EVOLUTION OF THE MANAGEMENT THOUGH

Also management thoughts and approaches are in the form of; 1. Classical 2. Neo classical 3. Modern 1. Classical approach includes i. Scientific management ii. Administrative/ operational management 2 Neo- classical approaches includes i. Human relations approach ii. Social systems approach iii. Decision theory approach iv. Management science approach v. Human behavior approach 3 Modern approaches includes i. Systems approach ii. Contingency approach iii. Some relevant portion of the above approaches but not in classical approach. However, this classification is time specific because what is modern n today’s context, may not remain the same in future. PRE-SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT CLASSICAL APPROACH Classical approach also s known as traditional approach or empirical approach I. SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT The concept of scientific management was introduced by Frederick Winslow Taylor n USA n the beginning of the 20th C. This concept was further carried on by frank and Lillian Gilbert, Henry Grant, George Berth, Edward Felen e.t.c. Scientific management was concerned essentially with improving the operational efficiency of the shop-flour level. Taylor has defined scientific management as follows; ‘’ Scientific management is concerned with knowing exactly what you want men to do and then see in that they do it in the best and cheapest way. Since Taylor has put the emphasis on solving managerial problems in a scientific way, often he is called as ‘’ father of scientific management ‘’ and his contributions as the principles of scientific management. Though his contributions have become traditional in present day context, still the label of scientific management is used for his contributions. Taylor joined Midvale steel company in USA as a worker and later on became a supervisor. During his period he continued his studies and eventually completed his Master of Engineering. Subsequently, he joined Bethlehem steel company. At both all these places, he carried experiments about how to increase efficiency of people. Even after his retirement, he continued to develop scientific management. On the basic of his experiments, he published many papers and books and all his contributions were complied in his book ‘’ scientific of management’’. Taylor’s contributions can be described in two parts; elements and tools of scientific management and principles of scientific management. ELEMENT AND TOOLS OF SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT Taylor conducted various experiments at his work-places to find out how human beings could be made more efficiency by standardizing the work and better method of doing the work. These experiments have provided the following features of scientific management. 1. Separation of planning and doing. Taylor emphasized the separation of planning aspect from actual doing of the work. Before Taylor’s scientific of management, a worker used to plan about how he had to work and what instruments were necessary for that. The worker was put under the supervision of a supervisor commonly known as gang boss. Thus, supervisor’s Job was merely to see how the workers were performing. This was creating a lot of problems and Taylor emphasized that planning should be left to supervisor and the worker and the worker should emphasize only operational worker. 2. Functional foremanship. Separation of planning from doing resulted in development supervision system which could take planning, work adequately besides keeping supervision on workers. For this purpose, Taylor evolved the concept of functional foremanship based on specialization of functions. 3. Job analysis Job analysis is undertaken to find out the one best way of doing the things. The best way of doing a job is one which requires them least movements, consequently less time and cost. The best way of doing the things can be determined by taking up time-motion fatigue studies. Job analysis as given by Taylor, suggests the fair amount of day’s work requiring certain movements and rest period to complete it. 4. Standards As far as possible standardization should be maintained in respect of instruments and tools, period of work, amount of work, work conditions, cost of production e.t.c. These things should be fixed in advance on the basis of job analysis and various elements of costs that in performing a work. 5. Scientific selection and training of workers. Taylor has suggested that workers should be selected on scientific basis taking into account their education work experience, aptitude physical strength e.t.c. A worker should be given work for which he is physically and technically most suitable. Apart from selection, proper emphasis should be given on the training of workers which makes them more efficient and effective. 6. Financial incentives Financial incentives can motivate to put in their maximum efforts. If provisions exist to earn higher wages by putting extra efforts, workers will be motivated to earn more. Taylor has suggested wages should base on individual performance and not on the position which he occupies. Further the wages rate should be fixed on accurate knowledge and not on estimates. 7. Economy While applying scientific management not only scientific and technical aspects should be considered but adequate consideration should be given to economy and profit. For this purpose, technique of cost estimates and control should be adopted. The economy and profit can be achieved by making the resources more productive as well as eliminating the wastages. Taylor has clarified by giving examples of how resources are wasted by not following scientific management. 8. Mental Revolution Scientific management depends on then mutual co-operation between management and workers. For this co-operation, there should be mental change both parties from conflict to cooperation. Taylor feels that this is the most important feature of scientific management because on its absence no principle of scientific management can be applied. PRINCIPLES OF SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT The following are basic principles of scientific management that Taylor saw underline the scientific management. 1 Replacing Rule of Thumb with Science Taylor has emphasized that in scientific management, organizational knowledge should be applied which will replace rule of thumb. While the use of scientific methods denotes precision in determining any aspect of work, rule of thumb emphasizes estimation since exactness of various aspects of work like- day’s fair work standardization in work Differential piece rate for payment is the basic core of scientific management. It is essential that all these are measured precisely and should not be based on mere estimates. This approach can be adopted in all aspects of managing. 2. Harmony in group action Taylor has emphasized that attempts should be made to obtain harmony n group action rather than dispute. Group harmony suggests that there should be mutual give and take situation and proper understanding so that the group as a whole contributes to the maximum. 3. Cooperation Scientific management involves achieving cooperation rather than chaotic good will. Cooperation between management and workers can be developed through mutual understanding and a change in thinking. Taylor has suggested ‘’ substitution of war for peace, hearty and brotherly cooperation for contentment and strife, replacement of suspicious watchfulness with mutual confidence, of becoming friends instead of enemies. 4. Maximum output Scientific management involves continuous increase in production and productivity unsteady of restricted production either by management or by workers. Taylor hated inefficiency and deliberate curtailment of production. His concern was with large size of the cake. In his opinion “There is hardly any worse crime to my mind than that of deliberately restricting output”. Therefore, he advised the management and workers to turn their attention towards increasing the size of the surplus until the size of the surplus becomes so large that is necessary to quarrel over how it shall be divided. 5. Development of workers. In scientific management, all workers should be developed to fullest extent possible for their own and for the company’s highest prosperity. Development of workers requires their scientific selection and providing them training at the work place. Training should be provided to workers to keep them fully fit according to the requirement of new methods of working which may be different from non- scientific methods. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT Scientific management created awareness about increasing operational efficiency at the shop-floor level by adapting systematic methods as against the rule of thumb which was prevalent at that time. However from the point of view of the development theoretical framework, the principle of scientific management were concerned with problems at the operating levels and didn’t emphasize management of an organization from the manager’s point of view. Therefore, it was more relevant from engineering point of view rather than management point of view. One author has later suggested that Taylor can be regarded as “father of industrial engineering rather than the father of scientific management” Similarly persons advocating scientific management have emphasized physiological variables affecting human behavior at workplace, both in terms of work efficiency and methods of motivating the workers. As such, the scientific management is more relevant to the mechanization and automation-technical aspect of efficiency than the broader aspects of management of an organization. Apart from the theoretical considerations, Taylor’s scientific management was opposed by trade unions industrialists and general public. The induction of scientific management led to agitation by trade unions in different productions units. The major reasons for the opposition of scientific management were as follows; 1. There were many of the followers of Taylor who took aggressive mechanical view of production and sidelined human aspects at the work place. This created aggressive attitudes among workers 2. The work used to be performed under close and strict supervision based on authoritarian approach. Workers were not allowed to raise their voice even for genuine grievances 3. There was lack of scientific standardization of work and whatever standards used to be set by management. The workers had to follow strictly. Such standards often used to raise production norm without taking into consideration the factors affecting such norm. 4. The most crucial element which was under contention was the differential peace rate system. The workers even the efficient ones, and their unions opposed this system on the claim that it was a new method of exploiting workers by the industrialists. It may be mentioned that trade unions were quite popular at that time ADMNISTRATIVE MANAGEMENT The real father of modern operation management theory is the French industrialist Henry Fayol. His contributions are generally termed as operational management or administrative management Fayol looked at the problems of managing an organization from top management point of view. He has used the term administration instead of ‘management’ emphasizing that there is unit of science of administration. For him administration was a common activity and administrative doctrine was universally applicable. From administrative point of view he placed commerce, industry, religion, philosophy and the state on equal footing. Therefore management is a universal phenomenon. However he has emphasized that principles of management are flexible and not absolute and are usable regardless of changing and special conditions. Fayol found that activities of an industry organization could be divided into six groups 1. Technical: relating to production 2. Commercial: buying, selling and exchange 3. Financial such for capital and its optimum use 4. Security protection of property and person 5. Accounting including statistics 6. Managerial planning, organization, command, coordination and control. Fayol pointing out that these activities exists in business of every size. Fayol has divided has approach of studying management into three parts i. Managerial qualities and training ii. General principles of management iii. Elements of management MANAGERIAL QUALITIES AND TRAINNING Fayol was the first person to identify the qualities required by a management. According to him there are six types of qualities that a manager requires. These are as follows. 1. Physical healthy, vigour and address 2. Mental ability to understand and learn judgments, mental vigour and capability 3. Moral (energy, firmness, initiative, loyalty, tact and dignity 4. Education (general acquaintance with matters, not belonging exclusively to the function performed) 5. Technical (peculiar to the function being performed) 6. Experience (arising from the work) Fayol has observed that the most important ability for the worker is technical, the relative importance of managerial ability increases as one goes up the scalar of chain, with insight becoming the most important ability for top level executives. On the bass of this conclusion, Fayol recognized a widespread need for principles of management and for management teaching. He held that managerial ability should be acquired first in school and later n the workshop. In order to acquire managerial knowledge he developed principles of management to be taught in academic institutions. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF MANAGEMENT Fayol has given 14 principles of management. He has made distinction between management principles and elements. While management principle is a fundamental truth and establishes cause-effect relationship, management elements denotes the function performed by a manager. While giving the management principles, Fayol has emphasized two things i. The list of management principles is not exhaustive but suggestive and has discussed only those principles which he followed in most occasions. ii. Principles of management are not rigid but flexible Various principles according to Fayol are as follows 1. Davison of work Fayol has advocated division of work to take the advantage of specialization. According to him specialization belongs to natural order. The workers always work on the same part, the managers concerned always with the same matters, acquires ability, sureness and accuracy which increases their output. Each change of workers brings n it training and adaptation which reduces output “Yet division of work has its limits which experience and a sense of proportion teach us may not be exceeded (Fayol, 1949). This division of work can be applied at all levels of the organization. 2. Authority and responsibility. Fayol find authority as a continuation of official and personal factors. Official authority is drived from the manager’s position and personal authority is derived from person qualities such as intelligence, experience, moral worth past services etc. Responsibility arises out of assignment of activity in order to discharge the responsibility; there should be parity of authority and responsibility. 3. Discipline All the personnel serving in an organization should be disciplined. Discipline is obedience, application, energy, behavior and outward mark of respect shown by employees. Discipline may be of two types i. Self imposed discipline which springs from within the individual and is in the nature of spontaneous response to a skilful leader ii. Command discipline which stem from a recognized authority and utilizes deterrents to secure compliance with a desired action which is expressed by established customs, rules and regulations. The ultimate strength of command and discipline can be obtained by sanctions in the forms of remuneration, warnings, suspension, demotion, dismissal etc. However, when applying such sanctions, people and attendant circumstances must be taken into account. This can be learned by experience and tact of the managers 4. Unity of command Unity of command means that a person should get orders and instructions from only on superior. The more completely an individual has a reporting relationship to a single superior, the less is the problem of conflict in the instructions and the greater is the feeling of personal responsibility for results. Fayol has considered unity of command as an important aspect of managing an organization. He says “unit of command should be violated, authority is undermined, discipline is in risk order disturbed and stability threatened. This rule seems fundamental to me and so I have put it to the rank of principle” 5. Unity of direction Each group of activities with the same objectives must have one head and one plan. Unity of direction is different from unity of command n the sense that the former s concerned with the functioning of the organization I respect of its grouping of activities or planning while the latter is concerned with personnel at all levels n the organization terms of reporting relationship. Unity of direction provides better coordination among various activities to be undertaken by an organization. 6. Subordination of individual interest to general interest. Common interest is above the individual’s interest. Individual interest must be subordinated to general interest when there is conflict between the two. However factors like ambition, laziness, weakness etc tend to reduce the importance of general interest. Therefore superiors should set an example in fairness and goodness. The agreement between the employers and the employees should be fair and constant vigilance and supervision 7. Remuneration of personnel Remuneration of employees should be fair and provide maximum possible satisfaction to employees and employers. Fayol does not favour sharing plan for workers but advocated it for managers. He was also in favour of non-financial benefits in the case of larger-scale organization. 8. Centralisation Fayol refers the extent to which authority is centralized or decentralized. Centralization and decentralization are the question of proportional. In small firms, centralization is a natural order, but in large firms a series of intermediaries is required share of authority and initiative left to intermediaries depends on the personal character of the manager, his moral worth, the reliability of his subordinates and also on the conditions or the business. Since both absolute and relative values of managers and employees are constantly changing. It is desirable that the degree of centralization or decentralization may itself vary constantly. 9. Scalar chain There should be scalar chain of authority and communication ranging from the highest to the lowest. It suggest that each communication gong up or coming down must flow through each position in the line of authority. It can be short-circuited only in short circumstances when its rigid following will be detrimental to the organization. 10. Order This is the principle relating to the arrangement of things and people. In material order there should be a place for everything and everything should be in its place. Similar in social order, there should be the right man in the right place. This kind of order demands precise knowledge of the human requirements and resources of the organization and a constant balance between these requirements and resources. Normally bigger the size of the organization, more difficult this balance is. 11. Equity Equity is a combination of justice and kindness. Equity in treatment and behavior is liked by everyone and it brings loyalty in the organization. The application of equity requires good sense, experience and good nature of soliciting loyalty and devotion from subordinates 12. Stability of tenure No employee should be removed within short time. There should be reasonable security of jobs. Stability of tenure is essential to get an employee comfortable to new work and succeeding in doing it well. Unnecessary turnover is both cause and effect of bad management 13. Initiative Within the limits of authority and discipline, managers should encourage their employees for taking initiative. Initiative is concerned with thinking out and execution of a plan. Initiative increases enthusiasm and energy on the part of human beings. 14. Esprit de corps This is the principle of “Union is strength” and extension of unity of command for establishing team work. The managers should encourage esprit de corps among his employees. The erring employees should be set right by all directions and not by demanding written explanations. Written explanations complicate the matters. ELEMENTS OF EMPLOYEES Fayol holds that management should be viewed as a process consisting of five elements. He is regarding these elements as functions of management. These functions of management are 1. Planning Fayol regarded planning as the most important managerial functioning and failure to plan properly leads to hesitation, false steps and untimely changes in directions which cause weakness in the organization process. 2. Organization commanding Creation of origination structure and commanding function s necessary to execute plans 3. Coronation Coordination is necessary to make sure that everyone is working together 4. Control Control looks whether everything s proceeding according to plan 5. Organization In short functions of management are: planning, organization, commanding, coordination and controlling The contributions of Fayol have made the real beginning of development of management as a separate field of study. His principles of management hold good even today, though pronounced long back. N fact many of the things were developed in management on the lines of Fayol much after his contributions. RELEVANCE OF FAYOL’S PRINCIPLES According to the classification of era of management development, Fayol’s principles are treated as classical while present day management adopts systems of contingency approach. This approach suggests that while managing an organization t should be treated as a system and management action should take into account the contingent factors both within and outside an organization. However this does not mean that Fayol’s principles are being applied today. However it can be said that not all principles can be applied in all originations. Fayol also recognized this fact and suggested that management principles are not rigid but flexible and their use requires intelligence, experience and proportion. CONTRIBUTIONS OF TAYLOR AND FAYOL: A COMPARISON Taylor and Fayol have made attempts to the development of management principles in somewhat more systematic way. Both were contemporary though from different countries. Both are complementary to each other and have some what is similarity and dissimilarity SIMILARITY Both Taylor and Fayol have seen and analyzed the problems of managing from practitioners’ point of view. The similarity exists on the following lines 1. Both have attempted to overcome managerial problems n a systematic way. 2. Both have developed some principles which can be applied n solving managerial problems 3. Both have emphasized that management actions can be effective f these are based on sound principles 4. Both of them have emphasized that managerial qualities are acquirable and can be acquired through training. Therefore organizations should make attempts to develop these 5. Both have emphasized harmonious relationship between management and workers for achievement of organizational objectives. DISSIMILARITY Taylor has concentrated on the shop floor while Fayol has concentrated o high managerial levels Prasad page 56 OTHER ADMINSTRATIVE THEORIESTS Besides Fayol contributors have come from other administrative theorists, notably among them being Max Weber, Sheldon, Mooney, Reiley, Urwick, Luther Gullick Sloan, Merriam Stene and Dale, Oliver Sheldon has added the concept of ethics and social responsibility to the scientific study of management. His normative approach was able to develop for the first time to view management both a science and a philosophy. Mooney and Reiley emphasized basic principles of origination. These principles are Coordination principle Scalar principle Functional principle Staff phase of functionalism They have also emphasized that all organizations irrespective of the field of their operation have common features requiring these principles. They all require coordination and have system of hierarchy and clearly define duties and responsibilities for each job. BUREAUCRACY The term bureaucracy has been used widely with invidious connotations directed at government and business. Max Weber who analysed the functioning of the church, government, military and business organizations believed that bureaucratic structure is the most efficient form of structure for all types of organizations. Weber insists that bureaucracy is the most rational means of carrying out imperative control over human beings. Therefore bureaucracy s administrative system designed to accomplish large-scale administrative tasks by systematically coordinating work of many individuals Weber has observed three types of power in an organization i.e 1. Traditional power 2. Charismatic power 3. Rational legal authority or Bureaucracy FEATURES OF BUREAUCRACY Max Weber (1864-1920) had given a number of features of bureaucracy as follows. 1. Administrative class Bureaucratic organizations generally have administrative class responsible for maintaining coordinative activities of the members. Main features of this class are as follows i. People are pad and are whole time employees ii. They receive salary and other perquisites normally based on their positions iii. Their tenure in the organization is determined by the rules and regulations iv. They do not have any proprietary interest in the organizations v. They are selected for the purpose of employment based on their competence 2. Hierarchy The basic feature of bureaucratic organization is that there is hierarchy of positions n the organizations. Hierarchy is a system ranking various positions in descending scale from top to bottom of the organization. In bureaucratic organization, offices also follow the principle of hierarchy. i.e. each lower office is subjected to control and supervision by higher office. Thus, no office is left uncontrolled in the organization. This hierarchy serves as lines of communication and delegation of authority. It implies that communication coming or going up must pass through each position. Similarly, a subordinate will get authority from his immediate supervisor. However this hierarchy is not unitary but sub-pyramids of officials within the large organizations corresponding to functional divisions exists. Thus there are offices with some amount of authority but with different kinds of functions operating n different areas of competence. 3. Division of work Work of the organization is divided on the basis of specialization to take the advantages of division labour. Each office in the bureaucratic organization has specific sphere of competence. This involves i). a sphere of obligations to perform functions which have been marked as a part of a systematic division of labour ii). The provision of incumbent with necessary authority to carry out these functions iii. The necessary means of compulsion are clearly defined and their use is subject to define conditions. Thus, division of labour tries to ensure that each office has a clear defined area of competence within the organization and each official knows the area n which he operates and the area in which he must obtain from action so that he does not over step the boundary between his role and those of others. Further, division of labour also tries to ensure that no work is left uncovered. 4. Official rules A most and most emphasized feature of bureaucratic organizations s that administrative process s a continuous and governed by official rules. Bureaucratic organization is antithesis of ad hoc, temporary and unstable relations. A rational approach to organization calls for systematic of maintaining rules to ensure twin requirements of uniformity and coordination of efforts by individual members in the organization. These rules are more or less stable and exhaustive. When there is no rule on any aspect or organizational operational, the matter is referred upward for decision which subsequently becomes precedent for future decision on the similar matter. 5. Impersonal relationship A notable feature of bureaucracy is that relationships among individuals are governed through the system of official authority and rules. Official positions are free from personal involvement, emotions and sentiments. Thus, decisions are governed by rational factors rather than personal factors. This impersonality concept is used in dealing with organizational relations as well as relations between the organization and outsiders 6. Official records A bureaucratic organization is characterized by maintenance of proper official records. The decision and activities of the organization are formally recorded and preserved for future references. This is made possible by extensive use of filling system in the organization. An official records is almost regarded as encyclopedia of various activities performed by the people in the organization PROBLEMS OF BUREAUCRACY Bureaucratic organization has been considered once superior than ad hoc or temporary structure. It has been termed as rational and ideal leading to efficiency. The efficiency in bureaucratic organization comes through rationality and predictability of behaviours because everyone knows the consequences of his action before actually the action is undertaken. However bureaucracy has been criticized because of its inefficiency. There are many dysfunctional aspect of bureaucracy which is referred to as bureapathology. Looking into the needs of modern organizations bureaucracy has many shortcomings and is therefore not suitable. The major problems of bureaucracy are because of the following factors 1. Invalidity of bureaucratic assumptions 2. Goal displacement 3. Unintended consequences 4. close- system perspective INVALIDITY BUREAUCRATIC ASSUMPTIONS The source of bureaupathology lie the invalidity of various assumptions of ideal bureaucracy. In most of the cases, either the conditions are not found n practice or even if found may not result into efficiency. Specifically the following aspects of bureaucracy work against efficiency of the organization, though they are supposed to contribute efficiency 1. Rules are normally provided for guidelines but often they become source of inefficiency because of too much emphasis on rules, their misuse and peoples apathy from rules. 2. Rigid organization hierarchy works against efficiency. Its overemphasis of superior-subordinate relationships is unnecessary which lead to detrimental to congenial organizational climate. 2. In dealing with people impersonal approach cannot be adopted because people have feelings, emotions and sentiments which affects decision making. Thus, people cannot work totally according to rules and prescriptions. 3. Goal displacement Goal displacement occurs when resources are used for a purpose other than for which the organization exists. Thus purpose that has replaced the original goals and value may be followed too excessively that this itself becomes end for the organization. Over the period, people are provided incentives on such behavior. E rules are means for achieving organizational goals but following of rules may become the objectives of the organization and organizational objectives may become secondary. People may be judged on the basis of observance of rules and not results. E.g. In government organizations, the performance may be judged on the basis of whether expenditure has been incurred on the lines of rules and regulations. Thus, expenditure becomes the criterion of performance measurement and not the results achieved through expenditure. 3. Unintended consequences In bureaucratic organization there may be many consequences which have no been visualized but which emerge because of the system. Such unintended consequences may be of following nature. i. There may be trained incapacity in the organization. Trained incapacity relates to a phenomenon where a person is trained at the matter from a single point of view. Thus, he does not see beyond his training and tries to correlate the matter with total situation on the basis of his training. This happens of excessive specialization. ii. There is conflict between professionals and bureaucrats. Professionals try to work according to their discipline for efficiency when bureaucrats try to emphasize rules and regulations. Often there is conflict between organization and individuals. There are many characteristics of bureaucratic organization put more restrictions through rules and regulations. Thus people try to avoid these rules and regulations 4. Inhuman organizations The most important criticism of bureaucracy has come from behavioural scientists who have emphasized on human behavior n the organization. According to them, bureaucratic organization is inhuman and works like machine in which there is no importance of human beings e.g a mature personality requires less control, innovation in behavior and flexibility in working. In design of bureaucratic organization is against these features. Thus bureaucracy works against the basic nature of human behavour. Warren Bennis (1969) see the model as overly mechanical and no longer useful. According to him the flows and dysfunctions of the bureaucratic organization are extensive but the main are as follows i. It is inhuman and denies man’s needs ii. It is incompatible with the development of a mature personality iii. it promotes conformity iv. It does not consider the informal organization and interpersonal difficulties v. The hierarchy interferes with communication vi. Innovation and new knowledge are stifled vii. It is ineffective n turbulent environment These criticisms are representative of lack of human aspect of bureaucracy. The thrust of these criticisms s bureaucratic organization makes inadequate assumptions about the real nature of human beings and does not address itself to the interaction of people within the organization 5. Closed system perspective A bureaucratic organization has closed system perspective. Though a social organization cannot be a totally closed system but it may learn towards closed system its working A closed system is self contained and self maintaining It is general rigid and static It ignores external conditions and makes no allowances for adapting to changes in the environment It is viewed as operating within a vacuum Specific characteristics of closed system social organization include predictability, rationality, optimization, internal efficiency and certainty Since behaviours are assumed to be functional and all outcomes predictable, those activities that take place in the environment that is changes in social, political economic and other factors can be ignored. Bureaucratic can work well when environment is highly static and predictable. However, the nature of environment for large organizations today is highly dynamic and heterogeneous. In dynamic environment, more interaction between organization and environment is required. There is high need for information monitoring and processing. Thus an open system perspective is more suitable for the management of modern-day organizations while bureaucratic organization has closed system perspectives NEW CLASSCAL APPROACH 1. HUMAN RELATIONS Many of the findings of the earlier writers, particularly of scientific management, which focused attention on the mechanical and physiological variables of organizational functioning were tested n the field to increase the efficiency of the organizations Surprisingly positive aspects of these variables could not evoke positive response I work behavior and researcher tried to investigate the reason for human behavior at work. They discovered that the real cause of human behavior was something more than the mere physiological variables. Such findings generated a new phenomenon about the human behavior and focused attention on the human beings in the organization. As such, this new approach has been called ‘human relations approach of management’. The human relations approach was born out of a reaction to classical approach and during the last seven decades, a lot of literature on human relations has been developed. The essence of the human relations contributions is contained in two points i. The social process of group behaviour can be understood in terms of clinical method analogous to the doctor’s diagnosis of the human organism 2. Organizational situation should be viewed in social terms in economic terms Technical terms Among human relations approach, there are many contributions and many more researches are being carried out. For the first time, an intensive and systematic analysis of human factor in organizations was made in the form of Hawthorne experiment. The Hawthorne plant of the general electric company, Chicago, was manufacturing telephone system bell. It employed about 30,000 employees at the time of experiments. In respect of material benefits to the workers, this was the most progressive company with pension and sickness benefits and other recreational facilities. There was great deal of dissatisfaction among the workers and productivity was not up to the mark. In1924 the company asked for the assistance from the national Academy of sciences to investigate the problems of low productivity. In order to investigate the real causes behind this phenomenon, a team was constituted led by Elton Mayo (Psychologists) Whitehead and Rothisberg (sociologists) and company representative William Dickson. The researchers originally set out to study the relationship between productivity and physical working conditions. They conducted different researches in four phases with each phase attempting to answer the question raised at the previous phase The four phases were as follows 1. Experiments to determine the effects of changes in illumination on productivity, illumination experiments 1924-1927 2. Experiments to determine the effects of changes in hours and other working conditions on productivity relay assembly test room experiments 1927-1928 3. Conducting plant-wide interviews to determine workers attitudes and sentiments, mass interviewing programme 1928-1930 4. Determination and analysis of social organization at work, bank wiring observation, room experiments 1931-1932 ILLUMINATION EXPERIMENTS Illumination experiments were undertaken to find out how varying levels of illumination (amount of light at the work place, a physical factor) affect the productivity. The hypothesis was that with higher illumination, productivity would increase In the first series of experiments a group of workers was chosen and placed in two separate groups One group was exposed to varying intensities of illumination. Since this group was subjected to experimental group Another group, called as control group continued to work under constant intensities of illumination The researchers found that as they increased the illumination in the experimental group, both groups increased production. When the intensity of illumination was decreased, the production continued to increase in both the groups The production in the experimental grouped decreased only when the illumination was decreased to the level of moonlight. The decrease was due to light falling much below the normal level. Thus it was concluded that illumination did not have any effect on productivity but something else was interfering with the productivity At the time, it was concluded that human factor was important in determining productivity but which aspect was affecting, it was not sure. Therefore another phase of experiments was undertaken. BANKING WIRING OBSERVATION ROOM EXPERMENTS These experiments were carried out between November 1931 and may 1932 with view to analyse the functioning of small group and its impact on individual behavior. A group of 14 male workers were employed in the bank wiring room nine wiremen, three soldier men and two inspectors. The work involved attaching wire to switchers of certain equipment used to telephone exchange Hourly wage rate for the personnel was based on average group output of each worker while bonus was to be determined on the basis of average group output. The hypothesis was that n order to earn more workers would produce more and in order to take the advantages of group bonus, they would help each other to produce more. However this hypothesis did not hold valid. Workers decided the target for themselves which was lower than the company’s target. Eg group’s target for a day was connecting 6,600 terminals against 7,300 terminals set by the company The workers gave following reasons for the restricted output 1. Fear of employment The basic reasoning of workers was that if there would be more production per head, some of the workers would be put out of the employment 2. Fear of raising the standards Most workers were convinced that once they had reached the standard rate of production, management would rise the standard of production reasoning that it must be easy attain 3. Protection of slower workers The workers were friendly on the job as well as off the job. They appreciated the fact that, they had family responsibility that required them to remain in the job. Since lower workers were likely to be retrenched, the faster workers protected them by not overproducing. 4. Satisfaction on the part of management According to the workers management seemed to accept the lower production rate as no one was being fired or even reprimanded to restricted output. The workers in the group set certain norms of behavior including personal conduct The workers whose behaviours were in conformity with both out-put norm and social norm were most preferred. Thus study suggested that information relationship are important factor in determining the human behavior During the course experiments, workers were counseled for good human relations in the company’s plant The counseling was in regard to Person adjustment Employee relations Management-employee relations The supervisor tended to understand and accept the problems of workers and management tried to sense their feelings which were helpful in formulating the action for resolving management-employees conflict IMPLICATONS OF HAWATHORNE EXPERIMENTS Hawthorne experiments have opened a new chapter in management bu suggesting management through good human relations in the company. Human relations involve motivating people in the organisation in order to develop teamwork which effectively fulfills their needs and achieves organizational goals. Hawthorne experiments have tried to unearth those factors which are important for motivating people at work place The major findings of the experiments can be presented below 1. Social factors in output An organization is basically influenced by social factors. Elton Mayo one of the researchers engaged in Hawthorne experiments has described an organization as ‘a social system, a system cliques, informal status system ritual and mixture of logical and non logical behavior. Thus an organization is not merely a formal structure of functions in which production is determined by the official prescription but the production norm is set by social norms. Since people are social beings, their social characteristics determine the output and efficiency in the organization. Economic rewards and productivity do not necessarily go together Many non –economic rewards and sanctions affect the behavior of workers and modify the impact of economic rewards While motivating workers these factors should be taken into account 2. Group influence Workers being social beings, they create groups which may be different from their official groups. Groups are formed to overcome the shortcomings of formal relationships. The group determines the norm of behavior of members. Thus, management cannot deal with workers as individuals but as members of work group subject to the influence of the group. 3. Conflict The informal relations of workers create groups and there may be conflict between organization6 and groups so created. The conflict may be so because of incompatible objectives of the two. However, groups may help to achieve organizational objectives by overcoming the restraining aspect of the formal relations which produce hindrance in productivity Conflict may also arise because of maladjustment of workers and organisation. As the individual moves trough the time and space within the organization, there constantly arises the end for adjustment of individual to the total structure In the absence of such adjustment either individual progress upward at rapid pace or the organization structure itself may change over the time while the individual with the respect to organization structure, hence adjustment is required. 3. Leadership Leadership is important for directing group behavior and this is one of the most important aspects of managerial functions. However, leadership cannot come only from a formally appointed superior as held by earlier thinkers. There may be informal leaders as shown by bank wiring experiment. In some areas, informal leaders are more important in directing behavior because of his identity with group objectives. However a superior is more acceptable as a leader if his style is in accordance with human relations approach that is the superior should identify himself with the workers 5. Supervision Supervisory climate is an important aspect in determining efficiency and output. Friendly to the workers, attentive genuinely concerned supervision affects the productivity favorably e.g. in banking wiring room experiments, an entirely different supervisory climate more friendly to the workers and less use of authority n issuing orders existed which helped n productivity, while n regular departments supervisors were concerned with maintaining order and control which produced inhibiting atmosphere and resulted in lower productivity 6. Communication The experiments show that communication is an important aspect of organization. Through communication, workers can be explained the rationality of a particular action, participation of workers can be sought in decision making concerning the matter of their importance, problems faced them can be identified and attempts can be made to remove these. A better understanding between management and workers can be developed by identifying their attitudes, opinions and methods of working and taking suitable actions on these. CRITICISM OF HAWTHORNE EXPERIMENTS The experiments have been widely criticized by some behavioral scientific objectivity used in arriving at various conclusions. Some critics feel that there was bias and preconception The following are the criticism that have been made against the Hawthorne experiments 1. The Hawthorne researchers did not give sufficient attention to the attitudes that people bring with them to the workplace. They did not recognize such forces as Class consciousness The role of unions Extra plant forces o attitudes of workers The Hawthorne plant was not a typical plant because it was a thorough unpleasant place to work. Therefore the results could not be valid for others. 3. The Hawthorne studies look upon the workers as a means to an end and not an end himself. They assume acceptance of management goals and look on the worker as someone to be manipulated by management SOCIIAL SYSTEMS APPROACH Social systems approach management has extended the implications of human relations approach further. This approach has introduced by Vilfredo Pareto a sociologist. His ideas were later developed by Chester Bernard who synthesized the concept of social system approach According to this approach an organization is essentially a cultural system composed of people who work in cooperation. As such for achieving organizational goals, cooperative system can be developed by understanding the behavior of people in groups. FEATURES OF SOCIAL SYSTEM APPROACH 1. Organization is a social system, a system of cultural relationships. 2. Relationships exist among the external as well as internal environment of the organization. 3. Cooperation among group members is necessary for the achievement of organizational objective. 4. For effective management, efforts should be made for establishing harmony between the goals of the organization and the various groups there in. CONTRIBUTONS OF CHESTER BERNARD The contributions of Chester Bernard to management, particularly social systems approach, are overwhelming. Hs book “the function of the executive s regarded as the most influential book on the management during the pre-modern management era. Hs analysis of management s truly a social systems approach since in order to comprehend and analyze the functions of executives, he has looked for their major tasks in the system in which they operate. N determining the tasks of executives, he has analysed the nature of cooperatives social system, as he found no-logical factors also influencing human behavour n the organization. This s a marked departure from the earlier approach The major contributions of Bernard can be presented as follows 1. Concept of organization Bernard suggests that classical concept of organization does not fully explain the features of an organization. He has defined formal organization as a system of consciously coordinated activities of two or more persons. On his opinion an organization exists when the following three conditions are fulfilled. There are persons able to communicate with each other There are willing to contribute to the action They attempt to accomplish a common purpose 2. Formal and informal organizations An organization can be divided into two or i.e. formal and informal The formal organization has a conscious coordinated interactions which have deliberate and common purpose The informal organization refers to those social interactions which do not have consciously coordinated joint purpose. The informal organization exists to overcome the problems of formal organizations. Bernard has suggested that executives should encourage the development of informal organization to serve as means of communication, to bring cohesion in the organization and to protect the individuals from dominance and on slaughter of the organization. Both formal and informal depend on each other and there s continuous interaction between the two. Therefore in managing the organization the manager should take into account both types of organizations. 3. Elements of organization According to Bernard, there are four elements of formal organization. These are System of fictionalization so that the people can specialize .e departimentation. System of effective and efficient incentives so as to induce people to contribute group action System of power which will lead group members to accept the decision of executives A system of logical decision making. 4. Authority Bernard does not agree with the classical view that authority transcends from the top to down. He has given a new concept of authority which is termed “acceptance theory of authority” or bottom up authority. In his opinion, a person does not obey an order because it has been given by a superior but he will accept a communication as being authoritative only when four conditions met simultaneously. i. He can understand the communication ii. He believes that it is not consistent with the organization purpose iii. He believes it to compatible with his personal interest as a whole iv. He is mentally and physically able to comply with it. 5. Function of the executive Bernard has identified three types of functions which an executive performs in a formal organization. These are i. Maintenance of organizational communication through system of organization i.e. through formal interactions ii. The security of essentials services from individuals’ n the organization so as to achieve origination goals iii. The formulation and definition organization purpose 6. Motivation Apart from financial incentives which have their own limitations in motivating the people, Bernard has suggested a number of non-financial techniques for motivating the people. Prominent among these are opportunity of power and distribution pride of workmanship pleasant organisation participation mutual supporting person attitudes feeling of belongingness 7. Executive effectiveness To make the executive effectiveness requires a high order of responsible leadership. While cooperation is the creative process, leadership is the indispensable fulminator of its forces. Leadership is the most strategic factor n securing cooperation from the people Executive leadership demand high caliber, technological competence, technical and social skills The executive leadership should not have preconceived notions and false ideologies. It should be above person predictions and prejudices notions and false ideologies. The leadership is likely to commit the following four types of errors i. The oversimplifications of the economy of organizational life ii. Disregarding the reality of informal organisaton and its necessity iii. An inversion of emphasis upon the objectives and subjective aspects of authority iv. A confusion of morality with responsibility Therefore executive should take adequate care to overcome these problems 8. Organization equilibrium Organization equilibrium refers to the matching of individual efforts and organizational efforts to satisfy individuals. The cooperation of individuals with the organization brings forth new activities. These organizations must afford satisfaction to individuals comprising it. This is required to maintain equilibrium in the organization. This equilibrium is not static but dynamic Demands and aspiration of individuals change and the organization has to cope with the dynamic situation The equilibrium of the organization depends on the individuals working on it, other organizations and the society as a whole. Thus the origination has to take into account the changes n the society The organization equilibrium can be perceived not only through logical appraisal but through analysis and intuition. Thus, many logical factors also enter into organizational analysis. Therefore the reasons for action should not only be logical but must also appeal to those attitudes, predilections, prejudices, emotions and mental background that cover action The above contributions of Bernard show how he was concerned for the development of organization through social systems. His contributions are regarded quite high in management. DECISION THEORY Decision theory approach looks at the basics problem of management around decision making. That is the selection of suitable courses of action out of the given alternatives. Major contributions in this approach have come from Simon and other contributors are March, Cyert forrester et.c. The major emphasis of this approach is that decision making is the task of every manager. The manager is the decision maker and organization is a decision making unit. Therefore, the basic problem in managing is to make rational decision. From this point of view decision theory approach has the following features. 1. Management is essentially decision making 2. The members of the organization are decision makers and problem solvers. 3. Origination can be treated as a combination of various decision centers. The level and importance of organizational members are determined on the basis of the importance 4. Quality of decision affects the organizational effectiveness 5. All factors affecting decision making are the subject-matter of study of management. Besides process and the techniques involved in decision making, other factors affecting the decisions are information systems and social psychological aspects of decision makers Thus, it covers the entire range of human activities on organization as well as the macro conditions within which the organization works. CONTRIBUTIONS OF HERBERT SIMON Herbert Simon has made significant contributions in the field of management particularly administrative behavior and decision making. His contributions cover both social systems and decision theory approaches. Simon examined the principles of management given by Urwick and Gullick and found them contradictory and ambiguous. He described these principles as ‘myth’ “slogans” and home ‘proverbs’. Simon looked at organizational problems in totality of socio-psychological context and viewed that decision making takes place in this context His contributions in management are summarized below 1. Concept of organization Simon described an origination as a complex network of decision processes all appointed towards their influence upon the behavior of the operatives. He has viewed the organization containing distribution and allocation of decision making functions. According to him, physiology of the organization is to be found n the process whereby organization influences the decisions of its members, supplying these decisions with their devices. 2. Decision making. Perhaps the greatest contribution, Simon is in the field of decision making. This is why he has been referred to as decision theorists. According to him the decision process can be broken into a series of three sequential steps. These are i. intelligent activity: the initial phase of searching the environment for conditions calling for discussion ii. Design activity: the phase of inventing, developing and analyzing possible course of action to take place ii. Choice activity: The final phase of actual choice selecting a particular course of action from those available 3. Bounded rationality Simon is of the view that man is not completing rational. He has criticized the theories which are based on the assumptions of complete rationality He has advocated the principle of bounded rationality Managers cannot maximize an account of various limitations and constraints A decision is rational if for achieving the desired ends, appropriate means are adopted. However it is not easy to separate the ends from the means because of end-means chain The relationship between organizational activities and ultimate objectives is also not clear. Moreover, a simple ends-means chain analysis may not help in reaching accurate conclusion because what is an end at one point of time or at one level of organization might be a means at the other time or at other level of the organization 4. Administrative man Simon has given the concept of administrative man as the model of decision making. The model is based on the following assumptions i. Administrative man adopts satisfying approach in decision making rather than the maximizing approach of economic man. ii. He perceives the world as a simplified model of real world. Thus, he remains content with simplification. iii. He can make his choice without first determining all possible alternatives and without ascertaining that these are in facts all the alternatives iv. He is able to make decision with relatively simple rule of the thumb or tricks of trade or force of habit. The administrative man model describes the decision making process of managers truly than alternatives theory of economic man. 5. Organization communication. Simon he emphasized the role of communication in organization. According to him, there are three stages in the communication process i. Initiation ii. Transmittal ii. Receipt of information There may be blockade of communication at any of these three stages. In order to overcome the problem of communication, he has emphasized the role of informal communication and has attached less importance to the formal network of authority. MANAGEMENT SCIENCE APPROACH Management science approach also known as mathematical or quantitative measurement approach visualizes management as a logical entity, the action of which can be expressed in terms of Mathematical symbols Relationships Measurement data The primary focus of this approach is the mathematical model. Through this device managerial and other problems can be expressed in basic relationships and where a given goal is sought, the model can be expressed in terms which optimize that goal. This approach draws many things from the decision theory approach and provides many techniques for rational decision making. 1. Management is regarded as the problem solving mechanism with the help of mathematical tools and techniques. 2. Management problems can be described n terms of mathematical symbols and date. Thus every managerial activity can be quantified. 3. This approach covers decision making systems analysis and some aspects of human behavior 4. Operations research, mathematical tools, simulation models etc are the basic methodologies to solve managerial problems. IMPLICATIONS OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE Management science approach is a fast developing one in analyzing and understanding management. This has contributed significantly in developing orderly thinking in management which has provided exactness management discipline Various mathematical tools like sampling, linear programming, game theory, time series analysis and simulation, waiting line theory etc have provided more However is very difficult to call it a separate school of management because it does not provide the answer for the total managerial problems Moreover, many managerial activities are not real capable of being quantified because of involvement of human beings who are governed by many traditional factors also. HUMAN BEHAVOUR APPROACH Human behavior approach is the outcome of the thoughts developed by behavoural scientists who have looked at the organization as collectivity of people for certain specific objectives. Since management involves getting things done by people, the study of management must revolve around human behavior. The approach also known as ‘leadership behavioural science’ or human resources’ approach brings to bear the existing and newly –developed theories and methods of the relevant behavioural sciences upon the study of human behavior. Human behaviour approach has been goal and efficiency-oriented and considers the understanding of human behavior to be the major means of that end The human behaviour approach emphasizes human resources in an organization more as compared to physical and financial resources Since this approach studies human behaviours ranging from personality dynamics of individuals at one extreme, to the relations of culture at the other. This can be divided into two groups i. Interpersonal behavior approach ii. Group behavior approach Writers in interpersonal behavior approach are heavily oriented towards individual psychology while writers in group behavior approach rely on social psychology and emphasize on organizational behaviour MODERN APPROACH SYSTEM APPROACH Perhaps systems approach has attracted the maximum attention of thinkers in management particularly in present era. Though this approach is of comparatively recent origin, starting late 1960s, it has assumed considerable management in its totality based on empirical data. The basic idea of systems approach is that any object must rely on a method of analysis involving simultaneous variations of mutually dependent variables. This happens when system approach is applied in management. FEATURES OF A SYSTEM A system is an assemblage of things connected or interrelated so as to form a complex unity; a whole composed of parts and subparts in orderly arrangement according to some scheme or plans. Richard (1973) has been defined a system as “organized of complex whole, an assemblage or combination of things or parts forming a complex unitary whole” On the basis of this definition, various features of a system can be identified: - A system is basically a combination of parts subsystems Each part may have various subparts When a sub system is considered as a system without reference to the system of which it is a part, it has the same features of a system. Thus, a hierarchy of systems and subsystems can be arranged. An organization is a system of mutually dependent parts each of which may include many subsystems. Parts and subparts of a system are mutually related to each other, some more, some less, some directly, some indirectly. The relationship is not natural given or unalterable in a social system. The relationship is in the context of the whole. Each change in one part may affect other parts also. Therefore, how various parts are given relationship is important for the functioning the system. A system is not merely the totality of parts and subparts but their arrangement is more important. The whole becomes greater than the total of individual parts because of the type of arrangement made in these parts and subparts. Thus, a system is an interdependent framework in which various parts are arranged. A system can be identified because it has boundary. In the case of social system, the boundary is not visible because it is not like a line or wall that functions to preserve or to define what is inside. Instead the boundary maintains proper relationship between the system and its environment objects laying outside the system. Identification of this boundary in the case of human organization facilitates the management of a system by differentiating those which can be controlled because they are outside the system. The boundary of a system classified it into two parts i.e close system and open system. All living organisms are open system while all non-living organism are closed systems. System transforms inputs into outputs. This transformation process is essential for the survival of the system. There are three aspects involves in this transformation process. These are: Inputs Mediator Outputs Inputs are taken from the environment transformed into outputs and given back to the environment. Various inputs may be in the form of information, money, material, human resources etc. Outputs may be in the form of goods and services. The total relationship may be called as input-output process and system works as mediator in this process. However, in this process, the system restores some of the inputs taken from the environment. Restoring the inputs taken from the environment helps the system maintain its structure and avoid decay and death. Thus the system can grow over the period of time e.g. business organization survives and grows over the period of time by earning profit in the process of transformation inputs into outputs. Profit is essential for the organizations to survive. OPEN AND CLOSED SYSTEMS The boundary of a system classified it into two parts. Closed system Open system All living organisms are open system while all non-living systems are closed system. The major differences between the two are as follows: - Closed systems are those that have no interactions with environment i.e. no outside system impinges on them or for which no outside systems are to be considered. Open system are those that interact with their environment, i.e. they have systems with which they relate, exchange and communicate. Closed systems are self contained and self maintaining as they do not interact with environment. Open systems interact with their environment and in this interaction; they import energy and export output. Because of this interaction, closed systems are rigid and static but open systems are dynamic and flexible as they are subject to change by environmental forces. Closed systems are generally mechanical e.g an automatic watch. Therefore, once they are set, they work. However, open systems are affected by environmental factors, and they have to be adjusted according to the environment. Thus, they require restructuring because of change in environment. Closed system are like close loop while open systems are characterized by negative entropy. They import more energy than is expanded or consumed. Thus they can grow over the period of time. When this relationship is reversed, the open systems decline. Open systems have feedback mechanism that help them to maintain homoeostatis of kind of equilibrium. Homoeostatis is a process through which a system regulates itself around a stable state. E.g human body works on the principle of homoeostatis. It maintains its temperature relatively at a constant level despite variations in the environment temperature. However, organizational equilibrium is not static. It being a dynamic system gets feedback to maintain dynamic equilibrium. In closed systems, there is no such feedback mechanism. The distinction between closed and open systems is there but really no system is a closed one but has some properties of open systems. The classification of various systems into closed and open is not very proper. Therefore, it is more appropriate to think systems in terms of the degree to which they are open or closed rather than using a dichotomy of open-close. FEATURES OF MANAGEMENT AS A SYSTEM Under a system approach, management is regarded as a system: - It draws heavily from system concepts When systems concepts are applied to management it is taken in the following ways: Management as a social system Management can be considered as a system. management is a social system and unlike biological or mechanical systems. Management as a system consists of many subsystems which are integrated to constitute an entity. Management as open system Management, like any other social system, is an open system. It interacts with its environment out of this interaction, it takes various resources allocates and combines these resources to produce desirable outputs which are exported to the environment. Consideration is required at the levels of taking inputs-transforming them into outputs and exporting the outputs to the environment. Adaptive Organization being an open system, its survival and growth in a dynamic environment demands on adaptive system which can continuously adjust to changing environment. Management tends to achieve environmental constancy by bringing the external world under control or bringing internal modification of organizational functioning to meet the needs of changing the world. Since there is a provision of feedback mechanism, management can evaluate its performance and take corrective actions. The basic role of management is considered in terms of its adaptability to environment. Dynamic Management as a system is dynamic it suggests that management attempts at achieving equilibrium in the organization. However, this equilibrium is not static as happens in mechanical system. Management moves towards growth and expansion by preserving some of the energy. Managerial effectiveness depends on this energy exchange. Therefore , it is not only the internal processing process that determines the effectiveness of management but also how it interacts with the changing environment in terms of talking inputs and giving outputs also determines the effectiveness. Probabilistic Management is probabilistic and deterministic. A deterministic model always specifies the use of model in condition with pre-determined results. Therefore the outcome of an action can be predicted accurately. Probabilistic model, the outcome can be assigned only probability and not certainty. Management being probabilistic points out only the probability and never the certainty of the performance and consequent of the results. Management has to function in the face of many dynamic variables and there cannot be absolute predictability of these variables. 6. Multilevel and multidimensional Systems approach of management points out the multilevel and multidimensional features of management. It has both macro and micro approach. At macro level, it can be applied to suprasystem, say a business system as a whole. At micro level, it can be applied to an organization. However it has the same characteristics at all these levels. Suprasystem level, system level, subsystem level. Thus, both parts and whole are equally important in managing. 7. Multivariable Management is multivariable and involves taking into account many variables simultaneously. This feature of management suggests that there is no simply cause effect phenomenon rather an event may be the result of so many variables which themselves are interrelated and interdependent. This interrelatedness and interdependence makes managing quite a complex process. Thus it realizes the complexity of management. An integrated approach System approach of management takes an integrated view of managing. It indentifies the reason for a phenomenon in its wider contest taking into account the total factors affecting phenomenon. In other approaches, a particular phenomenon has been explained in terms of a single factor or cluster of factors. Management tries to integrate the various factors to find out the reasons behind a phenomenon. It emphasizes how the management of one system of the organization should be taken in relation with others because other subsystems become environment for the given system. Thus, the problem in one subsystem should not be traced into the subsystem only that but in a much wide context. LIMITATION OF SYSTEMS APPROACH Though systems approach possess conceptual framework of much higher order as compared to other approaches, it may be emphasized that this is the unified theory of management. System approach came in a big way in managerial analysis and raised the hope of becoming general and unified theory of management. A general and unified theory can be applied to all types of organizations, presenting their comprehensive analysis so that those who go to organizations from different angles can drive knowledge. System approach suffers from two limitations: - Abstract approach It is often suggested that system approach is too abstract to be of much use of practicing managers. It merely indicates that various parts of the organization are interrelated Similarly, an organization is a social system and therefore, is a related with other organization in the society. This is true and significant for managing. But it fails to spell out precisely relationship among these. Therefore its contribution to managing is limited e.g. it is one thing to say that economic forces trigger social, technical and physiological changes in the organization. But this is not enough for managing an organization. What is required is a statement of what economic forces initiate what social technological and psychological changes. Lack of universality System approach of management lack universality and its precepts cannot be applied to all organizations. e.g. system approach provides modern structural forms, cybernetic system for control and communication. These systems are suitable for large and complex organizations but are not suitable for small organizations. Since most modern organizations are large and complex, it is argued that systems approach is applicable in general. This may be true but the role of a theory is not to prescribe actions for a particular category of organization, rather the theory should specify the relationships among different variables which can be applied to all organizations. If systems approach is seen in this perspective, some people believe that the approach is as incomplete as any other. Infarct they argue that this approach does not offer anything new. The managers have been doing their jobs seeing the problems as a network of interrelated elements with the interaction between environments inside and outside of their organizations. Looking into these short comings of systems approach, researchers have tried to modify the systems approach. This attempt has led to the emergency of a separate though related approach, contingency or situational approach. CONTINGENCY OR SITUATIONAL APPROACH Contingency or situational approach is an extension of systems approach. The basic idea of contingency approach is that there cannot be a particular management action which will be suitable for all situations rather than appropriate action is one which is designed on the basis of external environment and internal states and needs. Contingency theorists suggest that systems approach does not adequately spell out the precise relationship between organization and its environment. Contingency approach tries to fill this gape by suggesting what should be done in response to an event in the environment. Some researchers distinguish between contingency and situational approach by suggesting that situational management implies that what a manager does depends on a given situation. Contingency approach, on the other hand suggests an active interrelationship between the variables in a situation and the managerial actions devised. Thus, contingency approach takes into account in a given situations and the influence of given solutions on behaviour patterns of an organization. Despite these differences and emphasis on varying factors, themes of both the approaches are common In fact, some authors believe the term contingency is misleading and they should have used the term situational. Nevertheless both terms are used interchangeably Jay (1970). Jay A, Lorsch and Paul R. Lawrence, studies in organization design, Homewood III 1970 FEATURES OF CONTINGENCY APPROACHES Management action is contingency on certain action outside the system of subsystem as the case may be. Organizational action should be based on the behavior of action outside the system so that organization should be integrated with the environment. Because of the specific organization environment relationship, no action can be universal, it varies from situation to situation IMPLICATION OF CONTINGENCY APPROACH Contingency approach is an important addition to the paradigm of modern theory of management. It is the sophisticated approach to understand the increasing complexity of organization it emphasizes the multivariate nature of organization and attempts to understand how organization operate under varying conditions. The major implications of contingency approach are as follows: - Management is entirely situational and there is nothing like universal principles of management or one best way of doing a particular thing. What managers do depends on the circumstances and environment The approach suggest suitable alternative for those managerial actions which are generally contingent upon external and internal environment such external and internal environment such as organizational design, strategy formulation decision systems, influence system leadership and organizational improvements. In all these cases, actions alternatives cannot be arranged in advance but have to be identified and adjust according the situations in which decisions in respect of these have to be made. Contingency approach suggests that since organization interacts with its environment, neither the organization nor any of its subsystems is free to take absolute action. Rather, it has to modify and adjust the actions subject to various forces like social, political, technical and economic. Besides, the actions should be according to the needs of internal state of the organization or its subsystem. Thus, the basic problem of managing is to alike the internal state with the external state. LIMITATIONS OF CONTINGENCY APPROACH Inspite of the various contributions, contingency has not been acknowledged as a unified theory management because it suffers from some limitations. These limitations are as follows: - 1. Inadequate literature Contingency approach suffers from inadequately literature. Therefore it has not adequately spelled out various types of actions which can be taken under different situations. It is not sufficient to say that “managerial action depends on the situations. The approach should provide “if this is the situation, this action can be taken” unless this is done, the approach cannot offer much assistance to the practice of management. 2. Complex The suggestion of the approach is very simple; i.e. managers should so according to the needs of the situation. However, when put into practice, this becomes very complex. Determination of situational in which managerial action is to be taken involves analysis of a large numbers of variables within multifarious dimensions, therefore, there is a possibility that managers, who are always short time may ignore the thorough analysis of all these variables and may resort to short-cut and easier way. 5. Difficult Empirical Testing Contingency approach, being complex presents problems in testing the precepts of the theory. For empirical testing of a theory, it is necessity that some methodology is available, no doubt, methodology is available but because of the involvement of too many factors, testing becomes difficult. E.g. contingency theory suggests that greater the degree of congruence between various parts of organizational component, the more effective will be organizational behavior at various levels. This lacks the empirical validity and hence cannot be adapted to managerial actions. 4. Reactive and not proactive Contingency approach is basically reactive in nature. It merely suggests what managers can do in a given situation. For a given organization, supra system constitutes environment and management can be applied to supra system also. Therefore mangers are responsible to manage the environment in such a way that they avoid the undesirable aspects of environment. Since the managers are quite powerful in the society, they must be in position to provide a sense of direction and guidance through innovative and creative efforts especially in coping with the environmental changes.