Management History

Management has been practiced a long time. Organized endeavors directed by people responsible for planning, organizing, leading, and controlling activities have existed for thousands of years. Lets look at some of the most interesting examples. The Egyptian pyramids and the Great Wall of China are proof that projects of tremendous scope, employing tens of thousands of people, were completed in ancient times. It took more than 100,000 workers some 20 years to construct a single pyramid. Who told each worker what to do? Who ensured that there would be enough stones at the site to keep workers busy? The answer is managers. Someone had to plan what was to be done, organize people and materials to do it, make sure those workers got the work done, and impose some controls to ensure that everything was done as planned. The remainder of Table 2.1 shows how other management ideas and practices throughout history are clearly related to the management functions in the textbook. Besides the achievements of the Sumerians and Egyptians, we might note King Hammurabi, who established controls by using witnesses and written documents; King Nebuchadnezzar, who pioneered techniques for producing goods and using wages to motivate workers; Sun Tzu, author of The Art of War, who emphasized the importance of strategy and identifying and attacking an opponents weaknesses;

Time Group or Individual Managerial Function Contributions to

Management Planning Organizing Leading Control 5000 BC Sumerians Yes Record keeping.

4000 BC to 2000 BC

Egyptians Yes Yes Yes

Recognized the need for planning, organizing, and controlling when building the pyramids. Submitted requests in writing. Made decisions after consulting staff for advice.

1800 BC Hammurabi Yes

Established controls by using witnesses (to vouch for what was said or done) and writing to document transactions.

600 BC Nebuchadnezzar Yes Yes Wage incentives and production control.

500 BC Sun Tzu Yes Yes Strategy; identifying and attacking opponents weaknesses.

400 BC Xenophon Yes Yes Yes Yes Recognized management as a separate art.

400 BC Cyrus Yes Yes Yes Human relations and motion study. 175 BC Cato The Elder Yes Job descriptions. 284 Diocletian Yes Delegation of authority. 900 Alfarabi Yes Listed leadership traits. 1100 Ghazali Yes Listed managerial traits.

1418 Barbarigo Yes Different organizational forms/structures.

1436 Venetians Yes Numbering, standardization, and interchangeability of parts.

1500 Sir Thomas More Yes Critical of poor management and leadership.

1525 Machiavelli Yes Yes Cohesiveness, power, and

The Pyramids of Egypt

[Source: culturefocus.com]

ANURAG PAL, PIT 1

leadership in organizations.

[Source: C. S. George, Jr., The History of Management Thought (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972)]

TimeLine [Source: Management Stephen P Robbins & Mary Coulter, 11e, Prentice Hall, pg. 29]

Well look at four major approaches to management theory: classical, quantitative, behavioral, and contemporary. Keep in mind that each approach is concerned with trying to explain management from the perspective of what was important at that time in history and the backgrounds and interests of the researchers. Each of the four approaches contributes to our overall understanding of management, but each is also a limited view of what it is and how to best practice it.

Classical Approach: If you had to pinpoint when modern management theory was born, 1911 might be a good choice. That was when Frederick Winslow Taylors Principles of Scientific Management was published. Its contents were widely embraced by managers around the world. Taylors book described the theory of scientific management: the use of scientific methods to define the one best way for a job to be done. Taylor worked at the Midvale and Bethlehem Steel Companies in Pennsylvania. As a mechanical engineer with a Quaker and Puritan background, he was continually appalled by workers inefficiencies. Employees used vastly different techniques to do the same job. They often took it easy on the job, and Taylor believed that worker output was only about one-third of what was possible. Virtually no work standards existed and workers were placed in jobs with little or no concern for matching their abilities and aptitudes with the tasks they were required to do. Taylor set out to remedy that by applying the scientific method to shop-floor jobs. He spent more than two decades passionately pursuing the one best way for such jobs to be done. Taylors experiences at Midvale led him to define clear guidelines for improving production efficiency. He argued that these four principles of management would result in prosperity for both workers and managers. 1 Develop a science for each element of an individuals work to replace the old rule-of thumb method. 2 Scientifically select and then train, teach, and develop the worker. 3 Heartily cooperate with the workers so as to ensure that all work is done in accordance with the principles of

the science that has been developed. 4 Divide work and responsibility almost equally between management and workers.

Management does all work for which it is better suited than the workers. Probably the best known example of Taylors scientific management efforts was the pig iron experiment. Workers loaded pigs of iron (each weighing 92 lbs.) onto rail cars. Their daily average output was 12.5 tons.

Historical Background

Classical Approaches

Quantitative Approach

Behavioral Approach

Contemporary Approach

Early Examples of Management

Adam Smith

Industrial Revolution

Scientific Management

General Administrative

Early Advocates

Hawthorne Studies

Organizational Behavior

Systems Approach

Contingency Approach

Frederick Taylor is known

today as the father of scientific management. One of his many contributions to modern management is the common practice of giving

employees rest breaks throughout the day.

[Source: mypicpals.com

ANURAG PAL, PIT 2

However, Taylor believed that by scientifically analyzing the job to determine the one best way to load pig iron, output could be increased to 47 or 48 tons per day. After scientifically applying different combinations of procedures, techniques, and tools, Taylor succeeded in getting that level of productivity. How? By putting the right person on the job, with the correct tools and equipment, having the worker follow his instructions exactly, and motivating the worker with an economic incentive of a significantly higher daily wage. Using similar approaches for other jobs, Taylor was able to define the one best way for doing each job. Overall, Taylor achieved consistent productivity improvements in the range of 200 percent or more. Based on his groundbreaking studies of manual work using scientific principles, Taylor became known as the father of scientific management. His ideas spread in the United States and to other countries and inspired others to study and develop methods of scientific management. [1] Management Stephen P Robbins & Mary Coulter, 11e, Prentice Hall, pg. 30 Though admitted to MIT, Frank Gilbreth (18681924) began his career as an apprentice bricklayer. While learning the trade, he noticed the bricklayers using three different sets of motionsone to teach others how to lay bricks, a second to work at a slow pace, and a third to work at a fast pace.26 Wondering which was best, he studied the various approaches and began eliminating unnecessary motions. For example, by designing a stand that could be raised to waist height, he eliminated the need to bend over to pick up each brick. Turning to grab a brick was faster and easier than bending down. By having lower-paid workers place all the bricks with their most attractive side up, bricklayers didnt waste time turning a brick over to find it. By mixing a more consistent mortar, bricklayers no longer had to tap each brick numerous times to put it in the right position. Together, Gilbreths improvements raised productivity from 120 to 350 bricks per hour and from 1,000 bricks to 2,700 bricks per day. As a result of his experience with bricklaying, Gilbreth and his wife Lillian developed a long-term interest in using motion study to simplify work, improve productivity, and reduce the level of effort required to safely perform a job. Time study worked by timing how long it took a first-class man to complete each part of his job. After allowing for rest periods, a standard time was established, and a workers pay would increase or decrease depending on whether the worker exceeded or fell below that standard. By contrast, Motion study, as we saw in Frank Gilbreths analysis of bricklaying, broke each task or job into separate motions and then eliminated those that were unnecessary or repetitive. Henry Gantt (18611919) was first a protg and then an associate of Frederick Taylor. Gantt is best known for the Gantt chart, but he also made significant contributions to management with respect to pay-for-performance plans and the training and development of workers. As shown in below diagram, a Gantt chart, which shows time in various units on the x-axis and tasks on the y-axis, visually indicates what tasks must be completed at which times in order to complete a project.

Frank & Lillian Gilbreth

[Source: gilbrethnetwork.tripod.com]

Henry Gantt

[Source: Wikipedia]

ANURAG PAL, PIT 3

[Source: Management Chuck Williams, 5e, South-Western Cengage Learning] For example, above diagram shows that to start construction on a new com