The Evolution of Management Thinking

Chapter 2 of Richard L. Daft’s Management delves into the historical development of management theories and practices. This chapter traces the journey from classical management approaches to modern, innovative ideas that shape how organizations are managed today. Understanding the evolution of management thinking helps us appreciate the diverse perspectives and tools available to managers in addressing contemporary organizational challenges.


2.1 The Historical Struggle

  • Balancing Production and Humanity: The chapter opens by highlighting the historical struggle between focusing on the efficiency of production (the “things of production”) and considering the human side of work (the “humanity of production”). This tension has shaped management thinking over time, leading to various schools of thought.

2.2 Classical Perspective

The classical perspective emerged during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a time of industrial growth and the need for improved efficiency in factories and organizations.

  • Scientific Management:
    • Key Figures: Frederick Winslow Taylor is often credited as the father of scientific management.
    • Core Ideas: Taylor introduced the concept of breaking down tasks into smaller, standardized parts to improve efficiency. This approach emphasized time studies, work studies, and the use of scientific methods to determine the “one best way” to perform a job.
    • Impact: While scientific management significantly improved productivity, it was criticized for treating workers as machines and neglecting their social and psychological needs.
  • Bureaucratic Organizations:
    • Key Figure: Max Weber developed the concept of bureaucracy, which is a formal system of organization and administration designed to ensure efficiency and effectiveness.
    • Core Ideas: Bureaucracies are characterized by a clear hierarchy, division of labor, formal rules and procedures, and impersonal relationships. Weber believed that such structures would eliminate favoritism and allow for more rational decision-making.
    • Criticism: Over time, bureaucracies became associated with rigidity and inflexibility, often stifling innovation and employee morale.
  • Administrative Principles:
    • Key Figure: Henri Fayol is a central figure in the development of administrative principles.
    • Core Ideas: Fayol identified five key functions of management (planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling) and proposed 14 principles of management, including unity of command, division of work, and equity.
    • Contribution: Fayol’s work laid the groundwork for modern management practices, especially in terms of organizational structure and management processes.

2.3 Humanistic Perspective

As the limitations of the classical perspective became apparent, the humanistic perspective emerged, focusing on the importance of human needs and relationships in the workplace.

  • Early Advocates:
    • Core Ideas: Early humanists like Mary Parker Follett emphasized the importance of people over processes. They argued that organizations are social systems where workers have social needs that must be met.
    • Human Relations Movement: This movement, which gained prominence in the 1930s, was sparked by the famous Hawthorne Studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues. The studies revealed that social factors, such as group dynamics and employee satisfaction, significantly impacted productivity.
    • Key Takeaway: The human relations movement led to a greater emphasis on employee welfare, motivation, and communication within organizations.
  • Human Resources Perspective:
    • Core Ideas: This perspective built on the human relations movement, emphasizing that workers are valuable resources who contribute to the organization’s success. It introduced concepts like job enrichment, participative management, and the need for self-actualization in the workplace.
    • Behavioral Sciences Approach: This approach applies concepts from psychology, sociology, and other social sciences to management. It focuses on understanding employee behavior, motivation, and leadership.

2.4 Management Science

The management science perspective, also known as the quantitative perspective, gained traction during World War II, as the military sought more efficient ways to manage resources and operations.

  • Core Ideas: Management science applies mathematical and statistical techniques to solve management problems. It includes operations research, operations management, and information technology.
  • Applications: This approach is widely used in areas such as logistics, production planning, and decision-making. It emphasizes precision, efficiency, and the use of data to guide management practices.

2.5 Recent Historical Trends

In recent decades, new approaches have emerged that combine elements of the classical, humanistic, and quantitative perspectives to address the complexities of modern organizations.

  • Systems Thinking:
    • Core Ideas: Systems thinking views organizations as systems composed of interrelated parts that function as a whole to achieve a common purpose. It emphasizes the importance of understanding the interconnections and interdependencies within an organization.
    • Contribution: This approach helps managers see the big picture and understand how changes in one part of the system can affect the whole.
  • Contingency View:
    • Core Ideas: The contingency view posits that there is no one best way to manage an organization. Instead, management practices should be tailored to fit the specific circumstances, including the organization’s environment, technology, and goals.
    • Application: This approach encourages managers to be flexible and adaptive, using different management techniques depending on the situation.
  • Innovative Management Thinking:
    • Managing the Technology-Driven Workplace: As technology continues to evolve, managers must navigate challenges such as automation, big data, and social media. Managing technology effectively involves integrating it into organizational strategies and operations.
    • Managing the People-Driven Workplace: The modern workplace places a strong emphasis on employee engagement, collaboration, and empowerment. Innovative management practices focus on creating a culture that values creativity, trust, and continuous learning.

Key Takeaways

  1. Historical Evolution: Management thinking has evolved from a focus on efficiency and control (classical perspective) to a recognition of the importance of human factors (humanistic perspective) and the application of scientific techniques (management science).
  2. Modern Approaches: Contemporary management practices often combine insights from different perspectives, applying systems thinking, contingency planning, and innovative strategies to address the complexities of today’s organizations.
  3. Adapting to Change: Managers today must be flexible and adaptable, recognizing that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to management. The best practices depend on the specific context and environment in which the organization operates.

Study Tips

  • Understand Key Figures: Focus on the contributions of major thinkers like Taylor, Weber, and Fayol, and how their ideas still influence management practices today.
  • Compare and Contrast: Be able to distinguish between the classical and humanistic perspectives and understand how management science offers a different approach.
  • Real-World Application: Think about how the contingency view and systems thinking can be applied in real-world management scenarios, especially in dealing with change and complexity.

This discussion of Chapter 2 provides a comprehensive understanding of the evolution of management thought, helping you appreciate the diversity of tools and concepts available to modern managers.

The World of Innovative Management

Chapter 1 of Richard L. Daft’s Management introduces the foundational concepts of management and emphasizes the importance of innovative management in today’s rapidly changing environment. This chapter lays the groundwork for understanding what management is, the roles managers play, and the skills necessary for effective management.


1.1 The Nature of Management

  • Definition of Management: Management is defined as the attainment of organizational goals in an effective and efficient manner through planning, organizing, leading, and controlling organizational resources.
    • Effective: Achieving the organization’s goals.
    • Efficient: Using resources wisely and cost-effectively.
  • Management Competencies for Today’s World: The chapter highlights the new competencies managers need in the modern, complex environment. These include:
    • Engaging Employees: Motivating and involving employees to achieve high performance.
    • Managing Change: Being flexible and adaptive in a constantly changing business environment.
    • Building Trust: Establishing credibility and trust within teams and with stakeholders.
    • Time Management: Prioritizing tasks effectively to meet deadlines and organizational goals.

1.2 The Basic Functions of Management

  • Planning: Involves setting objectives and determining the best course of action to achieve them. Planning provides direction, reduces risks, and helps managers anticipate future conditions.
  • Organizing: This function entails arranging resources (human, financial, physical) and tasks to achieve the organization’s goals. It includes creating structures, job roles, and allocating responsibilities.
  • Leading: Leading is about inspiring and motivating employees to work towards organizational goals. It involves communication, motivation, and leadership styles that influence employee behavior.
  • Controlling: The controlling function involves monitoring performance, comparing it with goals, and taking corrective action as needed. It ensures that the organization’s objectives are met.

1.3 Organizational Performance

  • Organizational Performance: The chapter emphasizes that management’s ultimate goal is to achieve high performance, which is defined by two key aspects:
    • Effectiveness: Refers to the degree to which an organization achieves its goals.
    • Efficiency: Refers to the use of resources (time, money, materials) to achieve those goals with minimal waste.
  • Organizational Success: Success in management is measured by how well managers balance efficiency and effectiveness to achieve organizational goals.

1.4 Management Skills

  • Technical Skills: These are the specific abilities required to perform a particular job, such as expertise in a particular function or technology. They are more critical at lower levels of management.
  • Human Skills: The ability to work with and through other people. This includes interpersonal skills, communication, and empathy, and is crucial at all levels of management.
  • Conceptual Skills: The ability to think critically and understand the complexities of the organization as a whole. These skills involve seeing the organization in its entirety and understanding how its parts are interconnected. Conceptual skills are especially important for top managers.

1.5 Management Types

  • Vertical Differences: Managers are classified based on the hierarchy in an organization.
    • Top Managers: Responsible for the entire organization, such as CEOs, who set overall goals and strategies.
    • Middle Managers: Manage the performance of departments or divisions and implement the strategies set by top management.
    • First-Line Managers: Directly supervise non-managerial employees and are responsible for day-to-day operations.
  • Horizontal Differences: These relate to the different functions within an organization.
    • Functional Managers: Responsible for a specific department or function, such as marketing or finance.
    • General Managers: Responsible for several departments or a complete unit, such as a store or business division.

1.6 What Is a Manager’s Job Really Like?

  • The Reality of Management: Management is not a straightforward, linear process. It is dynamic and often involves dealing with unexpected challenges. Managers must be adaptable and ready to make decisions under uncertain conditions.
  • Making the Leap: Becoming a New Manager: The transition from individual contributor to manager can be challenging. New managers must shift their focus from personal achievement to achieving results through others. This involves developing new skills and adopting a broader perspective.
  • Manager Activities: Managers perform a variety of tasks that can be categorized into roles as identified by Henry Mintzberg:
    • Interpersonal Roles: Involving interactions with employees, such as leadership and networking.
    • Informational Roles: Involving the processing and dissemination of information.
    • Decisional Roles: Involving decision-making activities, such as resource allocation and negotiation.

Key Takeaways

  1. Foundation of Management: Understanding the basic functions of planning, organizing, leading, and controlling is essential to grasping what management involves.
  2. Skills for Success: Managers need a mix of technical, human, and conceptual skills to be effective.
  3. Dynamic Role: A manager’s role is multifaceted and requires adaptability, especially in today’s fast-paced business environment.

Study Tips

  • Focus on Functions: Be clear about the four basic functions of management and how they interrelate.
  • Understand Managerial Levels: Differentiate between the roles and responsibilities of top, middle, and first-line managers.
  • Real-World Application: Consider how the skills and roles discussed apply to real-life management scenarios you may encounter.

This discussion of Chapter 1 provides a solid understanding of the fundamental concepts of management, preparing you for deeper insights as you progress through the book.

Welcome to My Journey: From IT to Management

Hello, I’m Sonny! I’ve started this blog as part of my journey towards earning a Master of Management degree at the University of the Philippines (UP). I believe that the best way to solidify what I’m learning is by teaching others—or, in this case, sharing my insights with you through this blog. With a background in Information Technology, where I earned my Bachelor of Science, I’ve been casually building websites since college. Now, I’m merging my IT skills with my new venture into management by documenting my lessons and experiences here.

Why Pursue a Master of Management?

The decision to enroll at UP wasn’t taken lightly. I’m currently working as a network engineer, a role that compensates me well. So, why pursue further education? It’s not about the money. It’s about growth, preparation, and the belief that I can take on more responsibility when the time comes. I’m not in a rush to become a manager, but I want to be ready for the opportunity when it presents itself.

UP is renowned for its rigorous academic standards and being surrounded by like-minded, bright individuals is one of the main reasons I chose this path. However, I’ll admit that the Master of Management program is more challenging than I initially expected. It’s not just about writing papers and completing assignments—it’s a time-consuming commitment. But being part of such a prestigious institution is something I’m truly grateful for, and I’m determined to see this through.

The Purpose of This Blog

This blog serves as a space for me to explore and reinforce the management concepts I’m learning in class. Tomorrow, I have a final exam in one of my subjects, and while I may have started this blog a bit late, I’m committed to using this platform to continue my learning process over the next year and a half.

My primary goal is to enhance my management skills, and I believe that by reading, writing, and sharing my thoughts, I can grow in ways that will benefit me both personally and professionally. I understand that becoming a manager isn’t guaranteed—my personality doesn’t naturally align with traditional management roles—but I’m confident that developing these skills will be invaluable. Additionally, I’m considering a future in project management, and this course is a stepping stone towards that goal.

What’s Next?

As I embark on this journey, I hope that this blog not only helps me solidify my understanding but also serves as a resource for others who are navigating similar paths. Whether you’re a fellow student, a professional looking to expand your skills, or just someone curious about management, I hope you find value in what I share.

So, here’s to the learning ahead, and the possibility of growth for both myself and anyone who stumbles upon this blog. Let’s make the most of this journey together!

Rendell Company: A Tale of Organizational Change

Fred Bevins, the controller at Rendell Company, was increasingly worried about how his divisional controllers were positioned within the organization. For many years, including 1985, these controllers reported directly to the general managers of their divisions. Although this setup was common in many companies, Bevins wasn’t entirely comfortable with it. His interest in exploring a change was piqued after hearing about the organizational responsibilities at Martex Corporation from its controller.

Rendell Company boasted seven divisions, with annual sales ranging from $50 million to over $500 million. Each division managed both manufacturing and marketing for distinct product lines, though interdivisional transfers were minimal. The company had been profitable for over 50 years, but its growth had slowed in the late 1970s. To address this, James Hodgkin was hired as controller in 1980, eventually becoming president by 1984. Bevins joined as assistant controller in 1981 at age 33, becoming controller two years later.

Initially, the corporate control organization handled financial accounting, internal auditing, and capital budgeting analysis, with little involvement in budget preparation. Hodgkin, as controller, pushed for a more active role, personally reviewing budgets and performance reports. Bevins continued this approach, and by 1985, the corporate control organization was well-staffed and more involved in analyzing divisional submissions.

However, divisional controllers still reported to their general managers, with corporate input limited to appointments and salary increases. Bevins felt this setup hindered his ability to push for modern control techniques and left him uninformed about divisional activities. He suspected divisional controllers were more loyal to their general managers, potentially hiding inefficiencies in their reports.

Bevins found inspiration in Martex Corporation’s structure, as described by its controller, E.F. Ingraham. Intrigued, Bevins shared his thoughts with William Harrigan, his assistant controller, who had been with Rendell for 25 years and had experience as a divisional controller. Harrigan’s response was candid:

“I doubt the Martex plan would work for us. In my five years as a divisional controller, I was told to support the general manager in every way. My team prepared information for the divisional budget, but the final decisions were the general manager’s. At budget meetings, I was there to explain figures, but the general manager took the lead. When monthly reports were prepared, I reviewed them and discussed them with the general manager, who then took action.

Problems arose when corporate would ask questions directly to me, bypassing the general manager. While I often agreed with the data, there were times I had private doubts. This setup positions the divisional controller as a ‘spy’ rather than a trusted assistant, which could erode trust and effectiveness. If we followed the Martex model, general managers might isolate the controller, damaging the control function within divisions.”

Harrigan believed maintaining the current structure, despite its imperfections, was preferable. It allowed divisional controllers to remain integral to the management team, even if it meant dealing with some inefficiencies in budgeting and reporting.

What can we learn from Rendell Company?

The story of Rendell Company offers several valuable lessons about organizational structure, management, and the challenges of implementing change:

  1. Balancing Accountability and Autonomy: The existing structure at Rendell, where divisional controllers reported to their general managers, highlights the balance between holding divisions accountable and allowing them autonomy. This balance can foster a sense of ownership and responsibility within divisions.
  2. Challenges of Modernization: Fred Bevins’ push for modern control techniques underscores the difficulties organizations face when trying to modernize practices. Resistance can come from entrenched systems and personnel who are accustomed to the status quo.
  3. Importance of Clear Reporting Lines: The tension between corporate control and divisional autonomy illustrates the importance of clear and effective reporting lines. When divisional controllers report to general managers, there’s a risk that corporate may not receive unbiased information.
  4. Trust and Communication: The story emphasizes the critical role of trust and communication in organizational effectiveness. Divisional controllers need to be trusted assistants to general managers, not seen as corporate spies. This trust is essential for accurate reporting and effective management.
  5. Value of Experience and Institutional Knowledge: William Harrigan’s perspective shows the importance of experience and deep institutional knowledge in decision-making. His insights, based on years of experience, provided a grounded view that complemented Bevins’ more ambitious plans.
  6. Adapting Best Practices: Bevins’ interest in Martex Corporation’s structure demonstrates the value of learning from other organizations. However, it also shows that best practices are not one-size-fits-all. What works in one company might not be suitable for another due to different cultures, histories, and operational contexts.
  7. Role of Leadership in Change Management: The transition of James Hodgkin from controller to president, and his active involvement in budget reviews, highlights the impact of leadership in driving change. Strong leadership can inspire and implement new practices, but it requires buy-in from the entire organization.
  8. Potential Downsides of Centralized Control: Harrigan’s feedback warns of the potential downsides of overly centralized control. Isolating divisional controllers from their general managers could lead to inefficiencies and a lack of cooperation within divisions.

Rendell Company’s experience teaches us that organizational changes must be carefully considered and balanced with the existing culture and practices. Trust, communication, and adaptability are key to successfully implementing new structures and techniques.

What would be the best course of action to take between using the Martex Method and direct reporting to general manager?

Choosing between adopting the Martex method (where divisional controllers report directly to the corporate controller) and continuing with divisional controllers reporting to general managers involves weighing the pros and cons of each approach in the context of Rendell Company’s specific situation. Here are some considerations to help determine the best course of action:

Martex Method (Divisional Controllers Reporting to Corporate Controller)

Pros:

  1. Unbiased Information: Direct reporting to the corporate controller ensures that divisional controllers provide more objective and unfiltered information, improving transparency and accuracy in reporting.
  2. Standardization: It allows for more consistent implementation of modern control techniques and uniformity in accounting practices across divisions.
  3. Enhanced Oversight: The corporate controller can have better oversight and a clearer picture of the company’s overall financial health and operational efficiency.

Cons:

  1. Loss of Trust: Divisional controllers might be seen as spies by divisional managers, leading to a breakdown in trust and cooperation within divisions.
  2. Isolation: Divisional controllers might become isolated from the day-to-day operations and strategic goals of their respective divisions, reducing their effectiveness as integral team members.
  3. Resistance to Change: Long-standing relationships and loyalty within divisions might make it difficult to implement this new reporting structure smoothly.
Direct Reporting to General Managers

Pros:

  1. Close Collaboration: Divisional controllers can work closely with general managers, contributing to strategic decision-making and operational efficiency.
  2. Trust and Team Integration: Maintaining the current structure helps preserve the trust and collaborative spirit within each division, fostering a cohesive management team.
  3. Institutional Knowledge: Divisional controllers, being more integrated into their divisions, have a better understanding of the specific challenges and opportunities within their divisions.

Cons:

  1. Potential Bias: Reports from divisional controllers may be influenced by their loyalty to general managers, potentially leading to biased or incomplete information.
  2. Inconsistent Practices: Different divisions may develop varied practices and control techniques, leading to inconsistencies and difficulties in implementing company-wide policies.
  3. Limited Oversight: The corporate controller might have limited visibility and control over the divisions, making it harder to enforce standards and optimize overall performance.

Best Course of Action

To determine the best course of action, consider a hybrid approach that combines the strengths of both methods while mitigating their weaknesses:

  1. Dual Reporting Structure: Implement a dual reporting system where divisional controllers report both to their general managers and to the corporate controller. This maintains their close relationship with divisional management while ensuring corporate oversight and consistency.
  2. Clear Role Definition: Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of divisional controllers in relation to both the general managers and the corporate controller. Ensure they understand their duty to provide accurate and unbiased information to the corporate office while supporting their divisional managers.
  3. Regular Communication and Training: Facilitate regular communication between the corporate controller and divisional controllers through meetings, training sessions, and workshops. This helps in fostering a unified approach to control techniques and accounting practices.
  4. Performance Metrics and Accountability: Establish clear performance metrics and accountability standards for divisional controllers. Ensure that their performance evaluations involve input from both the general manager and the corporate controller.
  5. Phased Implementation: If considering a shift towards the Martex method, implement it gradually in phases, starting with a few divisions. This allows the company to address any challenges and resistance while refining the approach.

By adopting a balanced approach that incorporates elements of both methods, Rendell Company can improve transparency and oversight while maintaining trust and collaboration within its divisions.