Classical Management Theorists Argumentative Essay Example

as it establishes future objectives and the methods required to achieve them. Organizing, as stated by Fayol, encompasses providing a business with all necessary resources such as raw materials, tools, capital, and personnel. It is the responsibility of management to ensure that the human and material organization aligns with the goals, resources, and demands of the company. In addition to structuring the organization, organizing also involves acquiring raw materials and recruiting employees.

Without organizing there would be no need for a manager. Commanding, that is, adhering to the principle of the chain of command. Co-ordination to Fayol was more of a balancing act of matching expenses with revenues, maintaining equipment to live up to production goals and ensuring that sales and production were consonant (Wren, 1994). It is basically the synchronization of activities. Control involves verifying whether everything occurs in conformity with the plan and principles that have already been established (Wren, 1994).

The text emphasizes the importance of conformity to policies and regulations. It outlines the fourteen principles of management introduced by Taylor, including authority, responsibility, division of work, discipline, unity of command, unity of direction, subordination of individual interest, remuneration, centralization, scalar chain, order, equity, stability of tenure or personnel, and initiative. Taylor's principles of scientific management aimed to replace the rule of thumb method with a scientific approach to work. This involved selecting and training workers based on their suitability for a specific job and promoting cooperation to ensure adherence to scientific principles. The text also highlights the shared responsibility between management and workers in dividing work and responsibilities.The management now takes on more tasks and responsibility compared to the past when

these were mainly assigned to the workers (Hodgetts, 1995). Taylor's scientific management aimed to increase productivity, while Fayol's administrative management theory aimed to improve the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the organization. Scientific management focused on individual employee tasks, while general administrative management theory focused on the overall management of the organization. According to Pindur & Rogers (1995), general management theory was a broader theory that encompassed administrative management functions and is seen as the precursor to modern organization theory.

Henri Fayol viewed management as more than just creating systems to improve productivity. He believed it involved integrating various functions within an organization, including production, sales, finance, and more (Wren, 1994). Fayol emphasized that a manager's administrative skills were crucial for an organization's success, rather than technical skills. Similarly, Taylor's principle of developing a science for each aspect of work aligns with Fayol's function of Planning, as both involve following pre-established plans.

Taylor’s second principle, which involves scientifically training the worker and matching them with the job they are most suited for, shares similarities with Fayol’s principle of division of labor. Both principles aim to minimize costs and enhance productivity by assigning each worker tasks they are skilled at. Additionally, Taylor and Fayol both advocate for the idea that workers should be placed in positions that align with their abilities. Moreover, Taylor’s third principle is reinforced by Fayol's principle of stability of tenure and equity. Fayol himself recognized that his work and Taylor's work complemented each other as they both sought to enhance management through different approaches (Wren, 1994).

The difference in perspectives on management between Taylor and Fayol is attributed to their

different life experiences. Despite their differences, Taylor and Fayol's views on management complement each other. Their theories work together to achieve optimal efficiency in an organization. Taylor began as a worker, progressed through promotions, and ultimately became a manager. Consequently, his approach focused on the technical aspects of management and ways to enhance productivity through workers. He was interested in methods for improving efficiency.

Fayol and Taylor both had similar objectives in management. Fayol, who started as an engineer and became a manager, focused on integrating different aspects of an organization to achieve optimal outcomes. On the other hand, Taylor also shared the same goal but approached it differently. Implementing both Fayol's and Taylor's principles of management in an organization would lead to long-term efficiency, productivity, and profitability.

Fayol and Taylor shared similar views on management. However, their key difference lies in their perspectives. Taylor focused on the perspective of workers, analyzing their actions and their impact on productivity. He aimed to enhance efficiency by developing new methods and implementing his findings throughout the organization's hierarchy. On the other hand, Fayol examined management from a manager's point of view, taking a top-down approach in understanding the process.

Fayol combined various perspectives on organisation and management, while Taylor focused on work methods, measurement, and simplification to achieve efficiency. However, both methods are necessary for optimal results (Hodgetts, 1995; Pindur & Rogers, 1995; Wren, 1994).