Classifying the Management Theories

In the last blog, we looked at how the “analyzers” category of organizations perceives the adaptation cycle challenges. In this blog, let’s take an independent look at how the various organization theories itself could be classified and how the view the relation between strategy and structure where the discussion about adaptation cycle actually began.

If we look at the way management theory has evolved over the timeframe of the early 1900 to late 1900s, we could categorize them into the following sections 

1. Traditional Model
2. Human Relations Model
3. Human Resource Model

The Traditional model suggests that there are a select group of owner-managers who would ably direct larger number of employees by careful standardization and routinizing the work and by placing and planning functions completely controlled by the top managers. Under such a system, only few employees could be expected to perform to outstanding levels but most of them would perform to certain minimum standard.

The Human Relations model agreed to the Traditional model but went ahead emphasizing the universality of social needs for belongingness and recognition. This model argued that, it was interpersonal treatment that was the source of subordinate resistance to managerial directives. Managers would have to engage the organizational member's feeling of involvement and importance in order to improve organizational performance.

The Human Resource model approach though is debated to be a contingent theory, looks at the organization as having decision making in the pursuit of organizational objectives widely dispersed and that most organization members represent the untapped resources which if properly managed could considerably enhance the organizational performance. 

In the next blog we shall have a graphical comparison of the same for clarity purpose.