EVOLUTION OF MANAGEMENT
Creative, dynamic management is a driving force behind the success of any business. In today‘s
marketplace, change is rapid and managers are expected to deal with a broad set of issues and needs.
How they address those issues is very different today than it was a hundred years ago. Times have
changed, labor has changed, and, most importantly, management philosophies have changed. The
management philosophies of yesterday are valuable tools for managers to use today. The development
of management thought has been evolutionary in nature under the following four parts:-
1. Pre- Scientific Management Era [Before 1880]
2. Classical Management Era [1880-1930]
3. Neo-Classical Management Era[1930-1960]
4. Modern Management Era [1950 onwards]
During pre-scientific management era, valuable contributions were made by Churches, military
organizations and writers like Charles Babbage and Robert oven. A school of thought emerged in this era
is known as pre-scientific management school.
The earliest management philosophy, the classical perspective, emerged in the 19 th and rarly 20th
century in response to a problem businesses grapple with today: how to make businesses efficient
operating machines. In the factory system, managers had the challenge of coordinating a huge, unskilled
labor force, complex production systems, and an expansive manufacturing operation. The classical
theorists like F.W.Taylor and Henri Fayol concentrated on organizational structure for the
accomplishment of organizational goal.
Frederick Winslow Taylor‘s solution was the Scientific Management approach which proposed that
productivity could be improved only by a series of precise procedures developed from a scientific
observation of a situation. This approach standardized labor and training, employee hiring, and tied
compensation to increased productivity. While highly successful, this approach did not take into
consideration the diversity of abilities and needs within the Workforce.
The neo classical writers like Elton Mayo and Chester I. Barnard tried to improve upon the theories
of classical writers. They suggested improvements for good human relations in the organization. A
crucial shift in management philosophy came in the 1920s with a new emphasis on human behaviors,
needs and attitudes in the workplace over the economy and efficiency of production. This new way of
thinking led the way for the human resource perspective, which saw workers as a resource to be fully
utilized, as opposed to tools from which to extract utility. It suggested that beyond the need for worker
inclusion and supportive leadership, organizations should design jobs to meet the higher needs of their
employees and utilize their full potential. This perspective paved the way for the role that human
relations departments play in organizations today.
Many of today‘s management perspectives grew out of adaptations of the humanistic perspective.
One such perspective is the systems theory, which views an organization as a series of interconnected
systems that affect and are effected by each other
Creative, dynamic management is a driving force behind the success of any business. In today‘s
marketplace, change is rapid and managers are expected to deal with a broad set of issues and needs.
How they address those issues is very different today than it was a hundred years ago. Times have
changed, labor has changed, and, most importantly, management philosophies have changed. The
management philosophies of yesterday are valuable tools for managers to use today. The development
of management thought has been evolutionary in nature under the following four parts:-
1. Pre- Scientific Management Era [Before 1880]
2. Classical Management Era [1880-1930]
3. Neo-Classical Management Era[1930-1960]
4. Modern Management Era [1950 onwards]
During pre-scientific management era, valuable contributions were made by Churches, military
organizations and writers like Charles Babbage and Robert oven. A school of thought emerged in this era
is known as pre-scientific management school.
The earliest management philosophy, the classical perspective, emerged in the 19 th and rarly 20th
century in response to a problem businesses grapple with today: how to make businesses efficient
operating machines. In the factory system, managers had the challenge of coordinating a huge, unskilled
labor force, complex production systems, and an expansive manufacturing operation. The classical
theorists like F.W.Taylor and Henri Fayol concentrated on organizational structure for the
accomplishment of organizational goal.
Frederick Winslow Taylor‘s solution was the Scientific Management approach which proposed that
productivity could be improved only by a series of precise procedures developed from a scientific
observation of a situation. This approach standardized labor and training, employee hiring, and tied
compensation to increased productivity. While highly successful, this approach did not take into
consideration the diversity of abilities and needs within the Workforce.
The neo classical writers like Elton Mayo and Chester I. Barnard tried to improve upon the theories
of classical writers. They suggested improvements for good human relations in the organization. A
crucial shift in management philosophy came in the 1920s with a new emphasis on human behaviors,
needs and attitudes in the workplace over the economy and efficiency of production. This new way of
thinking led the way for the human resource perspective, which saw workers as a resource to be fully
utilized, as opposed to tools from which to extract utility. It suggested that beyond the need for worker
inclusion and supportive leadership, organizations should design jobs to meet the higher needs of their
employees and utilize their full potential. This perspective paved the way for the role that human
relations departments play in organizations today.
Many of today‘s management perspectives grew out of adaptations of the humanistic perspective.
One such perspective is the systems theory, which views an organization as a series of interconnected
systems that affect and are effected by each other
