A Comparison of Classical Management Theorists and Contingency Theorist

A Comparison of Classical commission Theorists and Contingency TheoristsThe watchfulness field is characterised by a wide variety of theories,schools and directions. This bear witness examines the untarnished and disaster schools of thought -- the approaches to organization thathave had the greatest impact on management today. Firstly the essaydelineates and criticises the important theories propounded byclassical writers. The essay continues with an account of thecontingency school, and finally evaluates its impacts on managerialthought.Up until around the late 1950s academic writing about organisational social organisation was dominated by the classical management school. This heldthat there was a single organisational structure that was effective inall organisations. (Clegg & Handy, 1999). According to Holt (1999),the classical school is characterised by ? being highly structured,with emphasis on the formal organisation with intelligibly definedfunctions and detailed rules, autocratic leadership, a rigid chain of verify and control by superiors? (Holt, 1999, p.137). The threegreatest proponents of classical theory were Taylor, Fayol, and Weber.each identifies detailed principles and methods through which thiskind of organisation could be achieved.Taylor (1947) developed a systematic approach to called ?scientificManagement?, which focused on efficient production. Through the studyof task movements, or ?time and motion studies? as it was known, herecognized matching the correct worker to the task was authoritative toincreasing work efficiency. Under this so-called Taylorism, emphasisis placed on power confered to those in control. According to Morgan(1997), this approach to work design is tack together in traditional forms ofassembly-line manufacturing and in production processes.Another major sub-field within the classical perspective is?Administrative Management,? set forth by Fayol (1949). mendScientific Management took a micro approach, Fayol s aw the macroconcepts, a body of knowledge which emphasised broad administrativeprinciples applicable to life-size organizations. In Fayol?s account,management is conceptualised as consisting of five elements, namelyplanning, organizing, command, co-ordination, and control. He alsodeveloped 14 principles of management or organisation, the best-knownbeing division of work, unit... ...ure. Academy of ManagementJournal, 25 (3), 553-566.Luthans, F. (1973). The Contingency Theory of Management A path outof the jungle. Business Horizons, 6, 67-72Meyer, M.W. (1972). Size and the structure of organizations A causalanalysis, American Sociological Review, 37, 434-441.Pugh, D., Hickson, D., Hinings, R. & Turner, C. (1969). The context oforganization structures. Administrative learning Quarterly 1491-114.Pugh, D. & Hickson, D. (1996). Writers on organisations. LondonPenguin.Robbins, S. & Barnwell, N. (2002). Organisation Theory Concepts andcases. Victoria, Australia Pentice Hall.Taylor, F.W. (1947). Scientific Management, Harper & Row.Watz, T. (1996). Technology rules OK? A review of technologicaldeterminism and contingency theory. Creativity and InnovationManagement, 5(1) 13-21.Weber, M. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. A.H.Henderson and Talcott Parsons (eds.). Glencoe, IL impoverished Press.Woodward, J. (1980). Industrial Organization Theory and Practice,second edition. New York Oxford University Press---------------------------------------------------------------------1 Pugh et al.