The history of the word management

Management (or managing) is the administration of organizations, whether they are a business, a nonprofit organization, or a government body. It is the art and science of managing resources of the business.

Management includes the activities of setting the strategy of an organization and coordinating the efforts of its employees (or of volunteers) to accomplish its objectives through the application of available resources, such as financial, natural, technological, and human resources. «Run the business»^[1] and «Change the business» are two concepts that are used in management to differentiate between the continued delivery of goods or services and adapting of goods or services to meet the changing needs of customers — see trend. The term «management» may also refer to those people who manage an organization—managers.

Some people study management at colleges or universities; major degrees in management includes the Bachelor of Commerce (B.Com.), Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA.), Master of Business Administration (MBA.), Master in Management (MSM or MIM) and, for the public sector, the Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree. Individuals who aim to become management specialists or experts, management researchers, or professors may complete the Doctor of Management (DM), the Doctor of Business Administration (DBA), or the PhD in Business Administration or Management. In the past few decades, there has been a movement for evidence-based management.^[2]

Larger organizations generally have three hierarchical levels of managers,^[3] in a pyramid structure:

• Senior managers such as members of a board of directors and a chief executive officer (CEO) or a president of an organization sets the strategic goals and policy of the organization and make decisions on how the overall organization will operate. Senior managers are generally executive-level professionals who provide direction to middle management, and directly or indirectly report to them.
• Middle managers such as branch managers, regional managers, department managers, and section managers, who provide direction to the front-line managers. They communicate the strategic goals and policy of senior management to the front-line managers.
• Line managers such as supervisors and front-line team leaders, oversee the work of regular employees (or volunteers, in some voluntary organizations) and provide direction on their work. Line managers often perform the managerial functions that are traditionally considered as the core of management. Despite the name, they are usually considered part of the workforce and not part of the organization’s management class.

In smaller organizations, a manager may have a much wider scope and may perform several roles or even all of the roles commonly observed in a large organization.

Social scientists study management as an academic discipline, investigating areas such as social organization, organizational adaptation, and organizational leadership.^[4]

Etymology[edit]

The English verb «manage» has its roots by the XV century French verb ‘mesnager’, which often referred in equestrian language «to hold in hand the reins of a horse».^[5] Also the Italian term maneggiare (to handle, especially tools or a horse) is possible. In Spanish, manejar can also mean to rule the horses.^[6] These three terms derive from the two Latin words manus (hand) and agere (to act).

The French word for housekeeping, ménagerie, derived from ménager («to keep house»; compare ménage for «household»), also encompasses taking care of domestic animals. Ménagerie is the French translation of Xenophon’s famous book Oeconomicus^[7] (Greek: Οἰκονομικός) on household matters and husbandry. The French word mesnagement (or ménagement) influenced the semantic development of the English word management in the 17th and 18th centuries.^[8]

Definitions[edit]

Views on the definition and scope of management include:

• Henri Fayol (1841–1925) stated: «to manage is to forecast and to plan, to organise, to command, to co-ordinate and to control».^[9]
• Fredmund Malik (1944– ) defines management as «the transformation of resources into utility».^[10]
• Management is included^{[by whom?]} as one of the factors of production – along with machines, materials and money.
• Ghislain Deslandes defines management as «a vulnerable force, under pressure to achieve results and endowed with the triple power of constraint, imitation and imagination, operating on subjective, interpersonal, institutional and environmental levels».^[11]
• Peter Drucker (1909–2005) saw the basic task of management as twofold: marketing and innovation. Nevertheless, innovation is also linked to marketing (product innovation is a central strategic marketing issue).^{[citation needed]} Drucker identifies marketing as a key essence for business success, but management and marketing are generally understood^{[by whom?]} as two different branches of business administration knowledge.

Theoretical scope[edit]

Management involves identifying the mission, objective, procedures, rules and manipulation^[12] of the human capital of an enterprise to contribute to the success of the enterprise.^[13] Scholars have focused on the management of individual,^[14] organizational,^[15] and inter-organizational relationships. This implies effective communication: an enterprise environment (as opposed to a physical or mechanical mechanism) implies human motivation and implies some sort of successful progress or system outcome.^[16] As such, management is not the manipulation of a mechanism (machine or automated program), not the herding of animals, and can occur either in a legal or in an illegal enterprise or environment. From an individual’s perspective, management does not need to be seen solely from an enterprise point of view, because management is an essential^[quantify] function in improving one’s life and relationships.^[17] Management is therefore everywhere^[18] and it has a wider range of application.^{[clarification needed]} Communication and a positive endeavor are two main aspects of it either through enterprise or through independent pursuit.^{[citation needed]} Plans, measurements, motivational psychological tools, goals, and economic measures (profit, etc.) may or may not be necessary components for there to be management. At first, one views management functionally, such as measuring quantity, adjusting plans, and meeting goals,^{[citation needed]} but this applies even in situations where planning does not take place. From this perspective, Henri Fayol (1841–1925)^{[19][page needed]} considers management to consist of five functions:

1. planning (forecasting)
2. organizing
3. commanding
4. coordinating
5. controlling

In another way of thinking, Mary Parker Follett (1868–1933), allegedly defined management as «the art of getting things done through people».^[20] She described management as a philosophy.^{[21][need quotation to verify]}

Critics,^[which?] however, find this definition useful but far too narrow. The phrase «management is what managers do» occurs widely,^[22] suggesting the difficulty of defining management without circularity, the shifting nature of definitions^{[citation needed]} and the connection of managerial practices with the existence of a managerial cadre or of a class.

One habit of thought regards management as equivalent to «business administration» and thus excludes management in places outside commerce, as for example in charities and in the public sector. More broadly, every organization must «manage» its work, people, processes, technology, etc. to maximize effectiveness.^{[citation needed]} Nonetheless, many people refer to university departments that teach management as «business schools». Some such institutions (such as the Harvard Business School) use that name, while others (such as the Yale School of Management) employ the broader term «management».

English-speakers may also use the term «management» or «the management» as a collective word describing the managers of an organization, for example of a corporation.^[23]
Historically this use of the term often contrasted with the term «labor» – referring to those being managed.^[24]

But in the present era^[when?] the concept of management is identified^{[by whom?]} in the wide areas^[which?] and its frontiers have been pushed^{[by whom?]} to a broader range.^{[citation needed]} Apart from profitable organizations, even non-profit organizations apply management concepts. The concept and its uses are not constrained^{[by whom?]}. Management as a whole is the process of planning, organizing, directing, leading and controlling.^[25]

Levels[edit]

A common management structure of organizations includes three management levels: first-level, middle-level, and top-level managers. First-line managers are the lowest level of management and manage the work of non-managerial individuals who are directly involved with the production or creation of the organization’s products. First-line managers are often called supervisors, but may also be called line managers, office managers, or even foremen. Middle managers include all levels of management between the first-line level and the top level of the organization. These managers manage the work of first-line managers and may have titles such as department head, project leader, plant manager, or division manager. Top managers are responsible for making organization-wide decisions and establishing the plans and goals that affect the entire organization. These individuals typically have titles such as executive vice president, president, managing director, chief operating officer, chief executive officer, or chairman of the board.

These managers are classified in a hierarchy of authority, and perform different tasks. In many organizations, the number of managers in every level resembles a pyramid. Each level is explained below in specifications of their different responsibilities and likely job titles.^[26]

Top management[edit]

The top or senior layer of management is a small group which consists of the board of directors (including non-executive directors, executive directors and independent directors), president, vice-president, CEOs and other members of the C-level executives. Different organizations have various members in their C-suite, which may include a chief financial officer, chief technology officer, and so on. They are responsible for controlling and overseeing the operations of the entire organization. They set a «tone at the top» and develop strategic plans, company policies, and make decisions on the overall direction of the organization. In addition, top-level managers play a significant role in the mobilization of outside resources. Senior managers are accountable to the shareholders, the general public and to public bodies that oversee corporations and similar organizations. Some members of the senior management may serve as the public face of the organization, and they may make speeches to introduce new strategies or appear in marketing.

The board of directors is typically primarily composed of non-executives who owe a fiduciary duty to shareholders and are not closely involved in the day-to-day activities of the organization, although this varies depending on the type (e.g., public versus private), size and culture of the organization. These directors are theoretically liable for breaches of that duty and typically insured under directors and officers liability insurance. Fortune 500 directors are estimated to spend 4.4 hours per week on board duties, and median compensation was $212,512 in 2010. The board sets corporate strategy, makes major decisions such as major acquisitions,^[27] and hires, evaluates, and fires the top-level manager (chief executive officer or CEO). The CEO typically hires other positions. However, board involvement in the hiring of other positions such as the chief financial officer (CFO) has increased.^[28] In 2013, a survey of over 160 CEOs and directors of public and private companies found that the top weaknesses of CEOs were «mentoring skills» and «board engagement», and 10% of companies never evaluated the CEO.^[29] The board may also have certain employees (e.g., internal auditors) report to them or directly hire independent contractors; for example, the board (through the audit committee) typically selects the auditor.

Helpful skills of top management vary by the type of organization but typically include^[30] a broad understanding of competition, world economies, and politics. In addition, the CEO is responsible for implementing and determining (within the board’s framework) the broad policies of the organization. Executive management accomplishes the day-to-day details, including: instructions for preparation of department budgets, procedures, schedules; appointment of middle level executives such as department managers; coordination of departments; media and governmental relations; and shareholder communication.

Middle management[edit]

Consist of general managers, branch managers and department managers. They are accountable to the top management for their department’s function. They devote more time to organizational and directional functions. Their roles can be emphasized as executing organizational plans in conformance with the company’s policies and the objectives of the top management, they define and discuss information and policies from top management to lower management, and most importantly they inspire and provide guidance to lower-level managers towards better performance.

Middle management is the midway management of a categorized organization, being secondary to the senior management but above the deepest levels of operational members. An operational manager may be well-thought-out by middle management or may be categorized as non-management operate, liable to the policy of the specific organization. The efficiency of the middle level is vital in any organization since they bridge the gap between top level and bottom level staffs.

Their functions include:

• Design and implement effective group and inter-group work and information systems.
• Define and monitor group-level performance indicators.
• Diagnose and resolve problems within and among workgroups.
• Design and implement reward systems that support cooperative behavior. They also make decisions and share ideas with top managers.

Line management[edit]

Line managers include supervisors, section leaders, forepersons and team leaders. They focus on controlling and directing regular employees. They are usually responsible for assigning employees’ tasks, guiding and supervising employees on day-to-day activities, ensuring the quality and quantity of production and/or service, making recommendations and suggestions to employees on their work, and channeling employee concerns that they cannot resolve to mid-level managers or other administrators. First-level or «front line» managers also act as role models for their employees. In some types of work, front line managers may also do some of the same tasks that employees do, at least some of the time. For example, in some restaurants, the front line managers will also serve customers during a very busy period of the day. In general, line managers are considered part of the workforce and not part of the organization’s proper management despite performing traditional management functions.

Front-line managers typically provide:

• Training for new employees
• Basic supervision
• Motivation
• Performance feedback and guidance

Some front-line managers may also provide career planning for employees who aim to rise within the organization.

Training and education[edit]

Colleges and universities around the world offers bachelor’s degrees, graduate degrees, diplomas and certificates in management; generally within their colleges of business, business schools or faculty of management but also in other related departments. In the 2010s era, there has been an increase in online management education and training in the form of electronic educational technology (also called e-learning). Online education has increased the accessibility of management training to people who do not live near a college or university, or who cannot afford to travel to a city where such training is available.

Requirement[edit]

While some professions require academic credentials in order to work in the profession (e.g., law, medicine, engineering, which require, respectively the Bachelor of Law, Doctor of Medicine and Bachelor of Engineering degrees), management and administration positions do not necessarily require the completion of academic degrees. Some well-known senior executives in the US who did not complete a degree include Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg. However, many managers and executives have completed some type of business or management training, such as a Bachelor of Commerce or a Master of Business Administration degree. Some major organizations, including companies, non-profit organizations and governments, require applicants to managerial or executive positions to hold at minimum bachelor’s degree in a field related to administration or management, or in the case of business jobs, a Bachelor of Commerce or a similar degree.

Undergraduate[edit]

At the undergraduate level, the most common business programs are the Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA) and Bachelor of Commerce (B.Com.).
These typically comprise a four-year program designed to give students an overview of the role of managers in planning and directing within an organization.
Course topics include accounting, financial management, statistics, marketing, strategy, and other related areas.

There are many other undergraduate degrees that include the study of management, such as Bachelor of Arts degrees with a major in business administration or management and Bachelor of Public Administration (B.P.A), a degree designed for individuals aiming to work as bureaucrats in the government jobs.
Many colleges and universities also offer certificates and diplomas in business administration or management, which typically require one to two years of full-time study.

Note that to manage technological areas, one often needs an undergraduate degree in a STEM area.

Graduate[edit]

At the graduate level students aiming at careers as managers or executives may choose to specialize in major subareas of management or business administration such as entrepreneurship, human resources, international business, organizational behavior, organizational theory, strategic management,^[31] accounting, corporate finance, entertainment, global management, healthcare management, investment management, sustainability and real estate.

A Master of Business Administration (MBA) is the most popular professional degree at the master’s level and can be obtained from many universities in the United States. MBA programs provide further education in management and leadership for graduate students. Other master’s degrees in business and management include Master of Management (MM) and the Master of Science (M.Sc.) in business administration or management, which is typically taken by students aiming to become researchers or professors.

There are also specialized master’s degrees in administration for individuals aiming at careers outside of business, such as the Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree (also offered as a Master of Arts in Public Administration in some universities), for students aiming to become managers or executives in the public service and the Master of Health Administration, for students aiming to become managers or executives in the health care and hospital sector.

Management doctorates are the most advanced terminal degrees in the field of business and management. Most individuals obtaining management doctorates take the programs to obtain the training in research methods, statistical analysis and writing academic papers that they will need to seek careers as researchers, senior consultants and/or professors in business administration or management. There are three main types of management doctorates: the Doctor of Management (D.M.), the Doctor of Business Administration (D.B.A.), and the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Business Administration or Management. In the 2010s, doctorates in business administration and management are available with many specializations.

Good practices[edit]

While management trends can change so fast, the long-term trend in management has been defined by a market embracing diversity and a rising service industry. Managers are currently being trained to encourage greater equality for minorities and women in the workplace, by offering increased flexibility in working hours, better retraining, and innovative (and usually industry-specific) performance markers. Managers destined for the service sector are being trained to use unique measurement techniques, better worker support and more charismatic leadership styles.^[32] Human resources finds itself increasingly working with management in a training capacity to help collect management data on the success (or failure) of management actions with employees.^[33]

Good practices identified for managers include «walking the shop floor»,^[34] and, especially for managers who are new in post, identifying and achieving some «quick wins» which demonstrate visible success in establishing appropriate objectives.^[35] Leadership writer John Kotter uses the phrase «Short-Term Wins» to express the same idea.^[36] As in all work, achieving an appropriate work-life balance for self and others is an important management practice.^[37]

Evidence-based management[edit]

Evidence-based management is an emerging movement to use the current, best evidence in management and decision-making. It is part of the larger movement towards evidence-based practices. Evidence-based management entails managerial decisions and organizational practices informed by the best available evidence.^[38] As with other evidence-based practice, this is based on the three principles of: 1) published peer-reviewed (often in management or social science journals) research evidence that bears on whether and why a particular management practice works; 2) judgement and experience from contextual management practice, to understand the organization and interpersonal dynamics in a situation and determine the risks and benefits of available actions; and 3) the preferences and values of those affected.^[39][40]

History[edit]

Some see management as a late-modern (in the sense of late modernity) conceptualization.^[41] On those terms it cannot have a pre-modern history – only harbingers (such as stewards). Others, however, detect management-like thought among ancient Sumerian traders and the builders of the pyramids of ancient Egypt. Slave-owners through the centuries faced the problems of exploiting/motivating a dependent but sometimes unenthusiastic or recalcitrant workforce, but many pre-industrial enterprises, given their small scale, did not feel compelled to face the issues of management systematically. However, innovations such as the spread of Arabic numerals (5th to 15th centuries) and the codification of double-entry book-keeping (1494) provided tools for management assessment, planning and control.

• An organisation is more stable if members have the right to express their differences and solve their conflicts within it.
• While one person can begin an organisation, «it is lasting when it is left in the care of many and when many desire to maintain it».
• A weak manager can follow a strong one, but not another weak one, and maintain authority.
• A manager seeking to change an established organization «should retain at least a shadow of the ancient customs».

With the changing workplaces of industrial revolutions in the 18th and 19th centuries, military theory and practice contributed approaches to managing the newly popular factories.^[42]

Given the scale of most commercial operations and the lack of mechanized record-keeping and recording before the industrial revolution, it made sense for most owners of enterprises in those times to carry out management functions by and for themselves. But with growing size and complexity of organizations, a distinction between owners (individuals, industrial dynasties or groups of shareholders) and day-to-day managers (independent specialists in planning and control) gradually became more common.

Early writing[edit]

The field of management originated in ancient China,^[43] including possibly the first highly centralized bureaucratic state, and the earliest (by the second century BC) example of an administration based on merit through testing.^[44] Some theorists have cited ancient military texts as providing lessons for civilian managers. For example, Chinese general Sun Tzu in his 6th-century BC work The Art of War recommends^{[citation needed]} (when re-phrased in modern terminology) being aware of and acting on strengths and weaknesses of both a manager’s organization and a foe’s.^{[45][need quotation to verify]} The writings of influential Chinese Legalist philosopher Shen Buhai may be considered^{[by whom?]} to embody a rare premodern example of abstract theory of administration.^[46][47] American philosopher Herrlee G. Creel and other scholars find the influence of Chinese administration in Europe by the 12th century.^{[48][49][50][51]} Thomas Taylor Meadows, Britain’s consul in Guangzhou, argued in his Desultory Notes on the Government and People of China (1847) that «the long duration of the Chinese empire is solely and altogether owing to the good government which consists in the advancement of men of talent and merit only,» and that the British must reform their civil service by making the institution meritocratic.^[52] Influenced by the ancient Chinese imperial examination, the Northcote–Trevelyan Report of 1854 recommended that recruitment should be on the basis of merit determined through competitive examination, candidates should have a solid general education to enable inter-departmental transfers, and promotion should be through achievement rather than «preferment, patronage, or purchase».^[53][52] This led to implementation of Her Majesty’s Civil Service as a systematic, meritocratic civil service bureaucracy.^[54] Like the British, the development of French bureaucracy was influenced by the Chinese system. Voltaire claimed that the Chinese had «perfected moral science» and François Quesnay advocated an economic and political system modeled after that of the Chinese.^[55] French civil service examinations adopted in the late 19th century were also heavily based on general cultural studies. These features have been likened to the earlier Chinese model.^[56]

Various ancient and medieval civilizations produced «mirrors for princes» books, which aimed to advise new monarchs on how to govern. Plato described job specialization in 350 BC, and Alfarabi listed several leadership traits in AD 900.^[57] Other examples include the Indian Arthashastra by Chanakya (written around 300 BC), and The Prince by Italian author
Niccolò Machiavelli (c. 1515).^[58]

Written in 1776 by Adam Smith, a Scottish moral philosopher, The Wealth of Nations discussed efficient organization of work through division of labour.^[58]
Smith described how changes in processes could boost productivity in the manufacture of pins. While individuals could produce 200 pins per day, Smith analyzed the steps involved in manufacture and, with 10 specialists, enabled production of 48,000 pins per day.^{[58][need quotation to verify]}

19th century[edit]

Classical economists such as Adam Smith (1723–1790) and John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) provided a theoretical background to resource allocation, production (economics), and pricing issues. About the same time, innovators like Eli Whitney (1765–1825), James Watt (1736–1819), and Matthew Boulton (1728–1809) developed elements of technical production such as standardization, quality-control procedures, cost-accounting, interchangeability of parts, and work-planning. Many of these aspects of management existed in the pre-1861 slave-based sector of the US economy. That environment saw 4 million people, as the contemporary usages had it, «managed» in profitable quasi-mass production^[59]
before wage slavery eclipsed chattel slavery.

Salaried managers as an identifiable group first became prominent in the late 19th century.^[60] As large corporations began to overshadow small family businesses the need for personnel management positions became more necessary.^[61] Businesses grew into large corporations and the need for clerks, bookkeepers, secretaries and managers expanded. The demand for trained managers led college and university administrators to consider and move forward with plans to create the first schools of business on their campuses.

20th century[edit]

At the turn of the twentieth century the need for skilled and trained managers had become increasingly apparent. The demand occurred as personnel departments began to expand rapidly. In 1915, less than one in twenty manufacturing firms had a dedicated personnel department. By 1929 that number had grown to over one-third.^[62] Formal management education became standardized at colleges and universities.^[63] Colleges and universities capitalized on the needs of corporations by forming business schools and corporate placement departments.^[64] This shift toward formal business education marked the creation of a corporate elite in the US.

By about 1900 one finds managers trying to place their theories on what they regarded as a thoroughly scientific basis (see scientism for perceived limitations of this belief). Examples include Henry R. Towne’s Science of management in the 1890s, Frederick Winslow Taylor’s The Principles of Scientific Management (1911), Lillian Gilbreth’s Psychology of Management (1914),^[65] Frank and Lillian Gilbreth’s Applied motion study (1917), and Henry L. Gantt’s charts (1910s). J. Duncan wrote the first college management textbook in 1911. In 1912 Yoichi Ueno introduced Taylorism to Japan and became the first management consultant of the «Japanese management style». His son Ichiro Ueno pioneered Japanese quality assurance.

The first comprehensive theories of management appeared around 1920.^{[citation needed]} The Harvard Business School offered the first Master of Business Administration degree (MBA) in 1921. People like Henri Fayol (1841–1925) and Alexander Church (1866–1936) described the various branches of management and their inter-relationships. In the early 20th century, people like Ordway Tead (1891–1973), Walter Scott (1869–1955) and J. Mooney applied the principles of psychology to management. Other writers, such as Elton Mayo (1880–1949), Mary Parker Follett (1868–1933), Chester Barnard (1886–1961), Max Weber (1864–1920), who saw what he called the «administrator» as bureaucrat,^[66] Rensis Likert (1903–1981), and Chris Argyris (born 1923) approached the phenomenon of management from a sociological perspective.

The 1930s and 1940s saw the development of a militarization trend in management in parts of Eurasia – both the NKVD (in the Soviet Union) and the SS (in the Greater Germanic Reich), for example, managed labor camps as industrial enterprises using slave labor supervised by uniformed cadres.^[67][68]
Military habits persisted in some management circles.^[69]

Peter Drucker (1909–2005) wrote one of the earliest books on applied management: Concept of the Corporation (published in 1946). It resulted from Alfred Sloan (chairman of General Motors until 1956) commissioning a study of the organisation. Drucker went on to write 39 books, many in the same vein.

H. Dodge, Ronald Fisher (1890–1962), and Thornton C. Fry introduced statistical techniques into management-studies. In the 1940s, Patrick Blackett worked in the development of the applied-mathematics science of operations research, initially for military operations. Operations research, sometimes known as «management science» (but distinct from Taylor’s scientific management), attempts to take a scientific approach to solving decision-problems, and can apply directly to multiple management problems, particularly in the areas of logistics and operations.

Some of the later 20th-century developments include the theory of constraints (introduced in 1984), management by objectives (systematised in 1954), re-engineering (early 1990s), Six Sigma (1986), management by walking around (1970s), the Viable system model (1972), and various information-technology-driven theories such as agile software development (so-named from 2001), as well as group-management theories such as Cog’s Ladder (1972) and the notion of «thriving on chaos»^[70] (1987).

As the general recognition of managers as a class solidified during the 20th century and gave perceived practitioners of the art/science of management a certain amount of prestige, so the way opened for popularised systems of management ideas to peddle their wares. In this context many management fads may have had more to do with pop psychology than with scientific theories of management.

Business management^[when?] includes the following branches:^{[citation needed]}

1. financial management
2. human resource management
3. Management cybernetics
4. information technology management (responsible for management information systems )
5. marketing management
6. operations management and production management
7. strategic management

21st century[edit]

In the 21st century observers find it increasingly difficult to subdivide management into functional categories in this way. More and more processes simultaneously involve several categories. Instead, one tends to think in terms of the various processes, tasks, and objects subject to management.^{[citation needed]}

Branches of management theory also exist relating to nonprofits and to government: such as public administration, public management, and educational management. Further, management programs related to civil-society organizations have also spawned programs in nonprofit management and social entrepreneurship.

Note that many of the assumptions made by management have come under attack from business-ethics viewpoints, critical management studies, and anti-corporate activism.

As one consequence, workplace democracy (sometimes referred to as Workers’ self-management) has become both more common and more advocated, in some places distributing all management functions among workers, each of whom takes on a portion of the work. However, these models predate any current political issue, and may occur more naturally than does a command hierarchy. All management embraces to some degree a democratic principle—in that in the long term, the majority of workers must support management. Otherwise, they leave to find other work or go on strike. Despite the move toward workplace democracy, command-and-control organization structures remain commonplace as de facto organization structures. Indeed, the entrenched nature of command-and-control is evident in the way that recent^[when?] layoffs have been conducted with management ranks affected far less than employees at the lower levels.^{[citation needed]} In some cases, management has even rewarded itself with bonuses after laying off lower-level workers.^[71]

According to leadership-academic Manfred F.R. Kets de Vries, a contemporary senior-management team will almost inevitably have some personality disorders.^[72]

Nature of work[edit]

In profitable organizations, management’s primary function is the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing great employment opportunities for employees. In case of nonprofit management, one of the main functions is, keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management and governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers, but this is rare.

Topics[edit]

Basics[edit]

According to Fayol, management operates through five basic functions: planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating and controlling.

• Planning: Deciding what needs to happen in the future and generating plans for action (deciding in advance).
• Organizing (or staffing): Making sure the human and nonhuman resources are put into place.^[73]
• Commanding (or leading): Determining what must be done in a situation and getting people to do it.
• Coordinating: Creating a structure through which an organization’s goals can be accomplished.
• Controlling: Checking progress against plans.

Basic roles[edit]

• Interpersonal: roles that involve coordination and interaction with employees.

Figurehead, leader, liaison

• Informational: roles that involve handling, sharing, and analyzing information.

Nerve centre, disseminator, spokesperson

• Decision: roles that require decision-making.

Entrepreneur, negotiator, allocator, disturbance handler

Skills[edit]

Management skills include:

• Political: used to build a power base and to establish connections.
• Interpersonal: used to communicate, motivate, mentor and delegate.
• Diagnostic: ability to visualize appropriate responses to a situation.
• Leadership: ability to communicate a vision and inspire people to embrace that vision.^[74]
  • cross-cultural leadership: ability to understand the effects of culture on leadership style.
• Behavioral: perception towards others, conflict resolution, time-management, self-improvement, stress management and resilience, patience, clear communication.^[75]

Implementation of policies and strategies[edit]

• All policies and strategies must be discussed with all managerial personnel and staff.
• Managers must understand where and how they can implement their policies and strategies.
• An action plan must be devised for each department.
• Policies and strategies must be reviewed regularly.
• Contingency plans must be devised in case the environment changes.
• Top-level managers should carry out regular progress assessments.
• The business requires team spirit and a good environment.
• The missions, objectives, strengths and weaknesses of each department must be analyzed to determine their roles in achieving the business’s mission.
• The forecasting method develops a reliable picture of the business’s future environment.
• A planning unit must be created to ensure that all plans are consistent and that policies and strategies are aimed at achieving the same mission and objectives.

Policies and strategies in the planning process[edit]

• They give mid and lower-level managers a good idea of the future plans for each department in an organization.
• A framework is created whereby plans and decisions are made.
• Mid and lower-level management may add their own plans to the business’s strategies.

See also[edit]

• Certificate in Management Studies
• Engineering management
• Outline of business management

References[edit]

External links[edit]

The industrial revolution sparked great debate about management theory. It’s a key turning point in the history of management. These are six of the leading theories that appeared after this event.

Every country undergoes industrialisation. It occurred in the United Kingdom in the mid-19th century. British people who immigrated to Australia then brought their knowledge with them. This sparked a similar industrial revolution in Australia.

Why is this relevant to modern management?

The industrial revolution allowed companies to grow far larger than ever before. Management no longer involved overseeing a few dozen employees directly. Massive corporations with hundreds or thousands of employees sprouted up from this era. It’s a key turning point in the history of management that led to many of the theories that we use today.

The industrial revolution led to the creation of several different concepts of management. Many came about in the years that followed. Though these concepts evolve, they’re still relevant in the modern age.

Let’s dive into the history of management and look at six theories. These all form the basis of modern management theory.

Frederick Winslow Taylor – Scientific Management Theory

Frederick Winslow Taylor was one of the earliest proponents of management theory. A mechanical engineer, he authored The Principles of Scientific Management in 1909.

At its most basic, his theory proposed for the simplification of jobs. By keeping things simple, he argued, productivity would improve. He also argued that managers and employees must work together. This was a new idea in the history of management. In the early-20th century, most companies still operated like dictatorships. The manager assigned the work, and the employee did it.

This was especially the case in the factories that rose out of the industrial revolution. Managers had almost no contact with employees. Instead, they issued orders and expected employees to get on with the work. There was no standardisation or science behind it. This, Taylor argued, led to unproductive workers.

He espoused fair pay for a fair day’s work. This mantra focused on employee productivity. If one worker produced less than another, they did not deserve equal pay. Taylor argued for the creation of scientific methods. These would make production as efficient as possible. This gave more responsibility to employees. They all had the same methods available, so the less productive had nothing to hide behind.

Taylor also created four principles of management as part of his work. These are:

1. Use scientific methods to determine the most efficient way to complete a task.
2. Monitor employees to determine performance. This involves offering guidance to those that aren’t as efficient as needed.
3. Assign employees to work that suits their skills and motivation levels. Then, coach them to reach maximum efficiency.
4. Managers must focus on planning and professional improvement. Employees must focus on the tasks given to them.

Some of these principles haven’t survived the test of time. The fourth, in particular, offers no way for employees to improve professionally. Yet, they do tackle common problems in the modern workplace. Most managers search for more efficient processes. Monitoring employee performance is a common practice. Still, these were different concepts of management than those practiced at the time.

Henri Fayol – Administrative Management Theory

Also active during the same time as Taylor was Henri Fayol. Having started his career at a French mining company at the age of 19, Fayol rose up the ranks. In time, he became the company’s director, managing over 1,000 people.

Henri Fayol went 10 better than Taylor when he published Administration Industrielle et Générale. He created 14 principles of management. However, most of these focused on the administrative side of management. We’ve covered his principles in depth on our blog.

Fayol developed his 14 principles while working in his directorship. As a result, they came from the direct experience of a man who had been there and done it all.

He argued that many managers didn’t interact well with their employees. In this, he agreed with Taylor. But Fayol’s principles focused less on science. Instead, he looked at how to create an efficient company structure.

He argued for employee specialisation and a focus on organisational interests. Fayol also believed that all employees should only have one direct manager.

Fayol’s book became one of the key leadership tools in the history of management. Even today, his 14 principles of management agree with most modern organisation’s aims.

Max Weber –  Bureaucratic Management Theory

One of the earliest examples of evolution in the history of management, Max Weber built on Taylor’s theory. He argued for similar principles. Weber believed that all managers must build chains of command. He also argued for standardisation.

Weber and Taylor differed in a key area. Weber realised that Taylor’s scientific theory did not account for emotions. He argued that the rise of technology could lead to a toxic workplace culture. He differs from many management theorists because of this focus on the negatives. Too much change can affect morale.

Weber’s bureaucratic theory argues for the following:

• Detailed record-keeping at all levels of an organisation.
• Employees must have clear job roles so they maintain their focus.
• All organisations should have clear hierarchies.
• The standardisation of common procedures.
• Organisations must only hire employees who are fit for the job in question.

With this last point, Weber touched on an important aspect of modern business. Hiring for fit, he believed, involved searching for employees with the correct skills.

We now know much more about hiring practices. Hiring based on skill alone does not account for a company’s culture. If a new employee’s personality does not fit your culture, they rarely succeed.

As such, modern management theory has taken Weber’s ideas a step further. Still, his work created another important stepping stone to today’s management principles.

Professor Elton Mayo – Human Relations Management Theory

Despite their importance, the previous concepts of management didn’t account for people. Specifically, they all held firm that money was the main influencer of employee performance.

Elton Mayo’s Studies added a new wrinkle. For five years, Mayo studied employees at Chicago’s Western Electric Hawthorne Works. He placed his focus on workplace conditions, and how they affected productivity.

His study found that relationships work as a key motivator for employees. When working as part of a team, people become more productive. The improvement was so marked that it became known as “The Hawthorne Effect”.

Mayo’s work laid the foundations for the focus on teamwork that today’s management theories have. He was the first to prove that the right people in the right teams leads to higher productivity.

His work led to the founding of the Human Relations Management Theory. Other theorists adopted his research. They used it to look for ways to create high-performing teams. These efforts still had the same aims of previous theories. They aimed for greater efficiency and better results. But Mayo’s work emphasised the importance of the human factor.

As a result, the Hawthorne Studies are a major benchmark in the history of management.

Ludwig von Bertalanffy – General System Theory

A biologist, Ludwig von Bertalanffy wasn’t a management theorist. In fact, his general theory related more to biology than management. Even so, his work in the 1940s proved instrumental in the history of management.

He argued that all systems are the sums of their parts. In biology, you can look at your own body for an example of this. Your organs, muscles, and bones all combine, along with everything else in your body, to make a whole. One organ or muscle on its own is not productive. But the right combination leads to an efficient body.

You may already see how this applies to management theory. Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s General System has relevance in the workplace too. Most organisations contain several departments. Each of these departments has people, all of whom have their own jobs. If one department doesn’t carry its weight, the organisation suffers. In some cases, even one person failing to do their job properly can have widespread ramifications.

Beyond this, he also argued that each element in a system reacts to its environment. Outside influences can affect how a system operates. You could argue that this relates to toxicity in the workplace. It also places an emphasis on how personal issues can affect an employee’s motivation levels.

Though a biological theory at first, general system theory applies to so much more. In fact, it’s at the root of many modern managerial theories.

Douglas McGregor – X & Y Management Theory

In 1960, Douglas McGregor built on the teamwork-related ideas in the Hawthorne Studies. He published The Human Side of Enterprise to make his points. In that book, McGregor presents two types of management: Theory X and Theory Y.

Theory X relates to authoritarianism. Such managers take a negative view of their employers. They assume their people have no motivation and won’t work well unless pushed. This leads to the leader taking too much control, often micromanaging projects. In such an organisation, productivity plays a huge role. If an employee doesn’t reach a certain “quota”, they don’t receive their rewards. It also assumes that employees have no ambition of their own. Theory X managers believe they must drag employees along to get results.

Theory Y built more directly from Mayo’s studies. Such managers take a much more positive approach to their people. They believe that teamwork leads to better results. Furthermore, Theory Y managers encourage professional development and give employees more responsibilities. They want to see initiative, which builds a positive workplace culture.

McGregor argued that Theory Y is the better choice of the two. Modern management bears his claims out as well. Though authoritarianism still exists, most don’t see it as the way to develop a healthy organisation. Theory Y forms the basis of most modern management theories.

The Final Word

Each of these theories has its own degree of relevance in modern management. However, they all make up important parts of the post-industrial history of management. Even today, others build upon the ideas presented in these theories. As a result, you could call these six theories the backbone of modern management.

Here are the key takeaways:

• Modern management involves looking for more efficient processes.
• Teamwork plays a crucial role in employee motivation.
• All parts of an organisation must work in harmony to achieve the collective goal.

Remember that a great manager can DOUBLE the capacity of their people.

Register for our next webinar to learn more about engaging your employees.

Management in all business and organizational activities is the act of getting people together to accomplish desired goals and objectives using available resources efficiently and effectively. Management comprises planning, organizing, staffing, leading or directing, and controlling an organization (a group of one or more people or entities) or effort for the purpose of accomplishing a goal. Resourcing encompasses the deployment and manipulation of human resources, financial resources, technological resources and natural resources.

Since organizations can be viewed as systems, management can also be defined as human action, including design, to facilitate the production of useful outcomes from a system. This view opens the opportunity to ‘manage’ oneself, a pre-requisite to attempting to manage others.

History

The verb manage comes from the Italian maneggiare (to handle — especially tools), which in turn derives from the Latin manus (hand). The French word mesnagement (later ménagement) influenced the development in meaning of the English word management in the 17th and 18th centuries.^[1]

Some definitions of management are:

• Organization and coordination of the activities of an enterprise in accordance with certain policies and in achievement of clearly defined objectives. Management is often included as a factor of production along with machines, materials and money. According to the management guru Peter Drucker (1909–2005), the basic task of a management is twofold: marketing and innovation.

• Directors and managers have the power and responsibility to make decisions to manage an enterprise when given the authority by the shareholders. As a discipline, management comprises the interlocking functions of formulating corporate policy and organizing, planning, controlling, and directing the firm’s resources to achieve the policy’s objectives. The size of management can range from one person in a small firm to hundreds or thousands of managers in multinational companies. In large firms the board of directors formulates the policy which is implemented by the chief executive officer.

Theoretical scope

At first, one views management functionally, such as measuring quantity, adjusting plans, meeting goals. This applies even in situations planning does not take place. From this perspective, Henri Fayol (1841–1925)^[2] considers management to consist of six functions: forecasting, planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating and controlling. He was one of the most influential contributors to modern concepts of management.

Another way of thinking, Mary Parker Follett (1868–1933), defined management as «the art of getting things done through people». She described management as philosophy.^[3]

Some people, however, find this definition useful but far too narrow. The phrase «management is what managers do» occurs widely, suggesting the difficulty of defining management, the shifting nature of definitions and the connection of managerial practices with the existence of a managerial cadre or class.

One habit of thought regards management as equivalent to «business administration» and thus excludes management in places outside commerce, as for example in charities and in the public sector. More realistically, however, every organization must manage its work, people, processes, technology, etc. to maximize effectiveness. Nonetheless, many people refer to university departments which teach management as «business schools.» Some institutions (such as the Harvard Business School) use that name while others (such as the Yale School of Management) employ the more inclusive term «management.»

English speakers may also use the term «management» or «the management» as a collective word describing the managers of an organization, for example of a corporation. Historically this use of the term was often contrasted with the term «Labor» referring to those being managed.

Nature of managerial work

In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers) and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely.

In the public sector of countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new president/governor/mayor.

Historical development

Difficulties arise in tracing the history of management. Some see it (by definition) as a late modern (in the sense of late modernity) conceptualization. On those terms it cannot have a pre-modern history, only harbingers (such as stewards). Others, however, detect management-like-thought back to Sumerian traders and to the builders of the pyramids of ancient Egypt. Slave-owners through the centuries faced the problems of exploiting/motivating a dependent but sometimes unenthusiastic or recalcitrant workforce, but many pre-industrial enterprises, given their small scale, did not feel compelled to face the issues of management systematically. However, innovations such as the spread of Arabic numerals (5th to 15th centuries) and the codification of double-entry book-keeping (1494) provided tools for management assessment, planning and control.

Given the scale of most commercial operations and the lack of mechanized record-keeping and recording before the industrial revolution, it made sense for most owners of enterprises in those times to carry out management functions by and for themselves. But with growing size and complexity of organizations, the split between owners (individuals, industrial dynasties or groups of shareholders) and day-to-day managers (independent specialists in planning and control) gradually became more common.

Early writing

While management has been present for millennia, several writers have created a background of works that assisted in modern management theories.^[4]

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War

Written by Chinese general Sun Tzu in the 6th century BC, The Art of War is a military strategy book that, for managerial purposes, recommends being aware of and acting on strengths and weaknesses of both a manager’s organization and a foe’s.^[4]

Chanakya’s Arthashastra

Chanakya wrote the Arthashastra around 300BC in which various strategies, techniques and management theories were written which gives an account on the management of empires, economy and family. The work is often compared to the later works of Machiavelli.

Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince

Believing that people were motivated by self-interest, Niccolò Machiavelli wrote The Prince in 1513 as advice for the city of Florence, Italy.^[5] Machiavelli recommended that leaders use fear—but not hatred—to maintain control.

Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations

Written in 1776 by Adam Smith, a Scottish moral philosopher, The Wealth of Nations aims for efficient organization of work through Specialization of labor.^[5] Smith described how changes in processes could boost productivity in the manufacture of pins. While individuals could produce 200 pins per day, Smith analyzed the steps involved in manufacture and, with 10 specialists, enabled production of 48,000 pins per day.^[5]

19th century

Classical economists such as Adam Smith (1723–1790) and John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) provided a theoretical background to resource-allocation, production, and pricing issues. About the same time, innovators like Eli Whitney (1765–1825), James Watt (1736–1819), and Matthew Boulton (1728–1809) developed elements of technical production such as standardization, quality-control procedures, cost-accounting, interchangeability of parts, and work-planning. Many of these aspects of management existed in the pre-1861 slave-based sector of the US economy. That environment saw 4 million people, as the contemporary usages had it, «managed» in profitable quasi-mass production.

By the late 19th century, marginal economists Alfred Marshall (1842–1924), Léon Walras (1834–1910), and others introduced a new layer of complexity to the theoretical underpinnings of management. Joseph Wharton offered the first tertiary-level course in management in 1881.

20th century

By about 1900 one finds managers trying to place their theories on what they regarded as a thoroughly scientific basis (see scientism for perceived limitations of this belief). Examples include Henry R. Towne’s Science of management in the 1890s, Frederick Winslow Taylor’s The Principles of Scientific Management (1911), Frank and Lillian Gilbreth’s Applied motion study (1917), and Henry L. Gantt’s charts (1910s). J. Duncan wrote the first college management textbook in 1911. In 1912 Yoichi Ueno introduced Taylorism to Japan and became first management consultant of the «Japanese-management style». His son Ichiro Ueno pioneered Japanese quality assurance.

The first comprehensive theories of management appeared around 1920. The Harvard Business School offered the first Master of Business Administration degree (MBA) in 1921. People like Henri Fayol (1841–1925) and Alexander Church described the various branches of management and their inter-relationships. In the early 20th century, people like Ordway Tead (1891–1973), Walter Scott and J. Mooney applied the principles of psychology to management, while other writers, such as Elton Mayo (1880–1949), Mary Parker Follett (1868–1933), Chester Barnard (1886–1961), Max Weber (1864–1920), Rensis Likert (1903–1981), and Chris Argyris (1923 — ) approached the phenomenon of management from a sociological perspective.

Peter Drucker (1909–2005) wrote one of the earliest books on applied management: Concept of the Corporation (published in 1946). It resulted from Alfred Sloan (chairman of General Motors until 1956) commissioning a study of the organisation. Drucker went on to write 39 books, many in the same vein.

H. Dodge, Ronald Fisher (1890–1962), and Thornton C. Fry introduced statistical techniques into management-studies. In the 1940s, Patrick Blackett combined these statistical theories with microeconomic theory and gave birth to the science of operations research. Operations research, sometimes known as «management science» (but distinct from Taylor’s scientific management), attempts to take a scientific approach to solving management problems, particularly in the areas of logistics and operations.

Some of the more recent developments include the Theory of Constraints, management by objectives, reengineering, Six Sigma and various information-technology-driven theories such as agile software development, as well as group management theories such as Cog’s Ladder.

As the general recognition of managers as a class solidified during the 20th century and gave perceived practitioners of the art/science of management a certain amount of prestige, so the way opened for popularised systems of management ideas to peddle their wares. In this context many management fads may have had more to do with pop psychology than with scientific theories of management.

Towards the end of the 20th century, business management came to consist of six separate branches, namely:

• Human resource management
• Operations management or production management
• Strategic management
• Marketing management
• Financial management
• Information technology management responsible for management information systems

21st century

In the 21st century observers find it increasingly difficult to subdivide management into functional categories in this way. More and more processes simultaneously involve several categories. Instead, one tends to think in terms of the various processes, tasks, and objects subject to management.

Branches of management theory also exist relating to nonprofits and to government: such as public administration, public management, and educational management. Further, management programs related to civil-society organizations have also spawned programs in nonprofit management and social entrepreneurship.

Note that many of the assumptions made by management have come under attack from business ethics viewpoints, critical management studies, and anti-corporate activism.

As one consequence, workplace democracy has become both more common, and more advocated, in some places distributing all management functions among the workers, each of whom takes on a portion of the work. However, these models predate any current political issue, and may occur more naturally than does a command hierarchy. All management to some degree embraces democratic principles in that in the long term workers must give majority support to management; otherwise they leave to find other work, or go on strike. Despite the move toward workplace democracy, command-and-control organization structures remain commonplace and the de facto organization structure. Indeed, the entrenched nature of command-and-control can be seen in the way that recent layoffs have been conducted with management ranks affected far less than employees at the lower levels. In some cases, management has even rewarded itself with bonuses after laying off level workers.^[6]

According to leading leadership academic Manfred F.R. Kets de Vries, it’s almost inevitable these days that there will be some personality disorders in a senior management team.^[7]

Topics

Basic functions

Management operates through various functions, often classified as planning, organizing, staffing, leading/directing, controlling/monitoring and motivation.

• Planning: Deciding what needs to happen in the future (today, next week, next month, next year, over the next five years, etc.) and generating plans for action.
• Organizing: (Implementation)pattern of relationships among workers, making optimum use of the resources required to enable the successful carrying out of plans.
• Staffing: Job analysis, recruitment and hiring for appropriate jobs.
• Leading/directing: Determining what needs to be done in a situation and getting people to do it.
• Controlling/monitoring: Checking progress against plans.
• Motivation: Motivation is also a kind of basic function of management, because without motivation, employees cannot work effectively. If motivation does not take place in an organization, then employees may not contribute to the other functions (which are usually set by top-level management).

Basic roles

• Interpersonal: roles that involve coordination and interaction with employees.
• Informational: roles that involve handling, sharing, and analyzing information.
• Decisional: roles that require decision-making.

Management skills

• Political: used to build a power base and establish connections.
• Conceptual: used to analyze complex situations.
• Interpersonal: used to communicate, motivate, mentor and delegate.
• Diagnostic: the ability to visualise most appropriate response to a situation .

^[8]

Formation of the business policy

• The mission of the business is the most obvious purpose—which may be, for example, to make soap.
• The vision of the business reflects its aspirations and specifies its intended direction or future destination.
• The objectives of the business refers to the ends or activity at which a certain task is aimed.
• The business’s policy is a guide that stipulates rules, regulations and objectives, and may be used in the managers’ decision-making. It must be flexible and easily interpreted and understood by all employees.
• The business’s strategy refers to the coordinated plan of action that it is going to take, as well as the resources that it will use, to realize its vision and long-term objectives. It is a guideline to managers, stipulating how they ought to allocate and utilize the factors of production to the business’s advantage. Initially, it could help the managers decide on what type of business they want to form.

Implementation of policies and strategies

• All policies and strategies must be discussed with all managerial personnel and staff.
• Managers must understand where and how they can implement their policies and strategies.
• A plan of action must be devised for each department.
• Policies and strategies must be reviewed regularly.
• Contingency plans must be devised in case the environment changes.
• Assessments of progress ought to be carried out regularly by top-level managers.
• A good environment and team spirit is required within the business.
• The missions, objectives, strengths and weaknesses of each department must be analysed to determine their roles in achieving the business’s mission.
• The forecasting method develops a reliable picture of the business’s future environment.
• A planning unit must be created to ensure that all plans are consistent and that policies and strategies are aimed at achieving the same mission and objectives.

All policies must be discussed with all managerial personnel and staff that is required in the execution of any departmental policy.

• Organizational change is strategically achieved through the implementation of the eight-step plan of action established by John P. Kotter: Increase urgency, get the vision right, communicate the buy-in, empower action, create short-term wins, don’t let up, and make change stick.^[9]

Policies and strategies in the planning process

• They give mid- and lower-level managers a good idea of the future plans for each department in an organization.
• A framework is created whereby plans and decisions are made.
• Mid- and lower-level management may add their own plans to the business’s strategic ones.

Levels of management

Most organizations have three management levels: first-level, middle-level, and top-level managers. These managers are classified in a hierarchy of authority, and perform different tasks. In many organizations, the number of managers in every level resembles a pyramid. Each level is explained below in specifications of their different responsibilities and likely job titles.^[10]

Top-level managers

Consists of board of directors, president, vice-president, CEOs, etc. They are responsible for controlling and overseeing the entire organization. They develop goals, strategic plans, company policies, and make decisions on the direction of the business. In addition, top-level managers play a significant role in the mobilization of outside resources and are accountable to the shareholders and general public.

According to Lawrence S. Kleiman, the following skills are needed at the top managerial level. ^[11]

• Broadened understanding of how: competition, world economies, politics, and social trends effect organizational effectiveness .

Middle-level managers

Consist of general managers, branch managers and department managers. They are accountable to the top management for their department’s function. They devote more time to organizational and directional functions. Their roles can be emphasized as executing organizational plans in conformance with the company’s policies and the objectives of the top management, they define and discuss information and policies from top management to lower management, and most importantly they inspire and provide guidance to lower level managers towards better performance. Some of their functions are as follows:

• Designing and implementing effective group and intergroup work and information systems.
• Defining and monitoring group-level performance indicators.
• Diagnosing and resolving problems within and among work groups.
• Designing and implementing reward systems supporting cooperative behavior.

First-level managers

Consist of supervisors, section leads, foremen, etc. They focus on controlling and directing. They assigning employees tasks, guide and supervise employees on day-to-day activities, ensure quality and quantity production, make recommendations, suggestions, and upchannel employee problems, etc. First-level managers are role models for employees that provide:

• Basic supervision.
• Motivation.
• Career planning.
• Performance feedback.

See also

• Scientific management
• Human relations movement
• Strategic management
• Total quality management

References

External links

Management as the art of management arose inof antiquity. His description as a kind of human activity is found in the writings of Socrates. Ancient Greek philosopher, who lived in the first millennium BC, describes the process of managing people as an attempt to put a certain person in a certain place and achieve from him the desired result of activity. Judging by the many sources that have survived to this day, the history of management originated several millennia ago, and the science of managing people passed in its formation in several definite stages.

Prehistoric people, who lived separately, do notneeded management of their activities from the outside. The main purpose of their existence was survival in the harsh conditions of nature. Our ancient ancestors, united for living together in tribes, already needed a wise man beside them, accepting solutions optimal for the whole tribe, resolving conflicts within the tribe, passing sentences for punishment in something of the guilty. The leader became such a man. As the social groups of people grew, the need for a division of labor arose, however, all this work also had to be controlled by someone from the outside. This is how the first rudiments of management of individual groups of people appear, separated by their professional characteristics.

The history of management in the modern sense of thiswords begins with the industrial revolution that occurred in the 17-19 centuries. It was during this period in Europe that the first production enterprises appeared that needed really talented managers. The science of management is formed by the end of the 19th century. In this period of time, the first works of scientists are devoted to this kind of human activity.

Stages and schools in the history of management

Management as a professionalactivity is first considered by the American G. Taun in his report prepared for the speech at the meeting of the Society of Mechanical Engineers. At this meeting, he for the first time expresses his opinion that the society needs training of managerial specialists.

In total, in the history of economic doctrines of the 20th century, five schools of management were formed:

— School of scientific management (founder F. Taylor, author of many books devoted to this topic);

— Administrative school (the ancestor — the French engineer A. Fayol);

— a quantitative school (representatives — D. Thompson, G. Ackoff, D. March);

— Behavioral school (its formation is associated with the development of sociology and psychology, known representatives are C. Bernard, F. Herzberg, K. Arjiris);

— School of human relations (founder — American E. Mayo).

The history of management includes five mainstages of management development, the first of which begins at the dawn of the 20th century and coincides with the time of the birth of the school of scientific management. The emergence of the administrative school of Fayol in the first decade of the 20th century marked the onset of the second stage of development of management activities.

At the same time in the United States begins the storyfinancial management. The Second World War has a significant influence on the formation of management thought, the first twenty years after its end coincide with the third stage of optimization of management.

The next stage in the development of managerialactivity is associated with science — psychology, which is only gaining momentum. For the fifth stage of management development (80-ies) is characterized by the discovery of such a powerful mechanism as the organizational structure. Modern management is associated with the development of computer technology and automation of production. Today the history of management does not end, the management science continues to actively develop and improve.

</ p>>