Taylor enunciated that scientific management involves a “complete mental revolution””” both on the part of the workingman as to their duties, toward their fellow men, and their employees, as also on the part of the managers without which scientific management cannot exist. This means a complete change in mental attitude of both sides for the substitution of peace for war, brotherly co-operation for strife ; for replacing suspicious watchfulness with mutual confidence ; for becoming friends instead of foes.24
The emphasis of scientific management school is on maximum output with minimum effort by eliminating waste and inefficiency at the operative level. Thus efficiency was the central theme of Taylor”s principles. Taylor was interested in getting more work out of workers, who, according to him, are “naturally lazy”. He explained the logic with example of an energetic and a lazy worker drawing the same salary: “Why should I work hard when the lazy fellow gets the same pay that I do and does only half as much work ? 25 He advocated that faster work could be assured only through :
1. enforced standardization of methods,
2. enforced adaptation of best instrument and working conditions, and
3. enforced co-operation. For this he made several experiments, viz. (i) work study ; (ii) standardized tools for shops ; and (iii) selection and training of workers. In the last experiment he emphasized that each worker be assigned to do what he was best suited for and that those who exceeded the defined work be paid bonuses. Consequently, production rose to an all time high.
Classical school : Fayol as father
The classical school started to develop in France at the same time as Taylor”s Scientific management in the United States. Its father was a Frenchman, Hinri Fayol who regarded management as a universal process, and hence the school was often called “traditional” or “universal” school. Fayol took the scientific approach, but he looked at administration from the top down and laid down the following 14 principles of administration :
1. Division of work
4. Unity of command
5. Unity of direction
6. Subordination of individual interest to general interest
7. Remuneration of personnel
9 Scalar chain
12. Stability of tenure of personnel
14. Esprit de corps.
It was a process through which management was being brought close to administration. Taylor and Fayol were thus considered the founders of the theory of administration or management. Today many organizations including library and information centres depend largely on these classical theories for their management and administration. Needless to say, the celebrated writers of university library administration, Wilson 26 and Tauber also adopted the above principles, with minor changes adding three more to the above principles, viz. (i) Span of control, (ii) Departmentation and (iii) Line and staff, which are now being taught and practised in the library schools and libraries the world over Many modern authors of management including Richard Hodgetts27 also depend on these principles in their discourse on management theory.
Theory of this school differentiated between administration representing the owner whip point of view, and scientific management, i. o. approach to work at the operative level as they related to organization and system. This school expanded the thesis of Fayol and along with it began to explore the behavioral aspect of management. Notable thinkers and analysts of this school were German sociologist Max Weber,28 an Englishman Lyndell Urwick,29 aid an American Luther Gulick30 who edited a landmark work on scientific administration. In 1937 Luther Gulick submitted a paper to president Roosevelt31 summing up an executive”s functions in the acronym POSDCORB which are now taught and practised by the administrators and library scientists throughout the world as the most systematic elements of administration :
These seven elements described to be the major duties of a chief executive or manager was adapted from the functional analysis elaborated by Henri Fayol in his Industrial and general administration.
Human relations schools
These schools which embodied Human behaviour school and Social system school developed in 1930s and were concerned with the study of peoples as human beings rather than as work units. These schools compensated for some of the deficiencies of the classical theories. The inherent thesis of these schools is that because management involves getting things done through people, management study should centre on interpersonal relations, i. e. emphasis is primarily laid on the individual and the informal group in the formal organization thereby integrating people into a work environment. Management is thus concerned more with personnel administration giving prominence to democratization and staff participation. This theory upholds that if human needs are recognized, and the suggestions arid complaints of the staff are considered, morale is bound to increase, as will production.
Human behaviour school
EIton Mayo and Mary Follett, two distinguished apostles of this school made experiments on physical working conditions and their influence on worker productivity. Their studies laid emphasis on social interaction and psychological factors in determining productivity and satisfaction These studies revealed several principles :
a. workers are more motivated by social rewards and sanctions than by economic incentives ;
b. workers in their acts are influenced by the group ; and
c. whenever formal organizations exist, both formal
and informal standards exist.
These researchers observed that when the workers associated them with management, productivity rose ; when they were in opposition to management, productivity remained at a minimum accepted level. This school maintains that if the organization can make employees happy, it can gain their full co-operation and effort, plus reaching optimum efficiency.
An Australian professor. Mayo made his most famous experiment in a textile mill in Philadelphia during 1923-24 on the cause of high labour turnover. By introducing rest periods he proved that it not only helped overcome physical fatigue and monotony, but also day-dreaming, which consequently led to high morale, and productivity, and elimination of labour turnover.
Social system school
Chester I Barnard, who was president of New Jersey Bell (1927-) as also of Rockefeller Foundation, and the U.S. Organization, is often regarded as the spiritual father of this school which is so closely related to the human relations
school that the one is sometimes confused with the other. Barnard is thus, otherwise, held as a distinguished contributor to behavioral thought. The social system school encourages management to allow : (i) the employees develop social groups on the job ; (ii) employee participation in management ; and (iii) democracy in the organization. Barnard identifies four inducements :
1 material inducements, viz. money and other physical securities ;
2 personal non-material opportunities for distinction, and personal power ;
3 desirable physical conditions of work ; and 4 ideal benefactions, i. e. pride of workmanship, sense of adequacy, loyalty to the organization, etc.
He emphasized upon maintenance of “communication” system as the “first function” or primary job of managers. Secondly, the workers are to be brought into a co-operative relationship with the organization, which must identify the
people with the firm. Third executive function is the delegation of authority. This theory gave rise to other new theories, one of which is Management by Objectives that will be discussed later.
Decision Theory Schools
Contributions have been made to management through various disciplines like library and information science, mathematics, statistics, economics, psychology and sociology. This school is basically concerned with the study of rational decision procedures, and the way managers actually reach decisions. The management scientists of all these disciplines share the following common characteristics32
1 the application of scientific analysis to managerial problems ;
2 the goal of improving the manager”s decision-making ability;
3 a high regard for economic effectiveness criteria ;
4 a reliance on mathematical models ; and
5 the utilization of electronic computers.
Management by Objectives (MBO)
This theory of management was advocated by Peter Drucker33in 1950s according to which “information sharing is desirable” and that “management and workers should share planning and analysis of the operations.” It combines individual and institutional goal setting with the decision making process. Peter Drucker first enunciated that “this approach involves the establishment and communication of organizational goals, the setting of individual objectives pursuant to the organizational goals, and the periodic and then final review of performance as it relates to the objectives.”34 George Odiorne further developed this thesis and defined it as “a process whereby the superior and subordinate managers of an organization jointly identify its common goals, define each individual”s major areas of responsibility in terms of the results expected of him, and use these measures as guides for operating the unit and assessing the contribution of each of its members.”35
MBO underlines the setting of certain specific objectives and approaching them as a team over a stated period of time. It emphasizes that objectives must be measurable, with time limits, and they must require specific realistic action. It is
a unique example of participative management, in which the supervisor and subordinates agree upon specific results to be achieved during appraisal period; and they together establish: (i) what”s to be done, (ii) how long it will take, (iii) how performance will be evaluated, and (iv) how together to review results and set further goals. The complete process depends upon the following rationale: 36
1 Clearly stated objectives.
2 A succession of specific objectives : bench mark must be done to measure progress.
3 Delegation of specific objective.
4 Freedom to act.
5 Verifiable results.
6 Clear communication.
7 Shared responsibilities.
8 Personal accountability.
9 Improving management ability.
The whole process encompasses several phases of operation 37 :
1 finding the objectives;
2 setting the objectives;
3 validating the objectives;
4 implementing the objectives; and
5 controlling and reporting the status of the objectives.
All these theories, principles and approaches to management are neither comprehensive nor an end in themselves. Library and information scientists are practising many of them and exploring potentialities of operation in the management and administration of libraries and information centres. A professionally qualified library manager or information scientist has the responsibility of preparing library budget and is supposed to know much of cost accounting, budgeting and finance, apart from his knowledge and studies in management and administration. He has thus greater facilities and acumen to run the management of a general enterprise, while a manager of a general enterprise is not expected to know technical and professional aspects of library and information science, viz. classification and cataloguing and hence cannot be expected of becoming a successful manager of a library or information centre.
23. Taylor, Frederick Wjnslow. “What is scientific management ?” In: Carroll, Stephen J., Frank T., and Miner, John B. The management process ; cases and readings. New York : Macmillan, 1973, p-30.
25. Taylor, Frederick Winslow. Scientific management, New York: Herper & Row, 1947. p-31
26. Wilson. Louis Round, and Tauber, Maurice F.. op. cit., p. 117-22.
27. Hodgetis, Richard M. Management : theory, process, and practice. 2nd edn. Philadelphia : W. B. Saunders, c, 1979, p, 22-4
28. Weber, Max. The theory of social and economic organization, tr. by A. M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. New York : Free Press, 1966. x,436p.
29″ Urwick. Lyndsll, “The function of administration : with special reference to the work of Henri Fayol”. In : Papers on the science of administration. Clifton. N,J. : Augustus M, Kelley, 1973 p. 115-30.
30, Gulick, Luther and Urwick, Lyndell, eds, Papers on the science of administration, op, cit, p, 13.
31. Stueart, Robert D. and Eastlick, John Taylor. Library management. Littleton, Colo. : Libraries Unlimited. 1977. p. 21.
32. Hodgetts, Richard M., op. cit.
33. Drucker, Peter F. The practice of management. New York : Harper & Brothers, 1954.
34. Carroll, Stephen J. and Tosi, Henry L. Managemant by objectives. New York: Macmillan, 1973. p.3.
35. Odiorne, George S. Management by objectives. New York : Pitman Publishing, 1965. p. 55-6.
36 Stueart, Robert D., and Eastlick, John Taylor. op. cit. p. 83.