A Comparison of Classical Management Theorists and Contingency Theorist

A Comparison of Classical Management Theorists and Contingency Theorists The management field is characterised by a wide variety of theories, schools and directions. This essay examines the classical and contingency schools of thought -- the approaches to organization that have had the greatest impact on management today. Firstly the essay delineates and criticises the important theories propounded by classical writers. The essay continues with an account of the contingency school, and finally evaluates its impacts on managerial thought. Up until about the late 1950s academic writing about organisational structure was dominated by the classical management school. This held that there was a single organisational structure that was effective in all organisations. (Clegg & Handy, 1999). According to Holt (1999), the classical school is characterised by ?being highly structured, with emphasis on the formal organisation with clearly defined functions and detailed rules, autocratic leadership, a rigid chain of command and control by superiors? (Holt, 1999, p.137). The three greatest proponents of classical theory were Taylor, Fayol, and Weber. Each identifies detailed principles and methods through which this kind of organisation could be achieved. Taylor (1947) developed a systematic approach to called ?Scientific Management?, which focused on efficient production. Through the study of task movements, or ?time and motion studies? as it was known, he recognized matching the correct worker to the task was crucial to increasing work efficiency. Under this so-called Taylorism, emphasis is placed on power confered to those in control. According to Morgan (1997), this approach to work design is found in traditional forms of assembly-line manufacturing and in production processes. Another major sub-field within the classical perspective is ?Administrative Management,? set forth by Fayol (1949). While Scientific Management took a micro approach, Fayol saw the macro concepts, a body of knowledge which emphasised broad administrative principles applicable to large organizations. In Fayol?s account, management is conceptualised as consisting of five elements, namely planning, organizing, command, co-ordination, and control. He also developed 14 principles of management or organisation, the best-known being division of work, unit... ...ure. Academy of Management Journal, 25 (3), 553-566. Luthans, F. (1973). The Contingency Theory of Management: A path out of the jungle. Business Horizons, 6, 67-72 Meyer, M.W. (1972). Size and the structure of organizations: A causal analysis, American Sociological Review, 37, 434-441. Pugh, D., Hickson, D., Hinings, R. & Turner, C. (1969). The context of organization structures. Administrative Science Quarterly 14:91-114. Pugh, D. & Hickson, D. (1996). Writers on organisations. London: Penguin. Robbins, S. & Barnwell, N. (2002). Organisation Theory: Concepts and cases. Victoria, Australia: Pentice Hall. Taylor, F.W. (1947). Scientific Management, Harper & Row. Watz, T. (1996). Technology rules OK? A review of technological determinism and contingency theory. Creativity and Innovation Management, 5(1) 13-21. Weber, M. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. A.H. Henderson and Talcott Parsons (eds.). Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Woodward, J. (1980). Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice, second edition. New York: Oxford University Press --------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] Pugh et al.