A Journey of Organization Theories: From Classical to Modern

International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, Vol. 12, Issue 2 (April)

ISSN 2289-1552

2017%

A JOURNEY OF ORGANIZATION THEORIES: FROM CLASSICAL TO MODERN

Jannatul Ferdous

ABSTRACT

In the modern age, Organizations have to face a lot of challenges. Undoubtedly, management is the most vital thing in an

organization. An organization cannot attain its purposes without appropriate management. Management is the skill of getting

work done with the active assistance of other persons. For instance, every society always depends on group work, and as many

systematized groups have turned into large, the workload of m anagers has been growing significantly and difficulty also arises.

Organizational theory is the study of organizational arrangement and as all science has as its goal, forecasts, the understanding

and control. The organizational theory is the course of generating understanding organizational arrangement therefore we can

forecast and control organizational efficiency or output by planning organizations. There ar e a lot of management theories

which are classified as Classical, Neo-classical and M odern Organization Theories. It is entirely a theoretical paper evaluating

the theoretical matters that existed and are prevalent in organizations that may support us to overcome difficulties those in

Management nowadays we face. Firstly, the paper focuses on the vital theories yielded by classical, neoclassical and modern

theorists. Secondly, the paper evaluates the impact of these theories and ove rall impression of evolution of organizational

theories. Finally, the paper ex presses the overview of theories and validity of the concepts provides us future management

guidelines.

Keywords: Classical, Neo-classical, Modern, Organization and Management.

INTRODUCTION

An organization is a deliberately organized social object, with a comparatively distinguishable frontier, that functions on a fairly

continuous source to attain a common objective or set of objectives (Robbins & Mathew, 2009). Theories are supported

managers understanding the arrangement of executive organizations. A theory is a statement or system of thoughts, clarifying

something, grounded in broad-spectrum philosophies independent of the specific effects to be clarified or the range of theoretical

understanding or abstract thought. Organizational theory purposes at empathetic to the structure within the organiz ations. It is

envisioned to discover whether there is a greater way for organizing organizations, or else, whether it differs centered on the

circumstances. One more objective is to recognize what sources the diverse structures concerning organizations (Mili &

Nasrullah, 2014). In the present day, as the organizational surroundings have become to a greater extent complication,

organizations seem to be flat-structure, network affiliation, stratified class, elastic and uncertain frontier. The development of

organization theories conserved from exercise contingent on the development of organization carries out. The development of

organization theories understands in three phases, i.e. classical, neoclassical and modern stage with the development of the

dynamic forces (Yang et al, 2013). At diverse phases, the interpretations and approaches of organizational research have been

transformed. These three phases give the organization three new knowledge of development. The sequence of research pattern

moved new approaches and new ways to the research of modern theories of organization.

CLASSICAL THEORIES

The development of administrative theory is drawn here in footings of interactions, all phase being a development on the

previous one. The classical theory of administration is as entitled as it is the eldest theory (Maheshwari, 2003). The classical

theory of organization accepts that administratio n is a common structural concept, which has a common applicability,

irrespective of the condition and framework, and is subject to similar kind of complications. Thus, the central character of this

theory is the view that definite common philosophies of organization can be operated out to simplify the smooth working of an

organization. Situational discourse, the classical organization theory was innate in a usual Western setting at the culmination of

the eighteenth century and commencement of the nineteenth century as soon as the Industrial Revolution had stretched its apex

and effectiveness and economy became the mottos of business production. The classical theory of organization with its intrinsic

structural preference rose up to the event to rationalize the output. The classical theory of organization is erected about four vital

supports. They are the scalar and functional procedures, the division of labor, span of control, and structure (Chakrabarty &

Chand, 2012).

The classical theory creates some audacious suppositions. First, it un dertakes that in an organization the in dividual is a reflexiv e

tool, who can be influenced at determ ination by the owner or administration. Secondly, an indiv idual is encouraged exclusively

by financial inducements. Thirdly, the classical theorists trust that a business is a closed system unaffected by outward

environment. In conclusion, on the formal organization, this theory as specified by organizational diagrams, guides, official

procedure and therefore disregards the informal organization (Maheshwari, 2003).

One of the eldest of the classical theories is the scientific management theory which stresses on the assignment or task. Scientific

management swayed public administration throughout its initial years, principally through the works of Frederick W. Taylor.

Taylor's key thoughts and procedures contain cost analysis, incentive pay-scales, time and motion study, functional foremanship,

the selection of employees scientifically, the training of employees carefully, etc. Entirely these swayed the philosophy of initial

Partial preview of the text

Download A Journey of Organization Theories: From Classical to Modern and more Papers Management Theory in PDF only on Docsity!

ISSN 2289- 1552 2017

Jannatul Ferdous ABSTRACT In the modern age, Organizations have to face a lot of challenges. Undoubtedly, management is the most vital thing in an organization. An organization cannot attain its purposes without appropriate management. Management is the skill of getting work done with the active assistance of other persons. For instance, every society always depends on group work, and as many systematized groups have turned into large, the workload of managers has been growing significantly and difficulty also arises. Organizational theory is the study of organizational arrangement and as all science has as its goal, forecasts, the understanding and control. The organizational theory is the course of generating understanding organizational arrangement therefore we can forecast and control organizational efficiency or output by planning organizations. There are a lot of management theories which are classified as Classical, Neo-classical and Modern Organization Theories. It is entirely a theoretical paper evaluating the theoretical matters that existed and are prevalent in organizations that may support us to overcome difficulties those in Management nowadays we face. Firstly, the paper focuses on the vital theories yielded by classical, neoclassical and modern theorists. Secondly, the paper evaluates the impact of these theories and overall impression of evolution of organizational theories. Finally, the paper expresses the overview of theories and validity of the concepts provides us future management guidelines. Keywords: Classical, Neo-classical, Modern, Organization and Management. INTRODUCTION An organization is a deliberately organized social object, with a comparatively distinguishable frontier, that functions on a fairly continuous source to attain a common objective or set of objectives (Robbins & Mathew, 2009). Theories are supported managers understanding the arrangement of executive organizations. A theory is a statement or system of thoughts, clarifying something, grounded in broad-spectrum philosophies independent of the specific effects to be clarified or the range of theoretical understanding or abstract thought. Organizational theory purposes at empathetic to the structure within the organizations. It is envisioned to discover whether there is a greater way for organizing organizations, or else, whether it differs centered on the circumstances. One more objective is to recognize what sources the diverse structures concerning organizations (Mili & Nasrullah, 2014). In the present day, as the organizational surroundings have become to a greater extent complication, organizations seem to be flat-structure, network affiliation, stratified class, elastic and uncertain frontier. The development of organization theories conserved from exercise contingent on the development of organization carries out. The development of organization theories understands in three phases, i.e. classical, neoclassical and modern stage with the development of the dynamic forces (Yang et al, 2013). At diverse phases, the interpretations and approaches of organizational research have been transformed. These three phases give the organization three new knowledge of development. The sequence of research pattern moved new approaches and new ways to the research of modern theories of organization. CLASSICAL THEORIES The development of administrative theory is drawn here in footings of interactions, all phase being a development on the previous one. The classical theory of administration is as entitled as it is the eldest theory (Maheshwari, 2003). The classical theory of organization accepts that administration is a common structural concept, which has a common applicability, irrespective of the condition and framework, and is subject to similar kind of complications. Thus, the central character of this theory is the view that definite common philosophies of organization can be operated out to simplify the smooth working of an organization. Situational discourse, the classical organization theory was innate in a usual Western setting at the culmination of the eighteenth century and commencement of the nineteenth century as soon as the Industrial Revolution had stretched its apex and effectiveness and economy became the mottos of business production. The classical theory of organization with its intrinsic structural preference rose up to the event to rationalize the output. The classical theory of organization is erected about four vital supports. They are the scalar and functional procedures, the division of labor, span of control, and structure (Chakrabarty & Chand, 2012). The classical theory creates some audacious suppositions. First, it undertakes that in an organization the individual is a reflexive tool, who can be influenced at determination by the owner or administration. Secondly, an individual is encouraged exclusively by financial inducements. Thirdly, the classical theorists trust that a business is a closed system unaffected by outward environment. In conclusion, on the formal organization, this theory as specified by organizational diagrams, guides, official procedure and therefore disregards the informal organization (Maheshwari, 2003). One of the eldest of the classical theories is the scientific management theory which stresses on the assignment or task. Scientific management swayed public administration throughout its initial years, principally through the works of Frederick W. Taylor. Taylor's key thoughts and procedures contain cost analysis, incentive pay-scales, time and motion study, functional foremanship, the selection of employees scientifically, the training of employees carefully, etc. Entirely these swayed the philosophy of initial

ISSN 2289- 1552 2017

academics in public administration. Yet again, Max weber's bureaucracy, stresses on the formal theory of organization (Maheshwari, 2003). The manager and French mining engineer Henri Fayol's "General and Industrial Administration" (1916) is viewed as a magnificent impact to the devising of classical administration theory in footings of five efficient components including 1. Planning 2. Organizing 3. Commanding 4. Co-coordinating and 5. Controlling. He perceived administration as a common procedure which is appropriate correspondingly in both public and private administrations. Fayol established an agreed fourteen principles regarding the shaping of organizations (Naidu, 1996). The last, accompanied by Fayol demonstrated by the works of L.F. Urwick, J.D. Mooney, Luther Gulick, and A.C. Reiley recognize the significant essentials in the procedure of administration and the structures common structures of administration, building the approach for the expansion of generally adequate agreed principles (Maheshwari, 2003). NEO-CLASSICAL THEORIES With the expansion of output and the development of employee level of education, the excessively severe principles and mechanical models of organization encouraged by classical theories of the organization have produced consequently outcomes: the inner communications are responsible for being misunderstood and the inner clashes become to a greater extent common. Entirely these inspire the new theories of administration that would pay more consideration to the human issue and inspire the humanize organization (Yang et al, 2013). Neoclassical theory has made important influence to a considerate human behavior at the job and in the organization. It has produced consciousness of the vast role of the human issue in production. This method has given fresh thoughts and practices for a well understanding of human behavior. Providers to this approach identify an organization, for instance, a social system matter of the thoughts and cultural forms of the associate of the organization, leadership, motivation, group dynamics, participation, the environment of the job, etc. organize the principal of the neoclassical theory. This method transformed the opinion that employees are apparatuses and promoted the acceptance that employees are treasured assets. Moreover, it placed the basis for future expansion in management theory. The neoclassical tactic is not beyond limitations. Firstly, it has deficiencies the accuracy of classical theory as human behavior is changeable. Secondly, its inferences have the shortage of scientific legitimacy and suffer from an experimental partiality, its conclusions are uncertain. Finally, its use, in reality, is very tough as it necessitates essential modifications in the philosophy and approach of both administration and workforces (Sarker & Khan, 2013). Elton Mayo is well-known for his study which he started in 1924 at Hawthorne works, the western electric company in Chicago. He did several experimentations and accepted diverse approaches to investigate the affiliation of the style of leadership, working condition and other organizational issues with employee output. Elton Mayo recognized different motivating issues which contain appreciation, association, sense of belongingness and different societal facets connected to the workplace (Kashyap, 2015).Enchanting an evidence from the Hawthorne Experiments numerous theorists steered research in the ground of relational and societal affairs amongst the associates of the organization. These relationships are recognized as human relations. A sequence of research by Abraham H. Maslow, Frederick Herzberg, Douglas Mc Gregor, Rensis Likert, Keth Davis and others worked to what is the drive of human relation. Drive of human relation reasoned that workers react principally to the societal setting of the workplace, containing societal habituation, group customs and relational dynamics (Sarker & Khan, 2013). MODERN THEORIES Modern theories incline to be grounded in the thought that the organization is a system which has to acclimatize to variations in its environment. An organization is defined as an intended and organized procedure in which persons network for purposes in modern theory (Hicks and Gullet, 1975). Modern theory has an abundant influence in contemporary society. It can be alienated into two shares: one is system approach and another is contingency approach. Of these two approaches mutually are closed systems, however, this theory observed organization as the system. Modern theory titles to offer a basis for total assimilation of all the essentials: in an organization technical, financial, sociological, and psychological in the interface with its setting. The organization has reflected a sub-system which happens and interrelates within a much comprehensive system (Abdullah, 2012). We contend with the organization, for instance, a system whole containing the reciprocally associated parts by a system approach. The approach of the system means to contend with these parts in their reciprocal linking as a part of the whole system. No system approach in the examining into the organization, yet, means contend with the parts of a whole, regardless of the reciprocal link. Just, it is for this purpose that the no system contends with the organization is simply a partial one and cannot elucidate the organizational spectacles in their whole. The whole of the organization and of its spectacles can be elucidated simply by the system approach. The theory of organization is essential to be, thus, system one. The inclinations in the expansion of the organizations are revealed in their difficulty of processes. Simply the complex system can perform the complex procedures. And for considering the complex system and their procedures it is essential to utilize the similar technique. We can express that the forthcoming progress of the organization science will utilize the system approach, regardless of the probable diverse methods and the improvement of the scientific organization (Ivanko, 2013). It can be said, a system contains four possessions: The first one is articles the parts, components, or variables inside the system. These may be somatic or intangible or both, contingent on the environment of the system; Second one, a system contains features - the potentials or possessions of the system and its things; the Third one, a system had inner relations amongst its things; and Fourth one, systems existent in an environment. Then, a system is an agreed of belongings that distress one another inside an environment and practice a greater form that is diverse as of any of the parts. The essential systems-collaborating paradigm structures the incessant phases of input, throughput (processing), and output that validate the thought of closedness / openness. A closed system ensures not intermingle with its environment. It ensures not yield in evidence and consequently is possible to degenerate, that is to disappear. An open system accepts facts, which it practices to network vigorously with its environment. Openness surges its probability to persist and flourish (Mili & Nasrullah, 2014).

ISSN 2289- 1552 2017

CONCLUSION

The 21st century has conveyed with it a different place of work, one in which everybody needs to adjust to a quickly dangling society with continually ever-changing demands and prospects. The economy has converted worldwide and is focused on modernizations and technology and organizations have to convert themselves to attend different client expectations. Currently economy offers inspiring prospects in addition to melodramatic ambiguity. The innovative economy has converted knowledge centered and is performance focused. F. W. Taylor’s scientific management utilized the scientific technique to regulate the “one best way” for a work to be completed. Various existing management thoughts and theories can be found in the effort of the common administrative theorists. The practical observation of a manager’s job relays to Henri Fayol’s thought of management. Bureaucratic management of Weber has the features are apparent in several of nowadays large organizations—though in extremely flexible organizations that hire brilliant professionals. A number of bureaucratic apparatuses are essential in extremely innovative organizations to confirm that possessions are used professionally and successfully. In the current day perspective behavioral method/neo-classical theories helps managers in planning jobs that stimulate workers, in functioning with worker teams, and in assisting the stream of communication inside the organizations. The behavioral method / neo-classical theory deliver the basis for contemporary theories of leadership, motivation, and group development and behavior. Managers visualize an organization as a form with many inter-reliant parts, all of which is significant to the welfare of the organization, for instance, a whole employing the systems method. Managers organize the effort actions of the diverse parts of the organization, understanding that judgments and activities taken in one organizational space will distress other extents. The contingency method to management is an assessment that the organization identifies and reacts to conditional variables as per they ascend. In these situations, the subjects in the current perspective extent are esteem, involvement, empowerment, communication and self- management. In the condition of the above tasks, a different kind of leader is desired to lead the business through unrest. In organizations, managers do this job. A manager is somebody who organizes and supervises the effort of other individuals so that administrative goals can be able to achieve. It is not almost individual attainment but facilitating others to do their work. Managers could as well have extra duties of work not linked to organizing the effort of others. REFERENCES Abdullah, M. M. (2012). Public Administration. Dhaka: Jahan Publications. Chakrabarty, B. & Chand, P. (2012). Public Administration in a Globalizing World: Theories and Practices. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Dzimbiri, L. B. (2009). Organisation and Management Theories: an African Focus: Integrating Structure, People, Processes and the Environment for Human Happiness. Cuvillier Verlag. Ehiobuche, C., & Tu, H. W. (2012). Towards The Relevance of Classical Management Theories and Organizational Behavior. ASBBS Proceedings, 19(1), 310. Hicks, G. H. & Gullet, C. R. (1975). Organizations: Theory and Behaviour. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Ivanko, Š. (2013). Modern Theory of Organization. Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana. Kashyap, H. (2015). Relevance of Classical and Neo-Classical Theories in Present World. Indian Streams Research Journal, 5(1), 104. Maheshwari, S. (2003). Administrative Theory: An Introduction. New Delhi: Mcmillan India Ltd. Mili, B. R. & Nasrullah, A. N. (2014). Fundamentals of Public Administration. Dhaka: Bangladesh Institute of Islamic Thought (BIIT). Naidu, S. P. (1996). Public Administration: Concepts and Theories. Delhi: New Age International Publishers. Nhema, A. G. (2015). Relevance of Classical Management Theories to Modern Public Administration: A Review. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 5(3), 165-179. Olum, Y. (2004). Modern management theories and practices. Uganda: Makerere University. Őnday, O. (2016). Classical Organization Theory: From Generic Management of Socrates to Bureaucracy of Weber. International Journal of Business and Management Review, 4(1), 87-105. Robbins, S. P. & Mathew, M. (2009). Organization Theory: Structure, Design and Applications. New Delhi: India. Sarker, S. I., & Khan, M. R. (2013). Classical and neoclassical approaches of management: An overview. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 14 (6), 1-5. Sahni, P. & Vayunandan, E. (2012). Administrative Theory. New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited. Yang, C. X., Liu, H. M., & Wang, X. X. (2013). Organization Theories: From Classical to Modern. Journal of Applied Sciences, 13(21), 4470 - 4476. Jannatul Ferdous Department of Public Administration Comilla University, Comilla-3506, Bangladesh Email:jannat.lata@yahoo.com

A Journey of Organization Theories: From Classical to Modern, Papers of Management Theory

Related documents

Partial preview of the text

Download A Journey of Organization Theories: From Classical to Modern and more Papers Management Theory in PDF only on Docsity!

ISSN 2289- 1552 2017