Mary Parker Follett and Chester Barnard’s contributions to management are known as those who belong to the neoclassical

(Transitional) school, as their theories seem to be in the midway between those of the classical school and those of the beha ioral school! Mary Parker Follett (1868-1933) Mary Follet’s work referred to as administrati e management, her contributions generally em"hasi#es the need for an integrated organi#ational system, where "eo"le worked as a team or grou"! $he feels that this will lead to more "roducti ity and greater %ob satisfaction, rather than the &solo worker’ scientific management theory of Frederick Taylor! $he ad ocated' ( )m"loyee em"owerment ( Flatter (hori#ontal) organi#ational structures ( Constructi e use of conflict in management and staff relations Follett belie ed that labor harmony could be achie ed by the "ro"er use of conflict! That there are four ma%or ways of resol ing conflict, namely' • • • • the oluntary submission by one "arty a ictory of one "arty o er the other a com"romise* and an integration + which is finding a solution that satisfied both "arties, without either a com"romise or a domination!

$he fa ored the last method! $he also belie ed that a leader in a grou" situation normally influences the grou" and is also influenced by the grou"! Mary Follett also de elo"ed the conce"ts such as' • • • ( The uni ersal goal, ( The uni ersal "rinci"le, and ( The law of the situation!

The universal goal of organi#ations is a combination of indi idual efforts that work towards the same goals of the organi#ation! The universal principle is that there should be a circular or reci"rocal res"onse in organi#ational acti ities and communications! Basically, she ad ocated a feedback (control) system in the organi#ation! The law of the situation is there is no single best way of doing things in management, and that the "articular situation will dictate what to do!

She admonished overmanaging employees. and employee participation were highly influential in the development of the fields of organizational studies. he states that the e5tent to which em"loyees are willing to acce"t an authority is de"endent on the following factors' ( The staff understands e5actly what management wants them to do. ( The staff belie e that the instructions are in line with the organi#ational goals and ob%ecti es. they could not achie e. if management could de ise strategies to induce the staff. strength in human diversity. a process now known as micromanaging. revolutionizing and humanizing the American workplace. Barnard stated that as much as "eo"le seek to satisfy their indi idual needs. alternative dispute resolution.A management guru in the early days of classical management theory. at least in the '(th century. progressive changes in management philosophy. )hese include the idea of seeking win"win solutions. and the #uman $elations Movement Mary !ollett%s work set the stage for a generation of effective. situational leadership. of ideas that are today commonly accepted as cutting edge in organizational theory and public administration. power. and a focus on process. by working on their own! Chester Barnard also highlighted the e5tent to which managers’ instructions are acce"ted or adhered to by their staff! 6e then de elo"ed the conce"ts of strategic planning and the acce"tance theory of authority! The acce"tance theory states that the degree of authority that a manager can e5ercise de"ends on how much em"loyees are willing to acce"t it! Thus. #er ideas on negotiation. /$. ob%ecti es or goals.nother transitional work in management was "roduced by Chester Barnard who became "resident of the -ew .ersey Bell Tele"hone. the le el of acce"tance of authority would increase. style and practice. She recognized the holistic nature of community and advanced the idea of reciprocal relationships in understanding the dynamic aspects of the individual in relationship to others. hester !" #arnar$ (1886-1961) . !ollett advocated the principle of what she termed integration. ( The staff are "hysically able to carry out the instructions. community"based solutions. as “bossism” and she is regarded by some writers as the “mother” of Scientific Management. or noncoercive power"sharing based on the use of her concept of power with rather than power over. in the course of "ursuing the organi#ational goals. in order to broaden the em"loyee’s #one of . Mary &arker !ollett pioneered the understanding of lateral processes within hierarchical organizations !ollett is increasingly recognized today as the originator. in order to achie e things. they also like to work together in the organi#ation. ( The staff belie e that the instructions are not contrary to their "ersonal goals and ob%ecti es! The theory adds that e ery em"loyee has what is known as a %)one of in$ifference( within which they will be willing to acce"t instructions without challenging authority! Therefore. in 0123! 4n his book %Functions of the &'ecutive(.

iguity of social life together with a $e'terity an$ integrity which rese+. =alking and Talking Chester 4! Barnard) .ility (Pye" 2nnie.a frag+ent to support their case .orrow. which contains a "sychological theory of moti ation and beha ior.ut often . he +anages to . and an ideology based on a meritocracy! Barnard’s teachings drew on "ersonal insights as a senior e5ecuti e of . again in a way which $oes not fin$ conte+porary parallel" !n what re+ains a rare gestalt analysis of organi)ation. "erha"s the 27th Century’s most influential book on management and leadershi"! Barnard offers a systems a""roach to the study of organi#ation.races a .ut his was a fun$a+entally holistic work which sought to interweave an$ integrate rather than $issect an$ $isintegrate" *he research $ata reporte$ in this paper were not generate$ to test #arnar$-s work . it was foun$ that his work e+. namely' ( To establish and maintain effecti e communication systems in the organi#ation* ( To em"loy and retain ca"able and efficient staff* and ( To moti ate the staff! Chester Barnard was best known as the author of The Functions of the )5ecuti e.T9T in the 0127s and 01:7s. and he em"hasi#ed the role of the manager as both a "rofessional and as a steward of the cor"oration! Barnard sensed that the central challenge of management was balancing both the technological and human dimensions of organi#ation! The challenge for the e5ecuti e was to communicate organi#ational goals and to win the coo"eration of both the formal and the informal organi#ation* but he cautioned against relying e5clusi ely on incenti e schemes to win that coo"eration! .es"onsibility<in terms of the honor and faithfulness with which managers carry out their res"onsibilities 88 is the most im"ortant function of the e5ecuti e! *he influence of hester #arnar$ in conte+porary +anage+ent an$ organi)ation theori)ing is su. he is the only theorist to $o so in such a co+prehensive way" /n further reflection. 1993.indifference! Barnard stated that there were three main functions of the e5ecuti e.arely acknowle$ge$" onte+porary authors so+eti+es -. it e+erge$ that #arnar$ spoke in a voice which echoe$ closely the co++ents of senior e'ecutives" !n$ee$.les the practitioners of e'ecutive arts rather +ore than conte+porary theorists" *his paper seeks to highlight so+e of the areas in which his work still e'poses our current lack of conceptual i+agination an$ a.stantial .ut in the process of analysis. a sociological theory of coo"eration and com"le5 inter8de"endencies.rea$th an$ $epth of conceptual thought which re+ains une0ualle$ in our vast literature" 1is intellectual foun$ations were 0uite ra$ical for his ti+e.len$ the contra$ictions an$ conflicts of in$ivi$ual an$ organi)ation an$ inherent fickleness an$ a+.

mpowering -thers ./.managerial com"etency *eadership +ision .uilding )rust Managing &erformance /udgment01ecision"making .