University of the Philippines Diliman

National College of Public Administration and Governance

Diliman, Quezon City

Isagani L. Bagus, BSBA, Dip.IR, MPA

Faculty in Charge

Module on
ORGANIZATION THEORY

Axalan, Kimberly C.
I – Bachelor of Public Administration

INTRODUCTION

In public administration, we are interested in how public organizations or the government

bureaucracy work and how we can further improve them. Before we can do that, we need
some handles to help us understand, analyze and explain how those public organizations
function and, when necessary, to prescribe what we think are appropriate interventions to
improve performance. These handles are found in the organization or administrative theory
(we’ll use these interchangeably). Organization theory is generally considered the conceptual
or theoretical of public administration study.

As an eclectic field, Public Administration drew much of its theoretical bases from various
disciplines. As Caiden once said, there are no distinctive schools of public administration
theory, theoretical work in public administration takes place within the general field of
administration (Caiden 1971)
Objectives:

When you have worked through the module, you will be able to:

a. Trace the beginnings of modern administrative thought;

b. Discuss the three major schools of administrative theory, how they evolved;
c. Discuss the major contributions and limitations of each school;
d. Determine what concepts and ideas are applied in our government offices;
e. Identify the leading personalities and their contributions to organization theory;
f. Identify the disciplines from which public administration drew its concepts in
administration; and
g. Formulate your own synthesis of the three schools

Readings:

For this module, your readings are the following:

Caoili, Manuel “Some Notes on the Origins of Modern Management” in Bautista, et al (eds)
Introduction to Public Administration in the Philippines: A Reader (pp 103-118)

Dubsky, Roman “The Classical Theories of Management: A Critical Appraisal” (mimeo)

Supplemental Readings:

Nigro, Felix and Llyod Nigro “Organization Theory” in Nigro and Nigro (eds) Modern Public
Administration, New York, Harper and Row Publishers, 1989

Caiden, Gerald “Administrative Theory” in Gerald Caiden (ed) The Dynamics of Public
Administration: Guidelines to Current Transformations in Theory and Practice, Minsdate, Illinois,
The Dryden Press, 1971
The Caoili material serves as a background reading for our topic. I suggest that you read if first
for it will help you put in proper perspective the emergence and development of modern
management thought

From the reading, you will get a sweeping view of the beginnings of modern management
thought. Caoili traced the origins of management as far back as the ancient civilization and in
Great Britain and the United States in modern times, particularly through the Industrial
Revolution. You can say that it was during and around the industrial era that explosion of
management ideas began to occur in both sides of the world. Paying special attention to the
historical context is important for it shows us how management practice had influenced the
development of administrative.

Last lecture we mentioned the link between theory and practice of administration. Here as we
discuss the various schools of management ideas, you will note once more the close interplay
between them. It is more vivid than when management practitioners like Taylor, Fayol, and
Barnard wrote about their own work experiences which eventually stimulated further
theoretical inputs from various scholars and theories. You will familiar with these people and
their ideas subsequently.

Dubsky, on the other hand, discussed the three streams of thoughts of classical organization
theory, namely scientific management, administrative management, and bureaucratic model.
We’ll elaborate on them here. He also presented a critique of the theory as well as its
contributions to organization and management.

Now, lets discuss the various schools of thought that from the foundations of organization
theory. I have described neoclassical and modern theory at length here because they are not
covered by the Caoili and Dubsky materials. I have used the supplementary readings as main
references to explain the neoclassical and modern theory. When you go to learning centers,
you can read them to further enhance your understanding.

Model of Organization Theory

Different authors have different ways of categorizing the theories of administration. For
instance,
Koontz identified six schools of administrative theory:

1. Administrative – process
2. Empirical school
3. Human-behavior school
4. Social-system school
5. Decision making school; and
6. Mathematics school

Caiden reduced these into two major schools:

1. Reductionist administrative process schools that combined the empirical, decision

making and mathematics schools; and
2. A holistic administrative system school that put together human behavior and social
systems schools

Nigro and Nigro, on the other hand , classified organization theory according to:
1. Bureaucratic model
2. Scientific management
3. Principles of administration
4. Human relations, and
5. Integrative framework or holistic approach
a. Decision making
b. Industrial humanism
c. Open system framework

To simplify, we’ll use the commonly employed way of categorizing organization theory
a. Classical
b. Neoclassical or human realtions, and
c. Integration theory or modern theory
You’ll Note that this hews closely to Nigro’s classifications. Under each group are various
streams of ideas which encompass those mentioned above.
 Classical Theory

Classical Theory, so called they are timeless and well established, include the scientific
management, administrative management, and the bureaucratic model. The conceptual
foundations of traditional public administration are founded on these three theories:

Scientific Management

Scientific Management covers a number of ideas about how work at the industrial shop or
factory can be carried out with utmost efficiency and minimum waste in human and material
resources. It principal proponent, also regarded as father of scientific management in United
States was Frederick Taylor, in Great Britain Robert Owen and Charles Babbage were the early
advocates of applying scientific methods to work processes in the industrial factories. This id
mentioned in Caoili material. You can say that these two persons were the forerunners of
scientific management.

In the United States, Taylor led the Scientific Management Movement. Let me give you a bit of
background here.

Taylor was an industrial engineer with a long experience in supervising work at the shop level in
the United States during the turn of the industrial revolution or industrialization era. He
observed that workers were not being managed by their employees. Left to their own devices
the workers decided by themselves the means by which they accomplish their work. They
relied on rule\-of-thumb methods that they developed over years of experience is their job
(Nigro, 1989).

Taylor may have been appalled at the amount of waste that accompanied such kind of work
style. He argued that there are scientific ways of doing one’s work and that these methods
could be identified and applied . His studies of the actual work situations at the individual
shop and individual worker, e.g. observing and timing how as exceptional employee performed
a particular tasks, in search of “the one best way” to perform a tasks supported his advocacy.
He contended that by subscribing to the best way of carrying out a task, efficiency could be
achieved and waste of resources could be minimized
Taylor’s investigation also signed the beginning of time and motion studies. The Scientific
approach to work management or “one best way” would be the enduring contribution of
scientific management to organization theory. Scientific management emphasized, too, the
importance of a managerial cadre that would supervise the work in he factory, clear division of
duties between management and labor (e.g. management will determine and assign workload;
labor is expected tom provide the skills and energy to carry it out), selecting through scientific
means the best person for a job, training the staff, and monetary incentives to reward good
performance or increased productivity (Nigro, 1989, Kernaghan and Siegel 1991)

In the Dubsky reading, these contributions are mentioned as time and motion study, systems of
incentives, reorganization of supervision, division of tasks, separating planning from doing, and
functional foremanship.

Taylor’s idea are nearly a century old now. Do you see any of his ideas being used in any
agencies in the government. Keep your answers at the back of your mind, You’ll be needing
them when you do our Activity.

According to Nigro, the influence of scientific management on public administration was its
contribution to the wide acceptance of efficiency as a primary objective of administration. The
values and methods it espoused were also compatible with the government reforms being
sought during that time such as the establishment of merit system, centralization of
administrative/executive authority and accountability, and removal of partisan politics from
administration (Nigro 1989)

Exercises No. 1:
A. Quickly describe the “one best way” principle
Answer:
The “One best way” Principle was investigated by Frederick Taylor. It is a
scientific approach to work management for laborers, workers and the employee
of which observation of each task is manifested. Duties and responsibilities of
the workers/laborers are supervised by the supervisors/ employee that will asses
their performance so that efficiency will be achieved. From the assessment,
incomes for the laborers are measured.
 Administrative Management

Administrative Management also called principles of management, was concerned with

developing a set of universal principles that can be applied to any type and all levels of the
organization. Unlike scientific management which focused on the lower level of organization,
administrative management emphasized the functions of management and the structuring of
organization. Foremost among its exponent was Henry Fayol, a French mining engineer and
industrial executive, who believed that administration was a skill that could be learned and
mastered once its underlying principles were understood and developed into a general theory
of administration. Administration, according to Fayol, was a process that must be carried out at
all levels of the organization or administrative system. The tasks of administration was
planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling (Nigro 1989 Stoner 1978).
These task are explained by Dubsky.

Based on his executive experience, Fayol identified 14 principles of administration that he most
frequently applied. According to him, these were neither rigid nor to be applied
unconditionally, for nothing in administration is so absolute and inflexible (Stoner 1987). How
and when to use them depends on the executive’s assessment of the situation. This line of
reasoning would however, become its own Achilles tendon when its claim to being a “science”
would later be attacked. We’ll get back to this when we tackle the criticisms against it.
The 14 principles of administration: division of work, authority, discipline, unity of command,
unity of direction, subordination of individual interest to general interest, remuneration of
employee, centralization, scalar chair or hierarchy, order, equity, stability of tenure of
personnel initiative, and esprit de corps.

In your opinion, which 14 principles are applied in public sector organizations?

If you ask me, all of them! And I suppose that most of them are also practiced in the private
sector. Let me add though that in practice some of these principles may not strictly be
observed. For example, we hear stories of employees complaining about having a de facto boss
e.g. secretary or assistant to the superior authority acts like they’re the boss simply because of
their close association with the latter. It’s also possible that some concepts are modified to
adopt to circumstances and needs. In the Philippines, for instance, centralization of authority
(in national government) was significant altered with the passage of the Local Government
Code. New powers and functions that formerly were exercised by the national government
were transferred or devolved to local government. In Reinventing Government written by
Osborne and Gaebler (we will tackle this in the coming days), the author proposed
decentralization authority to the field and front line workers to make governments more
responsive to people’s needs.

I’d like to add further that in the public sector, subordination of personal interest to public
interest is very relevant. What do you think about this?

While Fayol worked on his ideas in France, concurrent efforts were also being carried out in the
United States along the same thinking. Gulick and Urlick, edited the Papers on the Science of
Administration which Nigro said could perhaps be the most influential work on the principles of
administration.

According to Nigro, Gulick built upon Fayol’s five elements of administration’s tasks the famous
acronym POSDCORB which stands for seven administrative functions: Planning, Organizing,
Staffing, Directing, Coordinating, Reporting, and Budgeting. Dubsky mentioned six classical
concepts that have influenced contemporary management thought and practice. Can you
identify them?
What was the impact of the principles school on public administration? It is said that the
principles school is a response to the Wilsonian call for a “science of administration”. It offered
practical prescriptions to organization and management. It was most influential in American
public administration during the period 1930 -1950, when the administrative reform movement
was strong. The administrative management principles found their way in the structural
reforms being instituted in many agencies during the period. Its influence of public
administration practice and academic curricula is apparent in the way the administrative role,
following the POSDCORB functions, is defined (Nigro 1989)
Administrative management was criticized heavily for its lack of scientific validity and methods.
Herbert A. Simon in his Proverbs of Administration, argued the for every principle proposed,
there was a counter principle that contradicted its validity, many of the principles were
mutually contradictory. For instance, the principle of narrow span of control contravened the
principle of principle of keeping the number of supervisory level at a minimum. The principles
were also attacked for its lack of systematic methods. According to this criticism, the principles
were derived from observation, personal experience, and commonsense conclusions without a
valid theoretical framework to explain them (Nigro 1989)
Exercises No. 2: Differentiate administrative management from scientific management
Answer:
Scientific management differs hugely from Administrative Management. A stated above,
Scientific Management mainly focuses on the observation of work of the employee or
supervisor to the laborers or manufacturers so that the efficiency of work will be measured and
their incentives and wages will be stated from their work. To measure everything and everyone
in terms of resources, find the most efficient way to apply those resources to manufacture of
whatever it is that needs manufacturing, match workers to the new work, train the workers,
create financial incentives to motivate the workers to work in the new system, reallocate your
workforce as a result of being able to do much more work with fewer workers, and continue to
monitor the work for improvement opportunities. While Administrative management mainly
focuses on the 14 principles of administration that should be applied in the work area. These
principles are applied to any level inside the organization. May it be the head of the
Organization or mainly just a member. These principles must be applied. To conclude, scientific
management has mathematical basis and on the other hand, administrative management is
based on the principles.

References:
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management.