Classical vs Contemporary Approaches of Management

Introduction

Business management is a practise that has existed for decades and been adopted to enhance productivity and profitability. However, while multiple businesses have adopted management practices over time, they have also seen constant evolution developing from simple management techniques and practices such as the classical rational goal models that only take into account the financial outcome as the sole business objective to more complex strategies and techniques such as the Competing Values Framework that carters for multiple business goals and objectives all of which not only contribute to productivity and profitability but also sustainability and longevity of the business (Boddy, 2020).

Competing Values Framework

According to Quinn, Bright and Sturm (2021), the Competing Values Framework (CVF) is a theoretical management concept developed by Quinn and Rohrbaugh (1983), and that looks into the organisational culture within an organisation alongside the kinds of management styles that lead to this culture. It premises that two major dimensions of an organisation, including its focus (whether internal or external) and structure (whether geared towards flexibility or stability), effectively classifies an organisation into one of four quadrants of competing value and determine the type of management required for ultimate effectiveness. As such, the ultimate management style is not only dependent on a company’s financial outcomes as was in traditional management strategies but is dependent on a wider number of organisation objectives and goals that extend all the way to the culture that the company depicts.

Development of Management

Mullins (2013) advances the main stages in the development of management theory to include classical, human relations, system, and contingency management. The classical approach emphasises the common principles of an organisation, including its purpose, formal structures, management hierarchy and technical requirements, while the human relations management is focused on the social factors of a workgroup, including leadership and people’s behaviour (Mullins, 2013). On the other hand, systems management focuses on integrating the classical and human management aspects, while the contingency management approach premises that organisation success is dependent on a number of situational variables that cannot be predicted accurately.

Over time, organisations developed their management strategies and techniques by understanding the business area that needs managing and then carrying out adequate management activities. In the mid 20th century, businesses entirely focused on the business structure and activities to ensure adequate productivity and use of resources. Given the limited technology and less focus on human resources, organisations entirely adopted the classical management approach for almost all types of business. With the development of businesses into large entities and the realisation of human resources as a key aspect of organisation success, businesses developed the human relations management approach to ensure adequate personnel management. This evolved over time to systems management and necessitated the need for the development of contingency management in uncertain business situations.

Difference between Traditional and Contemporary Management

Traditional and contemporary management styles and theories as such differ significantly in the aspects of the objectives or goals of the ultimate management strategy adopted. According to Mullins and McLean (2019), for instance, traditional management models such as the rational goal model are entirely focused on improving a singular aspect of an organisation with no concern whatsoever on the other organisational aspects and elements that contribute towards the singular success. On the other hand, contemporary approaches such as the open systems model allow management on multiple planes to carter for all the elements and aspects that contribute to the organisation's ultimate success. While traditional management theories and strategies use scientifically focused methods to find the best way to do a job, contemporary methodology is more interested in flexibility and differentiation to enhance the attainment of multiple end goals, which may include productivity, profitability, employee satisfaction, as well as optimum equipment operations and resource use.

Part B: Individual paper based on a group project

Introduction

Working in teams is often necessary and the only way to achieve critical tasks within different organisation settings. McGurgan (2019) advances that in addition to individual workers within an organisation being competent at their individual skills and requirements for their positions, they also have to possess significant teamwork capabilities to adequately carry out group requiring jobs for the ultimate productivity and profitability of the organisation. However, motivation also provides a powerful incentive to a team to enhance their performance. Based on the experiences we had within our group work for identifying a historic individual and linking their activities to the leadership technique based on the CVF, regardless of the motivation technique adopted by team leader, team members often enhanced their performance to achieve success. The team included five people, and each individual was assigned a part of the work to contribute towards the ultimate end requirement. Various aspects of the group work, such as the strict timelines and the need to provide adequate work for maximum points, kept the team significantly motivated to be able to carry out their parts of the assignment adequately and on time. This highlights the significance of motivation to enhance productivity and profitability. However, different motivational theories and approaches exist and can be adopted and used effectively by team leaders to improve team productivity. These include both process and content motivation theories and techniques.

Content Motivation Theories

Content motivation models are directed towards individual needs as the main source of their motivation. According to Jeanes (2019), the premise of content motivation theories is that people will often be motivated by the possibility of acquiring the things that they think they need. Individuals will likely direct and sustain their behaviour towards meeting unmet needs. Among the common examples of content theories of motivation that any team leader can adopt to impact team’s motivation include the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Herzberg’s two-factor model, Alderfer's ERG model, and McClelland’s need for achievement, affiliation and power.

Providing what members within a team may require will provide necessary and sufficient motivation towards the achievement of the task at hand. While these needs may vary significantly from one person to the next, they also vary in terms of urgency, and this can be used to determine an individual’s most immediate need to adopt for motivation. Jeanes (2019) further highlights Maslow’s argument that individuals will seek the basic needs such as food, shelter and warmth first before considering and being motivated by other higher-order needs such as personal fulfilment and work satisfaction. This theory can significantly highlight the type of motivation that we had as a group in the process of preparing the group presentation. Each individual’s ultimate performance was reliant on the overall group performance, and since all of us wanted to pass the unit, we were sufficiently motivated by this to conduct our various tasks to perfection.

Process Motivation Theories

On the other hand, process motivation theories focus on the psychological and behavioural processes that affect individuals’ motivation. According to Mullins (2016), rather than focusing on the people's individual needs, process theories focus on the psychological and behavioural patterns that people follow and how these patterns and processes impact their motivation to carry out different activities. Among the common process, theories include Vroom’s expectancy theory, Skinners reinforcement theory, Adam’s equity theory and Locke’s goal-setting theory.

Through adequately understanding the psychological processes that impact motivation within a given team, it is possible to then understand the types of actions and interactions as well as contexts to trigger the ultimate team motivation (Mullins, 2016). Adam’s Equity theory for instance, premises that individuals engage in social comparisons by taing accounts each others effort and rewarded with determination for equal treatment. Often the perception of fairness of the reward based on the effort among multiple group members influences a higher level of motivation leading to enhanced performance and productivity. This is true for our group scenario, where the work was equally divided among all the five members of the group to achieve a sense of equality, given that the resulting outcome will be similar for all the members. The perception of equality on the amount of work and ultimate reward among all the group members provided sufficient motivation for each individual to carry out their delegated portion of the work adequately.

CVF Action Imperatives

The CVF classifies organisations and the leadership structures and strategies adopted in four major categories: Adhocracy, Market-oriented, Hierarchy and Family organisation. According to Harappa (2021), the Adhocracy refers to an externally focused company that relies significantly on extensive innovation and creativity to achieve adequate flexibility necessary for success. Such organisations significantly indulge in taking risks and diversifying company operations and are generally suitable for a visionary and innovative type of leadership. The market-oriented organisation type meanwhile describes organisations that are fuelled with adaptations to the changes in the marketplace. Harappa (2021) asserts that such organisations are externally focused and engage in continually looking to compete, control and gain a competitive advantage to enhance continued performance and profitability.

On the other hand, the Hierarchy organisation is internally focused and run through control, order, and continuous development and improvement. It is a formalised organisation where the leadership is focused on achieving the highest quality of work with long term strategies and visions for the organisations’ ultimate development into a stable structure with clear and formal rules. However, the family type organisation is entirely different from the other three types. It is an organisation firmly held together by shared values such as cohesion, stability, participation and succeeding as a team (Opinno, 2021). It is a people-focused organisation where employees share a lot, and leaders are often regarded as mentors. The organisation type also puts a high emphasis on personal development and fulfilment through work. Based on the information gathered on myself, I would describe myself as fitting more within the family type organisations given my significant value of team corporation and coordination. I believe that each team member has something to give, and therefore my leadership principles can better fit within the family type organisation.

To become an adequate manager, one must understand their leadership skills and styles and relate them adequately with the type of organisation they intend to lead. This is because among the key skills required to become an adequate manager is people skills and an inherent understanding of how an organisation operates. Through understanding which type of organisation one is leading, they can then deduce the most important aspects of the organisation, whether creativity and innovation or stability and control, an individual can then apply an adequate leadership style based to manage an organisation effectively.

Conclusion

Organisation management encompasses a wide range of activities and business aspects that have to be optimised to ensure the ultimate success and profitability of the business. While different management approaches and principles are available and can be adopted by leaders to enhance their organisation performance, it is critical to identify the type of organisation in question to determine the right type of leadership necessary for the organisation's ultimate performance and success. Leaders can also use the Competing Values Framework to determine which type of leaders and which organisation type and structure they will best fit.

Continue your journey with our comprehensive guide to Child protection and drug abuse.

Bibliography:

• Boddy, D., (2020). Management: An Introduction. Harlow, Pearson Education.
• Harappa, (2021). Competing Values Framework. Harappa. Available at: https://harappa.education/harappa-diaries/what-is-competing-values-framework/ (Accessed: 19 December 2021).
• Jeanes, E., (2019). A dictionary of organisational behaviour. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• McGurgan, H., (2019). Why It Is Necessary to Motivate a Team?. Small Business - Chron.com. Available at: https://smallbusiness.chron.com/necessary-motivate-team-78757.html (Accessed: 21 December 2021).
• Mullins, L. J., (2013). Management & Organisational Behaviour, 9th Ed. Harlow, Pearson Education Ltd.
• Mullins, L. J., (2016). Management & Organisational Behaviour. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.
• Mullins L. J. and McLean J. E., (2019). Organisational Behaviour in the Workplace. Harlow, Pearson Education Ltd.
• Opinno, (2021). Improving Organizational Culture with the Competing Values Framework | Opinno. Opinno.com. Available at: https://opinno.com/project/improving-organizational-culture-competing-values-framework (Accessed: 24 December 2021).
• Quinn, R. E., Bright, D.S. & Sturm, R.E., (2021). Becoming a master manager: a competing values approach. 7th ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.