: the high efficiency of the enterprise due to the high efficiency of its human resources.
Douglas McGregor developed the theory of two types of management “X” and “U” depending on the type of attitude towards subordinates: autocratic and democratic. The result of the study was the conclusion that a democratic management style is more effective. McGregor believed that managers should create the conditions under which the employee will not only expend efforts to achieve the goals of the enterprise, but also achieve personal goals.
A major contribution to the development of the school was made by psychologist Abraham Maslow, who created a pyramid of needs. He believed that the leader should see the needs of the subordinate and choose the appropriate methods of motivation. Maslow identified primary permanent needs (physiological) and secondary (social, prestigious, spiritual), constantly changing. This theory has become the basis for many modern motivational models.
School of Quantitative Approach (since 1950)
A significant contribution of the school was the use of mathematical models in management and a variety of quantitative methods in the development of managerial decisions. Among the school's supporters, R. Akoff, L. Bertalanfi, R. Kalman, S. Forrestra, E. Rife, S. Simon are distinguished. The direction is intended to introduce into management the main scientific management schools , methods and apparatus of exact sciences.
The emergence of the school was due to the development of cybernetics and operations research. An independent discipline arose within the framework of the school - the theory of managerial decisions. Research in this area is associated with the development of:
- methods of mathematical modeling in the development of organizational solutions;
- algorithms for selecting optimal solutions using statistics, game theory and other scientific approaches;
- mathematical models for phenomena in the applied and abstract economics;
- large-scale models that mimic a company or an individual company, balance models for costs or output, models for making forecasts of scientific, technical and economic development.
Empirical School
Modern scientific management schools cannot be imagined without the achievements of an empirical school. Its representatives believed that the main objective of management research should be the collection of practical materials and the creation of recommendations for managers. The prominent representatives of the school were Peter Drucker, Ray Davis, Lawrence Newman, Don Miller.
The school contributed to the separation of management in a separate profession and has two directions. The first is the study of enterprise management problems and the implementation of the development of modern management concepts. The second is a study of the work responsibilities and functions of managers. The "empiricists" claimed that the leader creates something united from certain resources. When making decisions, he focuses on the future of the enterprise or its prospects.
Any leader is called upon to perform certain functions:
- setting goals for the enterprise and choosing development paths;
- classification, distribution of work, the creation of an organizational structure, the selection and placement of personnel, and others;
- staff incentives and coordination, control based on relations between managers and the team;
- rationing, analysis of the enterprise and all those employed in it;
- motivation depending on the outcome of the work.
Thus, the activities of the modern manager becomes integrated. The manager must possess knowledge from various fields and apply methods that are proven in practice. The school has resolved a number of significant managerial problems that arise everywhere in large-scale industrial production.
School of Social Systems
The social school applies the achievements of the school of “human relations” and considers the employee as a person with a social orientation and needs, reflected in the organizational environment. The enterprise environment also affects the education needs of the employee.
Bright representatives of the school include Jane March, Herbert Simon, Amitai Etzioni. This trend in the study of the position and place of a person in the organization went further than other scientific schools of management. The postulate of “social systems” can be summarized as follows: the needs of the individual and the needs of the collective are usually far from each other.
Thanks to work, a person gets the opportunity to satisfy his needs level by level, moving higher and higher in the hierarchy of needs. But the essence of the organization is that it often contradicts the transition to the next level. Obstacles arising on the way the employee moves towards his goals cause conflicts with the enterprise. The school’s task is to reduce their strength through research on organizations as complex socio-technical systems.
Human resources management
The history of the emergence of “human resource management” dates back to the 60s of the 20th century. The sociologist R. Milles model considered personnel as a source of reserves. According to the theory, well-functioning management should not become the main goal, as the scientific schools of management preached. Briefly, the meaning of "human management" can be expressed as follows: the satisfaction of needs should be the result of the personal interest of each employee.
An excellent company is always able to retain excellent employees. Therefore, the human factor is an important strategic factor for the organization. This is a vital condition for survival in a complex market environment. The goals of this type of management include not just hiring, but stimulation, development and training of professional employees who effectively implement organizational goals. The essence of this philosophy is that employees are the assets of the organization, capital, which does not require much control, but depends on motivation and stimulation.