Classical Schools of Management
One of the first schools of management thought, the classical management
theory, developed during the Industrial Revolution when new problems related to
the factory system began to appear. Managers were unsure of how to train
employees (many of them non‐English speaking immigrants) or deal with increased
labor dissatisfaction, so they began to test solutions. As a result, the classical
management theory developed from efforts to find the “one best way” to perform
and manage tasks. This school of thought is made up of two branches: classical
scientific and classical administrative, described in the following sections.
The classical scientific branch arose because of the need to increase productivity and
efficiency. The emphasis was on trying to find the best way to get the most work done by
examining how the work process was actually accomplished and by scrutinizing the
skills of the workforce.
The classical scientific school owes its roots to several major contributors, including
Frederick Taylor, Henry Gantt, and Frank and Lillian Gilbreth.
Frederick Taylor is often called the “father of scientific management.” Taylor believed
that organizations should study tasks and develop precise procedures. As an example,
in 1898, Taylor calculated how much iron from rail cars Bethlehem Steel plant workers
could be unloading if they were using the correct movements, tools, and steps. The
result was an amazing 47.5 tons per day instead of the mere 12.5 tons each worker had
been averaging. In addition, by redesigning the shovels the workers used, Taylor was
able to increase the length of work time and therefore decrease the number of people
shoveling from 500 to 140. Lastly, he developed an incentive system that paid workers
more money for meeting the new standard. Productivity at Bethlehem Steel shot up
overnight. As a result, many theorists followed Taylor's philosophy when developing
their own principles of management.
Henry Gantt, an associate of Taylor's, developed the Gantt chart, a bar graph that
measures planned and completed work along each stage of production. Based on time
instead of quantity, volume, or weight, this visual display chart has been a widely used
planning and control tool since its development in 1910.
Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, a husband‐and‐wife team, studied job motions. In Frank's
early career as an apprentice bricklayer, he was interested in standardization and
method study. He watched bricklayers and saw that some workers were slow and
inefficient, while others were very productive. He discovered that each bricklayer used a
different set of motions to lay bricks. From his observations, Frank isolated the basic
movements necessary to do the job and eliminated unnecessary motions. Workers
using these movements raised their output from 1,000 to 2,700 bricks per day. This was
the first motion study designed to isolate the best possible method of performing a
given job. Later, Frank and his wife Lillian studied job motions using a motion‐picture
camera and a split‐second clock. When her husband died at the age of 56, Lillian
continued their work.
Thanks to these contributors and others, the basic ideas regarding scientific
management developed. They include the following:
Developing new standard methods for doing each job
Selecting, training, and developing workers instead of allowing them to choose
their own tasks and train themselves
Developing a spirit of cooperation between workers and management to ensure
that work is carried out in accordance with devised procedures
Dividing work between workers and management in almost equal shares, with
each group taking over the work for which it is best fitted
Whereas scientific management focused on the productivity of individuals, the classical
administrative approach concentrates on the total organization. The emphasis is on the
development of managerial principles rather than work methods.
Contributors to this school of thought include Max Weber, Henri Fayol, Mary Parker
Follett, and Chester I. Barnard. These theorists studied the flow of information within an
organization and emphasized the importance of understanding how an organization
operated.
In the late 1800s, Max Weber disliked that many European organizations were
managed on a “personal” family‐like basis and that employees were loyal to individual
supervisors rather than to the organization. He believed that organizations should be
managed impersonally and that a formal organizational structure, where specific rules
were followed, was important. In other words, he didn't think that authority should be
based on a person's personality. He thought authority should be something that was part
of a person's job and passed from individual to individual as one person left and another
took over. This nonpersonal, objective form of organization was called a bureaucracy.
Weber believed that all bureaucracies have the following characteristics:
A well‐defined hierarchy. All positions within a bureaucracy are structured in a
way that permits the higher positions to supervise and control the lower positions.
This clear chain of command facilitates control and order throughout the
organization.
Division of labor and specialization. All responsibilities in an organization are
specialized so that each employee has the necessary expertise to do a particular
task.
Rules and regulations. Standard operating procedures govern all organizational
activities to provide certainty and facilitate coordination.
Impersonal relationships between managers and employees. Managers
should maintain an impersonal relationship with employees so that favoritism and
personal prejudice do not influence decisions.
Competence. Competence, not “who you know,” should be the basis for all
decisions made in hiring, job assignments, and promotions in order to foster
ability and merit as the primary characteristics of a bureaucratic organization.
Records. A bureaucracy needs to maintain complete files regarding all its
activities.
Henri Fayol, a French mining engineer, developed 14 principles of management based
on his management experiences. These principles provide modern‐day managers with
general guidelines on how a supervisor should organize her department and manage
her staff. Although later research has created controversy over many of the following
principles, they are still widely used in management theories.
Division of work: Division of work and specialization produces more and better
work with the same effort.
Authority and responsibility: Authority is the right to give orders and the power
to exact obedience. A manager has official authority because of her position, as
well as personal authority based on individual personality, intelligence, and
experience. Authority creates responsibility.
Discipline: Obedience and respect within an organization are absolutely
essential. Good discipline requires managers to apply sanctions whenever
violations become apparent.
Unity of command: An employee should receive orders from only one superior.
Unity of direction: Organizational activities must have one central authority and
one plan of action.
Subordination of individual interest to general interest: The interests of one
employee or group of employees are subordinate to the interests and goals of the
organization.
Remuneration of personnel: Salaries — the price of services rendered by
employees — should be fair and provide satisfaction both to the employee and
employer.
Centralization: The objective of centralization is the best utilization of personnel.
The degree of centralization varies according to the dynamics of each
organization.
Scalar chain: A chain of authority exists from the highest organizational authority
to the lowest ranks.
Order: Organizational order for materials and personnel is essential. The right
materials and the right employees are necessary for each organizational function
and activity.
Equity: In organizations, equity is a combination of kindliness and justice. Both
equity and equality of treatment should be considered when dealing with
employees.
Stability of tenure of personnel: To attain the maximum productivity of
personnel, a stable work force is needed.
Initiative: Thinking out a plan and ensuring its success is an extremely strong
motivator. Zeal, energy, and initiative are desired at all levels of the organizational
ladder.
Esprit de corps: Teamwork is fundamentally important to an organization. Work
teams and extensive face‐to‐face verbal communication encourages teamwork.
Mary Parker Follett stressed the importance of an organization establishing common
goals for its employees. However, she also began to think somewhat differently than the
other theorists of her day, discarding command‐style hierarchical organizations where
employees were treated like robots. She began to talk about such things as ethics,
power, and leadership. She encouraged managers to allow employees to participate in
decision making. She stressed the importance of people rather than techniques — a
concept very much before her time. As a result, she was a pioneer and often not taken
seriously by management scholars of her time. But times change, and innovative ideas
from the past suddenly take on new meanings. Much of what managers do today is
based on the fundamentals that Follett established more than 80 years ago.
Chester Barnard, who was president of New Jersey Bell Telephone Company,
introduced the idea of the informal organization — cliques (exclusive groups of
people) that naturally form within a company. He felt that these informal organizations
provided necessary and vital communication functions for the overall organization and
that they could help the organization accomplish its goals.
Barnard felt that it was particularly important for managers to develop a sense of
common purpose where a willingness to cooperate is strongly encouraged. He is
credited with developing the acceptance theory of management, which emphasizes
the willingness of employees to accept that managers have legitimate authority to act.
Barnard felt that four factors affected the willingness of employees to accept authority:
o The employees must understand the communication.
o The employees accept the communication as being consistent with the
organization's purposes.
o The employees feel that their actions will be consistent with the needs and
desires of the other employees.
o The employees feel that they are mentally and physically able to carry out
the order.
Barnard's sympathy for and understanding of employee needs positioned him as a
bridge to the behavioral school of management, the next school of thought to emerge.
areer Guide / Career Development / Q&A: What Is the Classical Management Theory?
CAREER DEVELOPMENT
Q&A: What Is the Classical Management
Theory?
December 18, 2020
Share
The classical management theory was introduced during the Industrial Revolution as a
way to improve productivity within factories and other businesses. While less common in
today’s society, this type of management may still provide benefits for some
organizations. In this article, we will discuss what the classical management theory is as
well as the pros and cons of this form of management in the modern workplace.
What is the classical management theory?
The classical management theory is a style of management that emphasizes hierarchy,
specialized roles and single leadership for optimized efficiency in the workplace.
The classical management theory is based on the following principles:
Scientific management should be used to determine the most efficient way to do a
job.
Employees are selected to perform tasks based on their skills and specializations.
Operations should be streamlined as much as possible.
Decisions are made by a single person or by a select few authority figures.
Productivity is the primary goal.
Increased profit is given priority.
Concepts of the classical management theory
Additionally, the classical management theory holds that an ideal workplace is one that
implements the following concepts:
Centralized structure of leadership
The classical management theory holds that a workplace should be overseen by three
levels of leadership. The first level is composed of the business owners and/or
executives of the company. These individuals are given the highest level of authority
and set the long-term goals of an organization. The second level of leadership consists
of middle management. Individuals considered to be middle management are in charge
of overseeing managers and setting department-level goals. The third level is composed
of supervisors or managers who oversee the day-to-day operations of a company.
Labor specialization
This concept focuses on an “assembly line” set up within an organization. This structure
involves breaking down large tasks or projects into smaller tasks that are assigned to
employees. Workers are typically responsible for only one specific task to prevent
multitasking and increase productivity.
Wage incentives
The classical management theory places emphasis not on employees’ job satisfaction or
social needs but rather on physical needs. This theory holds that these physical needs
can be met through income and monetary incentives and uses the opportunity for wage
increases to motivate employees.
Advantages of the classical management theory
While not as common within the modern workplace, the classical management theory
can provide several benefits in the appropriate business setting. The following are a few
advantages of this type of management:
Clear organization hierarchy
As discussed above, the classical management theory includes three distinct levels of
management within an organization. This provides a clear outline of responsibilities and
objectives for each member of management and reduces any confusion as to what a
particular manager should focus on.
An easy-to-understand division of labor
Under the classical management theory, organizations establish clear divisions of labor
that plainly outline the expectations and duties of an employee. Tasks are typically
easier to understand and employees are given specific projects to complete that fall
within their abilities and specializations. As a result, productivity is often increased and
workers avoid having to multitask to fulfill their duties.
Increased productivity through monetary rewards
The classical management theory believes that employees are strongly motivated by
their physical needs and more specifically, monetary incentives. As such, organizations
that implement this management style often incorporate regular opportunities for
employees to be rewarded for their productivity with incentives. This can increase an
employee’s feeling of appreciation through recognition of their accomplishments as well
as make it easier for managers to motivate workers.
Related: Using Performance Management in the Workplace
Single-leader decision making
A primary component of the classical management theory is that a single leader or
select few leaders make decisions on behalf of a company. Organizations that use this
method of management make decisions at the highest level and then communicate the
decisions down the ladder of management. This can be beneficial for companies that
regularly need decisions to be made quickly or for smaller businesses that rely on a
single leader.
Related: Decision-Making Methods for the Workplace
Disadvantages of the classical management theory
As with many styles of management, the classical management theory also comes with
a few disadvantages that may make this type of management inappropriate for a
particular company. The following are potential disadvantages to consider when
deciding whether to implement this management style in your organization:
Limited emphasis on employee job satisfaction and human relations
This theory focuses primarily on the physical needs of an employee and can overlook
the employee’s social needs which is a vital component for some in their overall job
satisfaction.
For example, the classical management theory does not take into consideration a
worker’s need to connect with others in the workplace or utilize creativity when
performing duties. This can be a disadvantage for companies that rely on teamwork,
creative contributions and open communication.
Related: How to Deal With Job Dissatisfaction
Increased levels of pressure placed on employees
The classical management theory is primarily concerned with an employee’s productivity
and output. As a result, employees can feel increased pressure to complete tasks in a
certain period of time, which can lead to stress and discouragement.
Restricts the implementation of new ideas and concepts
This management theory is based on the belief that there is one right way to complete
tasks for maximum production. As a result, an organization’s ability to grow and
implement new ideas and concepts is often limited. In turn, employees may feel
restricted in their ability to express their ideas and unique value.
Tips for implementing the classical management
theory in your business
If you are considering implementing the classical management theory in your workplace,
there are several things you can do to increase the success of this management style.
Use the following tips during implementation:
Establish a standard operating procedure
A standard operating procedure should be clearly outlined for each specific task within
the workplace. This operating procedure should include the amount of time the task is
expected to take as well as other goals for each task. This will ensure that workers have
a clear understanding of their responsibilities and goals when beginning a task.
Complete the task selection process in a considerate way
Selecting the right workers for a particular task is key to ensuring that employees can
meet their job expectations. Consider each worker’s abilities and skills and match them
accordingly to the most appropriate tasks.
Regularly provide worker incentives
Offering incentives regularly as well as providing verbal praise and recognition for
employees performing well can greatly increase worker motivation and productivity.
