1.

Historical Development of Management

Management is essentially the concept of mobilizing people towards achieving planned goals and
has been a part of human civilization since its inception. Early human societies, such as hunter-
gatherers, relied on effective coordination and management skills to ensure survival. The
management of skills and resources was critical in ancient civilizations, including the Chinese with
their construction of the Great Wall, the Egyptians with the pyramids, and the Romans with their
sophisticated infrastructure.

In the philosophical realm, Mencius (372-298 BC) advocated for conceptual models related to
production management and the division of labor. Similarly, ancient Greeks and Plato (427-347 BC)
recognized the benefits of specialized tasks and uniform work methods. Historical texts like Sun Tzu’s
“The Art of War” and Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince” also contributed to early management
principles, emphasizing strategic awareness and control methods.

The field of management has undergone significant evolution over the last two centuries. Initially,
the Industrial Revolution marked a shift as workers transitioned to factory settings, leading to mass
production but also staff dissatisfaction. This period highlighted the need for a balance between
production demands and employee needs. In recent times, the global economy has introduced new
challenges, necessitating an understanding of cultural differences and practices.

Evolution of Management Theories

Early Thinkers and Philosophers

Adam Smith (1723-1790) is often considered a pioneer in labor management with his advocacy for
specialization and division of labor in his work “The Wealth of Nations” (1776). Smith proposed that
individuals strive for wealth, productivity increases with specialization, and a free market fosters
wealth accumulation. David Ricardo (1772-1823) examined the division of industrial produce in his
work, while Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) focused on the relationship between laws and general
happiness.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) critiqued capitalism and anticipated a shift to socialism. Charles Babbage
(1791-1871) further examined labor division and production economics, while Henry Towne (1844-
1924) introduced “shop management” concepts. Both Babbage and Towne laid groundwork for
scientific management theories.

Traditional Management Theories

The traditional management theories emerged during the Industrial Revolution, focusing on
increasing productivity through systematic and mechanized processes. These theories include:

1. Bureaucratic Management : Max Weber (1864-1920) emphasized a structured approach with a

clear hierarchy, division of labor, and detailed rules. This approach is suitable for handling large
quantities of standardized information and coordinating numerous employees.

2. Administrative Management: Henri Fayol (1841-1925) outlined fundamental managerial functions

such as planning, organizing, and leading. His 14 management principles, including division of labor
and unity of command, are still widely applied today.
3. Scientific Management: Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856-1915) advocated for improving work
methods through scientific analysis. His principles included task specialization, scientific selection,
and incentive schemes. Other contributors like Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, Henry Gantt, and Charles
Bedaux expanded on these principles, introducing concepts like motion study and the Gantt Chart.

Behavioral Management Theories

In response to the limitations of scientific management, the 1920s and 1930s saw the rise of
behavioral theories, which emphasize the human aspects of work. Key contributors include:

1. Elton Mayo: His Hawthorne Studies highlighted the importance of social groups and psychological
needs over physical conditions. Mayo advocated for considering workers' social needs and the
informal organization’s role in achieving productivity.

2. Mary Parker Follett :Follett emphasized dynamic management and the involvement of workers in
problem-solving. She highlighted the importance of communication and coordination.

3. Chester Barnard: In “Functions of the Executive,” Barnard stressed employee cooperation and the
need for aligning organizational structure with external environments.

4. Abraham Maslow: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs proposed that individuals are motivated by a
sequence of needs, from physiological to self-actualization. Clayton Alderfer’s ERG theory expanded
on this by incorporating regression between need levels.

5. Victor Vroom: Vroom’s Expectancy Theory focused on the process of choice-making, where
motivation is driven by the expectation that effort leads to performance and valued rewards.

6. Douglas McGregor :McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y described two contrasting assumptions
about employee motivation and management styles.

Together, these theories represent the evolution of management thought, from early principles of
efficiency and productivity to a deeper understanding of human motivation and organizational
dynamics.

Introduction

Wilson and Thomson (2006) argued that 'History matters' and therefore, it is essential to develop
better understanding about the present-day emerging trends and stages in the management since
19th century so that holistic view could be attained. To larger extent, there is an agreement that the
management practices and approaches have altered with the passage of time (Bartol and Martin,
1998; Naranjo-Gil, Sánchez-Expósito and Gómez-Ruiz, 2016; Hodge, 2002). However, different school
of thoughts have accredited it to several factors namely; globalization (Stros, Bukovinski and Coner,
2014), intense competition/survival of the fittest (Ferreira and Kittsteiner, 2011), connectedness
(Pham et al,2018), multiplicity (Cooper et al, 2017), socially constructed realities (Morgan, 1986) and
so on. Having said that, the roots of management lies in the earlier management theories and
therefore remains vital for tackling the contemporary
management challenges.
In simple terms, Drucker (1963) defined management as the product of effectiveness and efficiency
where “doing things right” is regarded as ‘efficiency’ while “doing the right things” is considered as
‘effectiveness’ (cited from Robbins and Coulter, 2012). The theme of Drucker's definition is based on
“knowledge work” (McGrath, 2014). On the other hand, Fayol defined it as, “to manage is to forecast
and to plan, to organise, to command, to co-ordinate and to control” (cited from Prasad and Gulshan,
2011).

Classical theory, also known as traditional management theory, encompasses several schools of
thought. The first of these, scientific management, is prominently associated with Frederick W.
Taylor, often regarded as the "father of scientific management." Taylor's approach, known as
Taylorism, focused on finding the 'one best way' to perform tasks through scientific analysis,
including time and motion studies to optimize productivity. This perspective aligns with Adam
Smith's emphasis on the division of labor and specialization to enhance efficiency, though it often
treated workers more like machines, neglecting their well-being (Ghuman and Aswathapa, 2010;
Khurana, 2009; Robbins and Coulter, 2012). Taylor's studies, including his “science of shovelling,”
aimed to determine the optimal weight for workers to lift, introducing efficient shovels and using
increased pay as motivation (Ghuman and Aswathapa, 2010). While money was a major motivator
under scientific management, it is not universally effective, as noted by Furnham (2012) and
Katzenbach and Khan (2010), who argued that long-term, meaningful work often surpasses financial
incentives for true motivation.

Following scientific management, the classical theory also includes administrative management and
bureaucratic organizations. Prominent figures such as Henri Fayol, Chester Barnard, and Colnel
Urwick contributed to this school of thought. Fayol, in particular, is recognized as the father of
modern management for his development of 14 principles of management and his focus on the
overall operational approach within an organization. His principles aimed at improving managerial
activities through structured processes, emphasizing rationality, consistency, and effective
operational layers (Sridhar, 2017; Robbins and Coulter, 2012). Max Weber further contributed by
proposing a bureaucratic model, emphasizing clear hierarchies, set rules, and organizational
efficiency. This approach aimed to minimize overlapping duties and enhance productivity, but it also
led to potential issues such as excessive red tape and reduced employee creativity (Sridhar, 2017;
Brown, 2014). Despite criticisms and the evolution of modern management practices, classical
theory remains a foundational aspect of management thought and practice (Sridhar, 2017).

Neo -Classic management theory

The contributions of management theories to contemporary practices are profound and

multifaceted. Classical theories, including scientific management and administrative management,
laid the groundwork by emphasizing efficiency, structured processes, and the optimization of tasks.
Frederick W. Taylor's scientific management introduced the idea of "one best way" to perform tasks
through meticulous time and motion studies, which, although criticized for treating workers like
machines, set the stage for later theories (Ghuman and Aswathapa, 2010; Khurana, 2009). Similarly,
Henri Fayol's administrative management and Max Weber's bureaucratic theory focused on
organizational structure and management principles, contributing to systematic approaches in
management that are still relevant in ensuring efficiency and clarity in roles (Sridhar, 2017; Robbins
and Coulter, 2012).

In response to the limitations of classical theories, neo-classical theories emerged, emphasizing a

human-oriented approach. The human relations school, spearheaded by Elton Mayo and his
colleagues, demonstrated that employee productivity could be significantly influenced by social
factors and attention from supervisors, not just monetary rewards (Cherry, 2018; Robbins and
Coulter, 2012). The Hawthorne experiments revealed that employees' performance improves with
increased attention and a supportive work environment, challenging the classical view that workers
are primarily motivated by economic incentives (Sridhar, 2017).

Building on this, the behavioral school introduced key theories such as Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs,
which proposed that human motivation is driven by a hierarchy of needs from basic physiological to
self-actualization (McLeod, 2018; Robbins and Coulter, 2012). Douglas McGregor's Theory X and
Theory Y further differentiated between autocratic and participative management styles, highlighting
how employee motivation and productivity are influenced by managerial attitudes (Robinson, 2010).
Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory identified the distinction between hygiene factors and motivators,
influencing modern approaches to job design and employee satisfaction (Herzberg, 1966; Robbins
and Coulter, 2012).

Mary Parker Follett's contributions emphasized the importance of integrating employees into the
management process and promoting a cooperative work environment, advocating for lateral
coordination and shared power within organizations (Caramela, 2018). This approach has been
validated in modern management practices where organizations prioritize employee engagement,
teamwork, and empowerment.

Overall, while classical theories laid the foundation for management practices, neo-classical and
behavioral theories have expanded the understanding of human motivation and organizational
dynamics, contributing to more holistic and people-centered management approaches that remain
relevant in today's complex work environments.

Mordern management theory

Examination of Theories in Contemporary Management

Modern management theories reflect an evolution from classical and neo-classical approaches to a
more complex understanding of organizational dynamics. The primary features shaping modern
management include the organization's complexity, connectedness, and context (Haque, Aydin &
Uysal, 2017; Sridhar, 2017). The modern perspective also acknowledges the diverse needs and
aspirations of individuals within organizations (Robbins and Coulter, 2012), recognizing that a one-
size-fits-all management template is impractical in today’s multifaceted business environment
(Sridhar, 2017).

1. System Theory

System Theory, a cornerstone of modern management, offers a holistic view of organizations,

emphasizing that they function as interconnected wholes (Ng, Maull & Yip, 2009). This theory
highlights the importance of understanding organizations as systems with interdependent parts, both
within and outside the organization, influencing management practices (Mele et al., 2010). Unlike
classical theories that focused narrowly on efficiency and structure, System Theory advocates for a
balanced approach, considering multiple aspects of organizational operations and their interactions
with external factors (Sridhar, 2017). It reflects contemporary management’s need for adaptability
and integrated problem-solving in a dynamic environment.

2. Contingency Theory
Contingency Theory posits that effective management depends on aligning managerial practices with
specific situational factors such as culture, technology, and external environment (Fiedler, 1970;
Islam & Hu, 2012). This theory underscores the necessity of adapting strategies to fit varying contexts
rather than applying a uniform approach across all situations (Sridhar, 2017). It builds on earlier
management theories by integrating their principles to address the complexity and variability in
modern organizational environments. Contingency Theory emphasizes flexibility in leadership and
organizational design, reflecting contemporary practices in responding to changing conditions and
fostering employee motivation (Sridhar, 2017).

3. Modern Behavioral School / Organizational Humanism

The Modern Behavioral School, extending from the neo-classical focus on human relations, centers
on intrinsic motivation and the fulfillment of individual needs (Doucet, 2017). Prominent figures like
Maslow and McGregor emphasized self-actualization and the importance of creating work
environments that support employee growth and autonomy (Sridhar, 2017). This approach aligns
with current trends that prioritize employee engagement and satisfaction, moving away from rigid
bureaucratic structures towards more flexible, empowering organizational cultures.

4. Management Science

Management Science applies quantitative methods to address complex organizational problems,

utilizing tools such as operations research and mathematical modeling to inform decision-making
(Luthans & Stewart, 1977). This approach reflects modern management’s reliance on data-driven
strategies and advanced analytical tools to handle the voluminous data and intricate variables
encountered in contemporary business settings (Sridhar, 2017). However, it is limited in its
application to aspects of management that are inherently human, such as leadership and
interpersonal relations.

5. . Post-Modern Perspectives

Post-modern management theories, including Foucault’s concepts of subjectivation and discipline,

challenge traditional views by emphasizing the role of power and subjectivity in organizational
dynamics (Bazrkar et al., 2014). These theories critique the rationalization of modern organizations
and explore how power dynamics shape organizational behavior and identity (Foucault, 1994). They
reflect a shift towards understanding organizations as complex, socially constructed entities rather
than merely rational systems.

6. Pierre Bourdieu’s Contributions

Bourdieu’s theory of practice, incorporating concepts like habitus, capital, and field, provides a
framework for understanding the interplay between individual actions and structural conditions
within organizations (Greenwood & Meyer, 2008). His work bridges the gap between objectivism and
subjectivism, offering insights into how social practices and power relations influence organizational
behavior (Ozbilgin & Tatli, 2005). Bourdieu’s contributions emphasize the importance of considering
both structural and individual factors in organizational analysis.

In summary, contemporary management theories reflect an integration of traditional concepts with

new insights into organizational complexity, adaptability, and the human dimension. They underscore
the need for flexible, context-sensitive approaches in managing today’s dynamic and multifaceted
business environments.
**References:

- Smith, A. (1776). The Wealth of Nations. Methuen & Co.

- Ricardo, D. (1817). On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. John Murray.
- Bentham, J. (1789). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. T. Payne.
- Marx, K. (1867). Das Kapital: Critique of Political Economy. Verlag von Otto Meissner.
- Babbage, C. (1832). On the Economy of Machinery and Manufactures. Charles Knight.
- Towne, H. (1884). The Principles of Scientific Management. Macmillan.
- Weber, M. (1922). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. University of
California Press.
- Fayol, H. (1916). Administration Industrielle et Générale. Dunod.
- Taylor, F. W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. Harper & Brothers.
- Gilbreth, F. B., & Gilbreth, L. M. (1917). Applied Motion Study: A Collection of Papers on the
Efficient Method to Industrial Preparedness. Sturgis & Walton Company.
- Gantt, H. L. (1910). Work, Wages, and Profits. Engineering Magazine.
- Bedaux, C. (1932). The Bedaux System: Principles and Practice. The Bedaux Company.
- Mayo, E. (1933). The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization. Macmillan.
- Follett, M. P. (1924). Creative Experiencd. Longmans, Green & Co.
- Barnard, C. I. (1938). The Functions of the Executive. Harvard University Press.
- Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-396.
- Alderfer, C. P. (1969). An Empirical Test of a New Theory of Human Need. Organizational Behavior
and Human Performance, 4(2), 142-175.
- Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and Motivation. Wiley.
- McGregor, D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. McGraw-Hill.
Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland: World Publishing.

Wilson, J. F., and Thomson, A. (2006). Management in Historical Perspective: Stages and Paradigms,
Competition & Change

Drucker, P. F. (1963). Managing for Business Effectiveness. Harvard Business

Robbins, S. P., & Coulter, M. (2012). Management, 11th Edition, USA, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Cooper, D. J., Ezzamel, M., & Robson, K. (2017). The Multiplicity of Performance Management
Systems: Heterogeneity in Multinational Corporations and Management Sense-Making, University of
Alberta School of Business

Ghuman, K., & Aswathapa, K. (2010). Management: Concepts, Practice & Cases, India, New Delh:
Tata McGraw Hill Education Private Limited.