School of Scientific Management. Characteristics of the organization as a system

16.10.2019 -

Warts

Introduction

Theoretical essence and foundations of management principles

1 History, essence and content of management principles

2 Principles of management based on the school of scientific management

Management at the present stage

1 Formation of a modern management model

2 Implementation of management principles in modern management

Conclusion

List of used sources and literature

Appendix

Introduction

Ideas about the role and place of managing an organization, about the content of management activities, methods and principles for its implementation have repeatedly undergone significant changes since management began to be considered as a special type of activity carried out in an organization. Views on management have evolved as social relations have developed, business has changed, production technology has improved, new means of communication and information processing have appeared.

The practice of management has changed - the doctrine of management has also changed. However, managerial thought did not play the role of passively following the practice of management. Moreover, it was precisely the new ideas in the field of management put forward and formulated by the leading minds of managerial thought, as well as new approaches to the implementation of management, that marked the milestones, starting from which there were broad transformations in management practice.

The development of problems of scientific management, which unfolded at the beginning of the 20th century and focused on the activities and specialization of the leader, faced the need to analyze the construction and creation of principles for the functioning of the organization as a whole.

The main tasks of management science are the study and practical use principles for the development of the entire set of management goals, the development of plans, the creation of economic and organizational conditions for the effective operation of labor collectives. The study and mastery of these patterns is a necessary condition for improving the management of public and private production, improving the economic infrastructure and raising the national economy of the country.

Relevance The topic is due to the fact that the choice of an effective management model can be made more accurately if you know the stages and principles of development of managerial thought.

Object and subject of research: The object of the research is the school of scientific management, the subject is the use of the principles of the school of scientific management in modern conditions.

Target: study of management in modern conditions based on the principles of the school of scientific management.

Tasks: consider

history, essence and content of management principles

principles of management based on the school of scientific management

formation

implementation of management principles in modern management

Methods for achieving the set goals and objectives: The methodological basis of the study was the dialectical method of cognition and a systematic approach. In the process, general scientific methods and research were used: analysis, synthesis, grouping and comparison methods.

Bibliographic overview: In preparing the work, the sources of scientific and educational literature, Internet resources, articles on the research topic were studied and analyzed.

Work structure: The work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion, a list of references and references, and an appendix.

In the introductionthe relevance of the choice of topic is substantiated, goals and objectives are set, the methods are characterized and the sources of the study are presented.

In 1 chapterthe theoretical essence and foundations of management principles are considered.

Chapter 2management at the present stage is considered.

In custodythe main conclusions are formulated.

1. Theoretical essence and foundations of management principles

.1 History, essence and content of management principles

The historical path of evolution of management has more than a hundred years. The essence of management is that it special function social labor, which arises from the need to organize joint activities and is generated, on the one hand, by the division of labor, and on the other hand, by the socio-historical conditions of society that determine labor cooperation. Consequently, both the joint work of people and management is a necessary element, a function of this common work, the existence and development of society.

The emergence of management is associated with the need to achieve goals that cannot be achieved alone. They proposed dividing people into two groups: those who are engaged in labor activities and those who manage them. Between these two groups certain relations began to take shape - relations of management.

The main components of any organization are tasks, people and management. For the successful existence of the organization, it is necessary to maintain a certain balance between these three processes. And the key role in maintaining this balance belongs to management.

The management system is based on developed and substantiated methods and principles. What are management principles and is it possible to do without them in modern production? Management principles are the basic rules that determine the construction and operation of the management system; the most important requirements, the observance of which ensures the effectiveness of management. The principles of management can be represented as the fundamental ideas and rules of behavior of the leader in the implementation of managerial functions.

In the past, not knowing about any principles, people successfully conducted their economic activities. It should be noted here that in their activities people have always been guided by certain principles.

In the relatively recent past, there was no complex system of economic relations due to the development of specialization and cooperation of labor and scientific and technological progress. In modern conditions, without relying on thoroughly substantiated and practice-tested management principles, it is impossible to ensure the effective development of the enterprise and the economy as a whole.

The main principles determine the philosophy and strategy of managing the enterprise and its links. To a certain extent, they are designed to serve as an advertisement for the enterprise. Based on the developed principles, the goals of the enterprise are adjusted, priorities are specified, its policy is formulated, methods are developed. The implementation of the principles, goals, priorities and policies of enterprises is carried out with the help of appropriate working methods, instructions, regulations and standards.

Social production relations determine the role and place of each worker in the process of production, exchange, distribution and consumption. The final result - the result of the activity of a huge team - depends on the quality and efficiency of the work of each of them.

Management principles are among the most important categories of management.

In the literature there is no single approach to the classification of management principles, there is no consensus on the content of the basic principles of management.

The principles of management are very diverse. They must comply with both partial and general goals of increasing production efficiency, socio-economic development. The principles of control serve not only to construct speculative schemes. They quite rigidly determine the nature of the links in the system, the structure of the governing bodies, the adoption and implementation of managerial decisions.

.2 Principles of management based on the school of scientific management

The era of the technical revolution made it possible to create new energy machines, optical and measuring instruments, the principles of organizing mass production, automata and programming. However, the regularity, efficiency and planning of monastic work in the 19th century began to be supplanted by the division of labor into separate primitive operations. At the same time, by the beginning of the 20th century, certain prerequisites for the formation of scientific management began to take shape.

The founder and main developer of the ideas of scientific management is Frederick Winslow Taylor. In 1911, his book Principles of Scientific Management was published. The purpose of the Taylor system is to provide maximum profit to the owner of the enterprise, forcing the worker to work with the utmost effort.

Unlike many management theorists, Taylor was neither a research scientist nor a business school professor. He was a practitioner: first a worker, and then a manager. Starting as a worker, he worked his way through several levels of hierarchy and rose to the level of chief engineer in a steel company.

“Taylor's teaching is based on a mechanistic understanding of man, his place in the organization and the essence of his activity. Taylor set himself the task of increasing labor productivity and saw its solution in the rationalization of labor operations on the basis of the scientific organization of the worker's work. The starting point for the rationalization of labor for Taylor was the study of the task, which was supposed to provide information for constructing a rational set of operations to solve this problem. Taylor proceeded from the fact that workers are inherently lazy and do not want to work just like that. Therefore, he believed that rationalization, leading to an increase in profits, would be accepted by the worker only when his income also increased.

Taylor was an industrial engineer, so it was natural for him to look at controls as if they were machines. It should be noted that this approach was universal at that time. He believed that managers should think and workers should work. This led to the emergence of a large number of functional managers and in-depth specialization based on the operational division of labor.

Taylor's basic principles of scientific management are as follows:

Development of optimal methods for the implementation of work on the basis of a scientific study of the costs of time, movements, efforts, etc.;
Absolute adherence to the developed standards;
Selection, training and placement of workers for those jobs and tasks where they can give the greatest benefit;
Pay based on performance (less results - less pay, big results - more pay);
The use of functional managers exercising control in specialized areas;
Maintaining friendly relations between workers and managers in order to enable the implementation of scientific management.

The main provisions of the Taylor system:

normalization of methods and working conditions
performance by each worker only of the work for which he is most capable
selection of workers on the basis of scientifically determined characteristics, their education and training
precise instructions for each employee
special training of workers
accounting and control of all types of work
separation of administrative work from executive work, the introduction of the institution of masters who manage workers
an attempt to unite the cooperation of administration and workers.

Scientific management is also closely related to the work of Frank and Lily Gilbreth and Henry Gantt. "These creators of the school of scientific management believed that by using observation, measurement, logic and analysis, many manual labor operations could be improved, achieving their more efficient performance." The first phase of the methodology of scientific management was the analysis of the content of the work and the definition of its main components. Taylor, for example, meticulously measured the amount of iron ore and coal that a person could lift with shovels of varying sizes. The Gilbreths invented the device and called it the microchronometer. They used it in conjunction with a movie camera to determine exactly what movements are performed in certain operations and how long each of them takes. Based on the information they received, they changed the workflow to identify redundant, unproductive movements and sought to improve work efficiency.

Henry Lawrence Gantt (1861-1919) was no longer interested in individual operations, but in the production processes as a whole. According to Gantt, “the main differences between the best systems today and those of the past are in the way tasks are scheduled, and the rewards for 'doing' them are distributed. Gantt is a pioneer in the field of operational management and scheduling of enterprises. He developed a whole system of planned schedules (Gantt schedules), which, thanks to his high awareness, allow him to control the planned and draw up calendar plans for the future. Gannt's organizational images include his wage system with elements of time and piecework forms of payment. Such a system of remuneration of workers sharply increased their interest in meeting and overfulfilling a high norm (if the planned norm was not met, workers were paid at an hourly rate).

The concept of scientific management was a major watershed in which management became widely recognized as a field of scientific research in its own right.

2. Management at the present stage

.1 Formation modern management model

Changes in society, the economy, in our entire way of life are complex in that they require changes in ourselves. To cope with this unprecedented challenge in the life of current generations, we, among other things, need to master new knowledge, learn how to use it in practice. An important part of this knowledge, as world experience shows, is the comprehension of the science and art of management.

At turning points in history, when outdated views are being revised, a lot of new ideas, models and concepts always appear, most of which are vague, indefinite, not justified by science and practice. Some jokers call this state of public thought "corporate insanity", but it is obvious that you need to go through the search phase - only in this way can a model of a management system be born at its new historical stage.

Now the problem of choosing a path is being solved further development society, and specialists from various branches of science are carefully studying the experience of management in various civilized, advanced states. Undoubtedly, the experience of many countries will be used and its own, characteristic system management. However, it is necessary to decide which system of management of society and production best suits the specific conditions. The concept of individualism is based on the assumption that in their actions a person is primarily focused on his own interests and achieves goals in a competitive struggle with other individuals. Some leaders focused on individual values, and the ideal type of such a leader is a leader, a strong personality, closing the entire management process. Others are focused on group activities, each member of the team, including the leader, does not think of himself outside of common tasks. The effectiveness of the work of such a manager lies in ensuring the successful operation of the team of associates headed by him, in applying such methods of influence that could ensure the voluntary and maximum realization of the creative potential of everyone.

If we compare the given data, we can conclude that there is a significant difference between these systems. Most of the elements of the second management system are reasonable, logically justified and can be applied in management practice after a certain modification.

Many corporations are already implementing various forms and methods of personnel management: ensuring the guarantee of employment of employees for a long time, introducing a system of continuous training and rotation, using methods of collective decision-making and monitoring their implementation, increasing attention to the "human factor" by developing informal relations between managers and subordinates, "quality circles " etc. The prospect of improving product quality and labor productivity while developing loyalty and devotion to the goals of the company explains the persistence in the introduction of Japanese management methods, especially since the modern Western school of management cannot yet offer an equivalent alternative to improve the traditional methods of managing large business.

Modern management theory is formed on the basis of hundreds and thousands of economic, structural and managerial experiments, as a result of painful searches, trial and error. You can criticize as long and caustically as you like, but an objective analysis of the development of market relations in shows that the saturation of the market with goods, the introduction of new technologies is not the result of the activities of old enterprises that existed under Soviet rule, but mainly of new organizations and firms. As a result of ill-conceived, amateurish, and sometimes clearly criminal actions, in order to satisfy the exorbitant personal ambitions of the highest political figures in the country, a catastrophic change in the situation occurred in all spheres of public life, and it was new economic structures that were able to correctly assess this new situation and draw reasonable conclusions. Old enterprises, despite their colossal production capacities, well-developed interregional ties, significant intellectual and labor resources, could not quickly fit into the new economic conditions.

After the destruction of the economic system, the existence of a colossal market for goods and services, from cigarettes and chewing gum to modern televisions and computers, became obvious. Using the sacramental slogan that "everything that is not prohibited is possible," new entrepreneurs began to energetically and by any means fill the market with goods, realizing the current situation on the market into new commercial opportunities. In this economic chaos, more and more new companies and firms were instantly enriched, created and quickly disappeared, but the most far-sighted began to understand that managing successful companies on the basis of personal authority alone, on the charisma of a leader, is becoming increasingly difficult and that it is vital to learn management, experience of well-known firms in a highly competitive environment. The "romantic-robbery" period of management was replaced by the time of laying the foundation for scientifically based management technology, and many new businessmen sat down at their desks.

Now, literally before our eyes, a new management model is being formed, and each of its successes or failures has an impact on the standard of living of the population. New terms are being formed, a new understanding of the role of those involved in management. The image of the modern entrepreneur is beginning to take shape - a person who owns property, uses hired labor and often takes on the functions of strategic management in order to maximize profits. The status of an entrepreneur implies not only economic freedom and creative independence in making managerial decisions, but also high legal, material and moral responsibility for the results of one's activities. The contours of the new, Russian system of governance are becoming more and more clear, and its main feature is the orientation towards the person, his creative potential, the system should work for people, with people, and not against them. A leader of a new type should be based on universal ethical values, master the theory, technique and art of influencing people around him, be open to innovations, to everything new.

2.2 Implementation of management principles in modern management

In a simplified sense, management is the ability to achieve goals, use labor, intellect, motives for the behavior of other people. Management - in Russian control - function, type of activity for the management of people in a wide variety of organizations. Management is also an area of human knowledge that helps to carry out this function. Finally, management as a collective of managers is a certain category of people, a social stratum of those who carry out management work. The importance of management was especially clearly realized in the thirties. Even then it became obvious that this activity had turned into a profession, the field of knowledge - into an independent discipline, and the social stratum - into a very influential social force.

In modern conditions, many organizations, one way or another, follow the principles of management based on the school of scientific management.

In any organization, in any enterprise great attention given to staff selection. Currently, when applying for a job in almost any position, the employer tries to find out as much as possible about his potential employee. The study of man is the responsibility of industrial psychology. It is connected with the choice of the most suitable job for a person, which is achieved in two ways.

Selection of a person for workinvolves the following points: inclinations (scientific definition of a person's inclination to a particular job, from which he receives maximum satisfaction); personal selection (the use of such means as questionnaires, interviews, tests to determine the best of many candidates); education.

Job selection for a person. This includes:

firstly, the design and layout of equipment (equipment must be designed and located in such a way as to match the capabilities of the average worker);

Secondly, physical conditions work (increasing the efficiency of work, lighting, heating, ventilation, noise reduction, etc.);

third, psychological conditions work (accidents, absenteeism, smoke breaks , salary and bonus systems, types of control, etc.).

The attitude of workers towards their job, firm, or management can influence their relationship with management. The attitude of workers can reveal much about their behavior in certain circumstances. For example, the management of the company can offer the workers a new project. However, it may be met without enthusiasm. Workers may suspect that management has some ulterior motive because they do not trust management. Likewise, many managers are wary of workers' proposals because they see them as lazy.

This is an important management tool, because without knowing what specifically motivates workers, how they feel about work, the management of the firm, working conditions and wages, managers will not be able to determine the policy of the firm. Such knowledge is also important for understanding your workers.

Training plays an important role in any enterprise. While studying, the employee acquires new knowledge, skills, etc., and can also be sure that he will keep his job and the prospect of promotion up the career ladder will appear. And each manager is interested in qualified employees, since the qualification of individual employees improves the qualification of the enterprise as a whole.

Scientific management advocated separating the managerial functions of thinking and planning from actually doing the work. This approach contrasted sharply with the old system in which workers planned their own work. There are difficult situations when the task itself is not clearly defined. For example, the development of an organization's strategy in connection with the economic crisis or the emergence of competitors. In this case, a clearer distribution of roles in the team is necessary. The old management system is being replaced by a new one, in which each employee has precise job descriptions, which indicate all rights, duties and responsibilities. This facilitates the work of both the employee and the manager. Employee non-compliance official duties, which entailed various kinds of consequences, gives the employer the right to apply various sanctions in the form of a remark, reprimand, etc., up to and including dismissal.

In modern organizations, the concept of division of labor is often applied.

Taylor and his contemporaries recognized that management work is a specialty and that the organization as a whole would benefit if each group of workers focused on what they did best. When selecting a team, the employer must take this into account.

Also, by creating intermediate managers (foremen, foremen, etc.), it is possible to carry out intermediate control over production, compliance with deadlines and drawing up plans for the future. It also allows management to communicate with workers through intermediate managers. One of the main causes of industrial conflict is the lack of understanding between managers and workers. This is due to the fact that both parties do not know about the relationship to each other. Knowledge of these relationships leads to understanding.

The concept of worker participation aims at something more than achieving any level of worker participation in various bodies. Worker participation is possible only if workers are truly involved in the company, its goals, policies and performance, and such involvement is possible only if management accepts responsibility for communicating facts and figures to its employees about the situation in the company.

By introducing new technologies into production, people can be freed from unnecessary manual labor operations. This will allow you to more carefully perform those works that require the presence of a person.

Pay according to the results of work, time wages - these principles are still used. Workers have an incentive to work if they know they are paid piecework. This is beneficial for both the organization and the employee. Everyone gets what he aspires to, the worker - wages, the employer - the labor force.

The principles of the school of scientific management still work today.

Management was recognized as an independent field of activity only in the twentieth century. The forms of almost all manifestations of modern management can be traced in the huge flourishing organizations of antiquity, but in general the nature and structure of management in those days was different from today. For example, the proportion between managers and non-managers was much smaller, and there were fewer middle managers.

Now everything is focused on intellectual property, education in the broadest sense of the word. The corporate culture is transformed along with the company. Since people in the company work in departments related to each other by type of activity, they have much more opportunities to combine their efforts.

For the first time, practitioners and scientists saw that the methods and approaches used in science and technology can be effectively used in the practice of achieving the goals of the organization (Appendix, Table 1).

Very often the leadership was carried out by one person. If the person at the top level of government (and this was almost always a man) was a good leader and ruler, like Julius Caesar, then everything went more or less smoothly. When such an inept leader as Nero came to power, life could plunge into darkness. Comparison of old and modern organizations (appendix, table 2).

New entrepreneurs are often reproached for focusing on maximizing profits, but even the leaders of old enterprises now think little about people - mass layoffs, strikes, long delays salary payments, even hunger strikes do not prevent many directors of enterprises from remembering their own pocket. The desire to receive the highest possible payment for one's work is understandable and characteristic of any time and for any people, but to receive it for work, for initiative, for a thoughtful commercial risk, and not for theft and deceit.

Conclusion

For the effective use of the principles of management, it is necessary to reveal and comprehensively investigate the objective laws and patterns of management. In turn, since the laws and patterns of management are based on the laws of the development of nature, society and thinking, it is necessary to form a perfect system of scientific knowledge for each leader, the broadest cultural and professional horizons.

The principles of management, having an objective character, should have a legal form fixed in the system of normative documents, regulations, agreements, contractual obligations, legislative acts, etc. However, the nature and forms of fixing the principles of management should be flexible enough to avoid excessive rigidity of procedures and formulations. This is very important, since a change in specific historical conditions leads to a change in the operation of socio-economic laws and, accordingly, the content of the very principles of management.

As already noted, management uses the data and conclusions of many sciences, since it is almost impossible to manage a complex modern economy "on a whim." At the same time, the situation can change so rapidly and unpredictably that there is simply no time to search for a scientifically based solution, and then unconventional approaches have to be used. This requires from the leader, in addition to deep knowledge, extensive experience, mastery of the art of interpersonal communication, the ability to find a way out of hopeless situations.

The management process should be purposeful, that is, it should always be carried out for a reason, but be focused on solving specific problems that the organization is currently facing. Any management process should be based on the principle of consistency. In some cases, the sequence of managerial actions may be cyclical, involving their repetition in the same form at certain intervals. The continuity of the implementation of business processes in the organization requires, accordingly, the continuity of their management, control and coordination of personnel activities. The latter requires an optimal combination of centralized regulation and self-government of individual elements of the organization. Since self-regulation is carried out by people, it is impossible without observing such a principle as taking into account the individual characteristics and psychology of workers, as well as the patterns of interpersonal relationships and group behavior.

In order for the management process to proceed normally, it is necessary to observe such an important principle as ensuring the unity of rights and responsibilities in each of its links. An excess of rights in comparison with responsibility leads in practice to managerial arbitrariness, and a lack of paralyzes business activity and the initiative of employees. Here, the competitiveness of management participants is considered important on the basis of personal interest in success, supported by various motivators, such as material incentives, the possibility of promotion, self-realization, and the acquisition of new knowledge and skills.

There are no barriers to career growth for any employee, he just needs to be a good manager or specialist, and then he is able to achieve any leadership positions. It is extremely important to feel the corporate spirit, to understand the goals of the company, its strategy, ideology. You need to be able to work in a team, take responsibility and discuss everything in a positive way - your work plans, the plans of your department, the whole company, the problems of your unit, criticism.

It is necessary to show initiative, to overcome the measured and slow pace of large corporations in decision-making, to take responsibility. Bonuses and career prospects for staff should be used as widely as possible. This is the best way to get employees and especially managers interested.

There is no single production management model. Everything is relative to the general level of development, worldview, culture of the organization ... Each system has its own most effective principles and shortcomings. At the international level, there is a constant search for the most effective ways of management.

Thus, the principles of management reflect an objective reality that exists independently of human consciousness, in other words, they are objective. At the same time, each of the principles is an idea, that is, a subjective construction, a subjective construction that every leader mentally performs at the level of his knowledge of general and professional culture. Since the principles belong to the subject, they have a subjective character. The more the reflection of the principle in the mind of a person approaches the law, the more accurate the knowledge, the more effective the activity of the leader in the field of management.

List of used sources and literature

management management head decision

1.#"justify"> Applications

Table 1.

Solutions typical for control functions

Planning1. What is our overarching mission or the nature of our business? 2. What should be our goals? 3. What changes are taking place in the external environment and how do they affect and may affect the organization in the future? 4. What strategy and tactics should we choose to achieve our goals? Organization of activities1. How should the work of the organization be structured? How is it expedient to enlarge the blocks of work performed? 2. How to coordinate the functioning of these blocks so that it proceeds harmoniously and is not contradictory? 3. What decisions at each level of the organization should be trusted by people, in particular managers? 4. Should we change the structure of the organization due to changes in the external environment? Motivations1. What do my subordinates need? 2. To what extent are these needs met in the course of activities aimed at achieving the goals of the organization? 3. If my subordinates' job satisfaction and productivity increased, why did this happen? 4. What can we do to improve job satisfaction and performance of subordinates? The control1. How should we measure performance? 2. How often should results be evaluated? 3. How far have we been in achieving our goals? 4. If we have not progressed enough towards our goals, then why did this happen and what adjustments should be made?

Table 3

Comparison of old and modern organizations

Old Organization Modern Organizations Few large organizations, no giant organizations Large numbers of extremely powerful organizations, both for-profit and non-profit Relatively few leaders, virtually no middle managers Large numbers of leaders, including middle managers Management work often not highlighted and not separated from non-managerial. Management groups are clearly defined, managerial work is clearly perceived and separated from non-management. Occupation of leadership positions in an organization is most often by birthright or by force. Occupation of leadership positions in an organization is most often by the right of competence in compliance with law and order. A small number of people capable of making important decisions for the organization. A large number of people capable of making important decisions for the organization. Emphasis on order and intuition. Emphasis on teamwork and rationality.Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

The school of scientific management was finally formed and became widely known at the beginning of the 20th century. It is connected, first of all, with the names of F. Taylor, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, G. Emerson, G. Ford.

Creators schools of scientific management proceeded from the fact that, using observations, measurements, logic and analysis, it is possible to improve most manual labor operations, to achieve their more efficient implementation.

Main principles of scientific management school:

Rational organization - involves the replacement of traditional methods of work with a number of rules formed on the basis of work analysis, and the subsequent correct placement of workers and their training in optimal working methods.
Development of the formal structure of the organization.
Determination of measures for cooperation between the manager and the worker, i.e., the separation of executive and managerial functions.

The founders of the school of scientific management are:

F. W. Taylor;
Frank and Lily Gilbert;
Henry Gantt.

F. W. Taylor— an engineer-practitioner and a manager who, based on the analysis of the content of the work and the definition of its main elements developed the methodological framework for labor rationing, standardized work operations, put into practice scientific approaches to the selection, placement and stimulation of workers.

Taylor developed and implemented a complex system of organizational measures:

timing;
instructional cards;
methods of retraining workers;
planning office;
collection of social information.

He attached considerable importance to the correct system of disciplinary sanctions and labor incentives. in his system is the main source of efficiency. A key element of this approach was that people who produced more, were rewarded more.

A look at piecework and bonus wage systems:

F.Taylor: workers should be paid in proportion to their contribution, i.e. piecework. Workers who produce more than the daily quota should be paid more, i.e. differentiated piecework wages;
G. Gantt: The worker is guaranteed a weekly wage, but if he overfulfills the norm, he earns a bonus plus a higher payment per unit of output.

Scientific management is most closely associated with the work of Frank and Lilia Gilbert, who dealt primarily with the study of physical work in production processes and researched the ability to increase output by reducing effort spent on their production.

Gilberts studied work operations using movie cameras in combination with a microchronometer. Then, with the help of freeze frames, they analyzed the elements of operations, changed the structure of work operations in order to eliminate unnecessary, unproductive movements, and sought to increase work efficiency.

F. Gilbert's studies on the rationalization of workers' labor provided a threefold increase in labor productivity.

L. Gilbert laid the foundation for the field of management, which is now called "personnel management". She explored issues such as placement and training. Scientific management did not neglect the human factor.

An important contribution of this school was systematic use of incentives in order to interest workers in increasing the volume of production.

Taylor's closest student was G. Gantt, who was engaged in developments in the field of bonus payment methods, compiled charts for production planning (Gantt's tape charts), and also contributed to the development of leadership theory. Gantt's works characterize the consciousness of the leading role of the human factor.

Representatives of the school of scientific management mainly devoted their work to what is called the management of production. She was engaged in efficiency improvement at the level below the managerial level, the so-called non-management level.

Criticism of the scientific management school: a mechanistic approach to management: the teaching of management was reduced to the teaching of industrial engineering; reduction of labor motivation to the satisfaction of the utilitarian needs of workers.

The concept of scientific management was a turning point. It almost instantly became a subject of general interest. Many branches of business activity began to apply scientific management not only in the USA, but also in England, France and other countries.

G. Ford, mechanic and entrepreneur, organizer of mass production of automobiles in the United States, was the successor of Taylor's teachings and implemented his theoretical provisions in practice.

G. Ford's principles of production organization: replacement of manual work with machine work; maximum division of labor; specialization; arrangement of equipment along the way technological process; mechanization of transport works; regulated rhythm of production.

The ideas laid down by the school of scientific management were developed and applied to the management of organizations as a whole, primarily by representatives.

Principles, advantages and disadvantages of the school of scientific management

The founder of the school of scientific management, Taylor, using observations, measurements and analysis, improved many of the manual labor operations of workers and, on this basis, achieved an increase in the productivity and efficiency of their work. The results of his research served as the basis for revising the norms for the production and remuneration of workers.

Taylor's followers Frank and Lillian Gilbreth dealt with the rationalization of the work of workers, the study of physical movements in the production process and the study of opportunities to increase output by increasing labor productivity. A significant contribution to the development of the Taylor system was made by Emerson, who studied the staff principle in management and the rationalization of production. Ford formulated the basic principles of the organization of production, for the first time separated the main work from its service.

From the studies and experiments carried out, the authors of this school deduced a number of general principles, methods and forms of organizing production and stimulating the work of workers. The main principles of the school of scientific management:

development of optimal methods for the implementation of work based on the study of the cost of time, movements, efforts, etc.;
absolute adherence to the developed standards;
selection, training and placement of workers in those jobs where they can give the greatest benefit;
pay based on performance;
allocation of managerial functions to a separate area of professional activity;
maintaining friendly relations between workers and managers.

The contribution of the scientific management school to management theory:

using scientific analysis to study the work process and determine the best ways to complete a task;
selecting workers best suited to the tasks and providing them with training;
providing workers with the resources required to effectively perform their tasks;
the importance of fair material incentives for workers to increase productivity;
separation of planning and organizational activities from the work itself.

The disadvantages of this theory include the following:

the doctrine was based on a mechanistic understanding of man, his place in the organization and the essence of his activity;
in the worker, Taylor and his followers saw only the performer of simple operations and a means to an end;
did not recognize disagreements, contradictions, conflicts between people;
in the doctrine, only the material needs of the workers were considered and taken into account;

Taylor tended to treat the workers as uneducated people, ignoring their ideas and suggestions.

The founder of this school, Taylor, devoted many years to increasing the productivity of workers. In essence, he was trying to find an answer to the question: how to make a worker work like a machine? The set of principles and provisions of this school was later called "Taylorism".

At the same time, this theory was a major turning point, thanks to which management became widely recognized as an independent field of scientific research. For the first time, practitioners and scholars saw that the methods and approaches recommended by the school could be used effectively to achieve organizational goals.

Representatives of this school created the scientific foundations of production and labor management. In the 1920s independent sciences emerged from this scientific direction: the scientific organization of labor (NOT), the theory of organization of production, etc.

Course work

by discipline:

"Control Theory"

on the topic:

"Schools of Scientific Management"

Introduction

The relevance of the topic I have chosen is as follows: any science is based on the use of historical experience. Studying the lessons of history makes it possible to avoid the contradictions and mistakes encountered in the early stages of the development of science. The science of management differs little from other sciences in this respect. Like any science, it is interested in the past, present and future. Analysis of the past allows you to better understand the present in order to predict future development. Knowledge of the history of the past is necessary for the following main reasons:

.always interesting and necessary;

.allows you to make up for the lack of your own thoughts and the amount of your knowledge;

.makes it possible to analyze the main milestones in the evolutionary development of science and systematize them;

.allows you to learn relevant lessons from the past so as not to repeat the mistakes in the future.

Knowledge and understanding of the past contributes to a better understanding of the current state of science, as well as the emergence and formation of new ideas. The development of management science shows that non-life concepts perished, and only the most valuable, proven by practice and time, remained. As the previous experience of the development of many countries of the world shows, turning to history often took place in critical, fateful periods in the life of society, in periods of searching for ways out of the current crisis situation.

The creation of a fundamentally new management system in Russia adequate to market relations is an integral part of building a new society.

This work contains a description of the evolution of managerial thought. It is shown how management developed before it was formed into a systematized scientific discipline and profession. There are no universal techniques or firm principles that would make management effective. There are, however, approaches that help managers increase the likelihood of effective achievement of the organization's goals. Each of the approaches outlined below has made significant contributions to our understanding of management and organization.

Development as scientific discipline was not a series of successive steps forward. Rather, it was several approaches that often overlapped.

The world is becoming an arena of rapid change. Scientific and technological innovations became more frequent and significant, and governments began to become more determined in their attitude to business. These and other factors have made representatives of managerial thought more aware of the existence of forces external to the organization. New approaches have been developed for this purpose.

To date, four major approaches are known that have made a significant contribution to the development of the theory and practice of management.

The approach from the standpoint of identifying different schools in management actually includes four different approaches. Here management is considered from four different points of view.

Process approach - considers management as a continuous series of interrelated management functions.

The systems approach emphasizes that managers should view the organization as a set of interrelated elements, such as people, structure, tasks and technology, which are focused on achieving different goals in a changing external environment.

The situational approach focuses on the fact that suitability various methods management is determined by the situation. Because there are so many factors, both in the organization itself and in the environment, there is no single “best” way to manage an organization. by the most effective method in a particular situation is the method that best suits the situation.

In the first half of the twentieth century, four distinct schools of managerial thought developed. Chronologically, they can be listed in the following order: Scientific Management School, Administrative School, Behavioral School, Quantitative School.

Thus, the purpose of this work is to study the evolution of managerial thought, including the School of Scientific Management.

Therefore, the tasks term paper are:

· study of the stages of development of managerial thought

· study of the main schools of managerial thought (in particular scientific).

1. The evolution of managerial thought

1.1 Development of management in Russia

The development of management in the 17th century.The beginning of the development of management in Russia was laid in the 17th century, when the process of merging regions, lands and principalities began. There was a merger of fragmented regional markets into a single nationwide market.

A.L. played an important role in the development of the public administration system. Ordin-Nashchokin (1605-1680), who made an attempt to introduce urban self-government in the western border cities of Russia, thus A.L. Ordin-Nashchokin is considered one of the first Russian managers who raised the issue of developing not only strategic, but also tactical (at the micro level) management.

A special era in the development of Russian management is made up of Peter the Great's reforms to improve economic management. The range of managerial actions of Peter I is very wide - from changing the chronology to creating a new state administrative apparatus. Detailing and concretizing the administrative aspects of the period of the reign of Peter I, we can distinguish the following transformations in the central and local government:

o development of large-scale industry and state support for handicraft industries;

o promoting the development of agriculture;

o strengthening the financial system;

o activation of the development of foreign and domestic trade

Legislative acts of Peter I - decrees, regulations, instructions and control over their implementation - regulated various areas of state activity, in fact it was state management.

The managerial ideas of I.T. Pososhkov (1652-1726). To the original ideas of I.T. Pososhkov should attribute the division of wealth into real and immaterial. Under the first he meant the wealth of the state (treasury) and the people, under the second - the effective management of the country and the existence of fair laws. The principles of I.T. Pososhkov on improving economic management were based on the decisive role of the state in managing economic processes. He was a supporter of strict regulation of economic life.

The development of managerial thought in the XVIII century.First quarter of the 18th century was the period of Peter the Great reforming the management of the economy, both at the macro and micro levels. The control system created by Peter I was irreversible.

The ideas of public administration are reflected in the works of A.P. Volynsky (1689-1740). A consistent ideologist of serfdom was V.N. Tatishchev (1686-1750). In the field of managing the economic affairs of Russia, V.N. Tatishchev attached particular importance to the management of financial policy. He believed that the state was obliged not to observe economic processes, but to actively regulate them in the interests of Russia.

In the second half of the eighteenth century management thought developed in the spirit of the reforms of Catherine P. In order to improve the management of the Russian economy, at the direction of Catherine P., the “Institution for the Administration of the Provinces of the Russian Empire” was published.

Features of the management of the Russian economy in the XIX century.By the beginning of the XIX century. the impossibility of managing the Russian State by the old methods, the need for reforms was realized by the highest authorities.

The main transformations of economic management at the beginning of the XIX century. occurred during the reign of Alexander. In 1801, a manifesto was issued on the establishment of ministries, which were built on the basis of personal power and responsibility.

A special role in the development of management in Russia was played by M.M. Speransky (1772-1839). He saw the purpose of the transformations in giving the autocracy an external form of a constitutional monarchy based on the force of law. The system of power M.M. Speransky proposed to divide it into three parts: legislative, executive and judicial. Those. legislative matters were to be under the jurisdiction of the State Duma, the courts - under the jurisdiction of the Senate, government - under the jurisdiction of the ministries responsible to the Duma.

In 1864, Alexander P. approved the "Regulations on provincial and district zemstvo institutions", which approved all-estate self-government.

Considering the development of the theory and practice of management, there are several historical periods.

1.2 Historical periods of governance

I period - ancient period:the longest was the first period of development of management - starting from 9-7 thousand years BC. until about the 18th century. Before separating into an independent field of knowledge, humanity has been accumulating management experience bit by bit for thousands of years.

The first, simplest, rudimentary forms of streamlining and organizing joint labor existed at the stage of the primitive communal system. At this time, management was carried out jointly, by all members of the clan, tribe or community. The elders and leaders of clans and tribes personified the guiding principle of all activities of that period.

Around 9-7 millennium BC. in a number of places in the Middle East, there was a transition from an appropriating economy (hunting, fruit picking, etc.) to a fundamentally new form of obtaining products - their production (producing economy). The transition to a producing economy became the starting point in the emergence of management, a milestone in the accumulation of certain knowledge in the field of management by people.

In ancient Egypt, rich experience in managing the state economy was accumulated. During this period (3000-2800 BC), a state administrative apparatus, sufficiently developed for that time, and its service layer (clerks, scribes, etc.) was formed.

Socrates (470-399 BC) was one of the first to characterize management as a special field of activity. He analyzed various forms of management, on the basis of which he proclaimed the principle of universality of management.

Plato (428-348 BC) gave a classification of forms of government, made attempts to distinguish between the functions of government.

Alexander the Great (356-323 BC) developed the theory and practice of command and control.

The materials presented do not cover all the events and dates that in one way or another characterize the process of accumulation of knowledge in the field of management.

II period - industrial period (1776-1890):the greatest merit in the development of ideas about public administration in this period belongs to A. Smith. He is not only a representative of classical political economy, but also a specialist in the field of management, as he made an analysis of various forms of the division of labor, gave a description of the duties of the sovereign and the state.

The teachings of R. Owen had a great influence on the formation of many scientific directions and schools of management that have formed to date. His ideas of humanization of production management, as well as the recognition of the need for training, improving working conditions and living conditions of workers are relevant today. The first revolution in the theory and practice of management is associated with the creation and use of computer technology. In 1833, the English mathematician C. Babbage developed a project for an "analytical engine" - a prototype of modern digital computing technology, with the help of which even then management decisions were made more quickly.

III period - the period of systematization (1856-1960):management science is in constant flux. New directions, schools, currents are being formed, the scientific apparatus is changing and improving, and finally, the researchers themselves and their views are changing. Over time, managers have changed their focus from the needs of their particular organization to the study of the forces of control operating in their environment. Some of them solved their managerial problems in ways that seemed to work in past periods. Other researchers have looked for more systematic approaches to management. Their individual successes and failures can provide valuable lessons for today's managers.

In fact, what we call management originated during the Industrial Revolution in the 19th century. The Emergence of the Factory as a Primary Type of Production and the Need for Jobs large groups people meant that individual owners could no longer oversee the activities of all workers. For these purposes, the best workers were trained - they were trained so that they could represent the interests of the owner in the workplace. These were the first managers.

IV period - information period (1960 to the present):later theories of management were developed mainly by representatives of the quantitative school, often called managerial. The emergence of this school is a consequence of the use of mathematics and computers in management. Its representatives consider management as a logical process that can be expressed mathematically. In the 60s. a broad development of management concepts begins, based on the use of a mathematical apparatus, with the help of which the integration of mathematical analysis and subjective decisions of managers is achieved.

The formalization of a number of managerial functions, the combination of labor, man and computer required a revision of the structural elements of the organization (accounting services, marketing, etc.). New elements of intra-company planning have appeared, such as simulation modeling of decisions, methods of analysis under conditions of uncertainty, and software for evaluating multi-purpose management decisions.

In modern conditions, mathematical methods are used in almost all areas of management science.

The study of management as a process has led to the widespread use of system analysis methods. The so-called systems approach in management was associated with the use of general theory systems for solving managerial problems. It suggests that leaders should view the organization as a collection of interrelated elements such as people, structure, tasks, technology, resources.

The main idea of systems theory is that no action is taken in isolation from others. Each decision has implications for the entire system. A systematic approach to management avoids situations when a solution in one area turns into a problem for another.

On the basis of a systematic approach, control tasks were developed in several directions. This is how the theory of contingencies arose. Its essence lies in the fact that each situation in which the manager finds himself may be similar to other situations, but it will have inherent unique properties. The manager's task in this situation is to analyze all the factors separately and identify the strongest dependencies (correlations).

In the 70s. came up with the idea of an open system. Organization as open system tends to adapt to a very diverse internal environment. Such a system is not self-sustaining, it depends on energy, information and materials coming from outside. It has the ability to adapt to changes in the external environment.

Thus, following systems theory, we can assume that any formal organization must have a system of functionalization (ie, various forms of structural division); a system of effective and efficient incentives to encourage people to contribute to group action; power system; logical decision making system.

From the point of view of the economics of the organization, the most significant results in scientific and methodological terms were obtained within the framework of the situational approach. The essence of the situational approach is that the forms, methods, systems, styles of management should vary significantly depending on the situation, i.e. the situation must take center stage. This is a specific set of circumstances that strongly affect the organization at this particular time. In other words, the essence of the recommendations on the theory of a systematic approach is the requirement to solve the current, specific organizational and managerial problem, depending on the goals of the organization and the prevailing specific conditions in which this goal must be achieved. Those. the suitability of different management methods is determined by the situation.

The situational approach has made a great contribution to the development of control theory. It contains specific recommendations regarding the application of scientific provisions to management practice, depending on the current situation and the conditions of the external and internal environment of the organization. Using a situational approach, managers can understand what methods and means will best contribute to the achievement of the organization's goals in a particular situation.

2. Scientific schools of management

2.1 School of Scientific Management

emergence modern science administration dates back to the beginning of the 20th century. and is associated with the names of F.U. Taylor, Frank and Lilia Gilbert and Henry Gantt. An important merit of this school was the position that it is possible to manage "scientifically", relying on economic, technical and social experiment, as well as on the scientific analysis of the phenomena and facts of the management process and their generalization.

This research method was first applied to a single enterprise by the American engineer F.W. Taylor, who should be considered the founder of scientific production management.

The term "scientific management" was first proposed in 1910 by L. Bridays. After Taylor's death, this name was universal recognition in relation to his concept.

Taylor's research method consisted in dividing the process of physical labor and its organization into its component parts (performing labor and managerial labor) and the subsequent analysis of these parts. Taylor's goal was to create a system of scientific organization of labor based on experimental data and analysis of the processes of physical labor and its organization.

Creating his own system, Taylor was not limited only to the issues of rationalizing the work of workers. Taylor paid considerable attention to the best use of the production assets of the enterprise. The requirement for rationalization also extended to the layout of the enterprise and workshops.

The functions of carrying out the interaction of elements of production were assigned to the planning or distribution bureau of the enterprise, which was given a central place in the Taylor system.

Taylor's important contribution was the recognition that management work is a specialty. Taylor considered the convergence of the interests of all the personnel of the enterprise to be the main task of the system proposed by him.

The philosophical basis of Taylor's system was the concept of the so-called economic man, which became widespread at that time. This concept was based on the assertion that the only driving stimulus of people is their needs. Taylor believed that with the help of an appropriate wage system, maximum productivity could be achieved. Another false principle of the Taylor system was to proclaim the unity of the economic interests of workers and managers. The goals were not achieved.

F. Taylor's ideas were developed by his followers, among whom, first of all, Henry Gantt, his closest student, should be mentioned. Gantt made a significant contribution to the development of leadership theory.

Frank Gilbert and his wife Lillian Gilbert were engaged in the rationalization of the work of workers and the study of opportunities to increase output through increased labor productivity.

G. Emerson made a significant contribution to the development of the Taylor system. Emerson explored the principles of labor activity in relation to any production, regardless of the type of its activity.

Henry Ford continued Taylor's ideas in the field of industrial organization. Taylor's system was dominated by manual labor. Ford replaced manual labor with machines; took a further step in the development of the Taylor system.

2.2 Classical school (administrative school) of management

The classical or administrative school in management occupies a period of time from 1920 to 1950. The founder of this school is Henri Fayol, a French mining engineer, an outstanding practical manager, one of the founders of management theory.

Unlike the school of scientific management, which dealt mainly with the rational organization of the work of an individual worker and increasing the efficiency of production, representatives of the classical school began to develop approaches to improve the management of the organization as a whole.

The goal of the classical school was to create universal principles of government. Fayol and others belonged to the administration of organizations, which is why the classical school is often called the administrative school.

Fayol's merit lies in the fact that he divided all management functions into general, related to any field of activity, and specific, related directly to the management of an industrial enterprise.

Fayol's followers, who developed and deepened the main provisions of his doctrine, are Linda Urwick, L. Gyulik, M. Weber, D. Mooney, Alfred P. Sloan, G. Church.

Based on the developments of Fayol and his followers, a classical model of organization was formed, based on four main principles:

a clear functional division of labor;

transmission of commands and orders from top to bottom;

unity of command (“no one works for more than one boss”);

observance of the "range of control" (management by a limited number of subordinates).

All the above principles of building an organization are valid for the present, despite the fact that the achievements of the scientific and technological progress have left a certain imprint on them. Thus, the widespread use of electronic computers in practical activities has simplified the links between the management bodies (links) in the organization by accelerating the processing of information.

In general, the classical school of management is characterized by ignoring the person and his needs. For this, representatives of the school are justly criticized by theorists and practitioners of management. .

2.3 School of Human Relations Psychology

One of the shortcomings of the scientific management school and the classical school was that they did not fully understand the role and importance of the human factor, which, ultimately, is the main element in the effectiveness of the organization. Therefore, the school of psychology and human relations that eliminated the shortcomings of the classical school is often called the neoclassical school.

The first attempt to apply psychological analysis to practical problems of production was made by G. Munsterberg, a professor at Harvard University in the USA.

In the 20-30s of our century, a school of human relations was born, in the center of which is a person. The emergence of the doctrine of "human relations" is usually associated with the names of the American scientists E. Mayo and F. Roethlisberger, who are known for their research in the sociology of industrial relations.

One of the main differences between the school of psychology and human relations is the introduction of behaviorism into it, i.e. theories of human behavior.

One of the founders of the School of Psychology and Human Relations is Harvard Business School Professor Elton Mayo.

Representatives of the "human relations" school recommended that serious attention be paid to changing the informal structure while restructuring the formal structure of the organization. A formal manager should strive to become an informal leader, having won the “affections of people”. This is not an easy task, but a "social art".

The disadvantages of the school of psychology and human relations include ignoring the issues of self-government and self-organization of workers in production; scientists clearly overestimated the level of impact on workers using socio-psychological methods.

However, despite the criticism that the school of psychology and human relations was subjected to, its main provisions were subsequently reflected in new, more complex and modern concepts management.

A large place in the research of scientists adjoining the school of psychology and human relations is occupied by the problems of motivating people in an organization. Among the researchers who paid considerable attention to these problems are: A. Maslow, F. Herzberger, D. McClelland, K. Alderfer.

The concept of motivation was most consistently developed by a prominent representative of the school of psychology and human relations, Professor of the School of Management at the University of Michigan Douglas McGregor. McGregor made a significant contribution to the development of the content of the theory of human resources, focusing on issues of leadership, leadership style, and the behavior of people in organizations.

2.4 School of Management Science (Quantitative School)

The formation of the school of management science is associated with the development of mathematics, statistics, engineering sciences and other related areas of knowledge. The most famous representatives of this school are R. Ackoff, L. Bertalanfi, S. Beer, A. Goldberger, D. Fosrester, R. Luce, L. Klein, N. Georgescu-Regan.

The School of Management Science was formed in the early 1950s. and is still operating successfully. The school of management science distinguishes between two main areas:

Consideration of production as a "social system" using systemic, process and situational approaches.

Study of management problems based on system analysis and the use of a cybernetic approach, including the application mathematical methods and computer.

The system approach assumes that each of the elements that make up the system (the organization under consideration) has its own specific goals.

The process approach is based on the position that all management functions depend on each other.

The situational approach is directly related to the system and process approaches and expands their application in practice. Its essence lies in the definition of the concept of a situation, which means a specific set of circumstances, variables that affect the organization at a certain time.

The merit of the management science school lies in the fact that it was able to identify the main internal and external variables (factors) that affect the organization.

The second direction of the school of management science is associated with the development of the exact sciences and, above all, mathematics. In modern conditions, many scientists call this direction the new school.

The beginning of the application of mathematical methods in economic research in the XIX century. associated with the name of the French economist A. Caunot (1801-1877).

The possibility of using mathematics to solve economic problems has aroused great interest in Russia.

A number of prominent specialists, such as V.K. Dmitriev, G.A. Feldman, L.V. Kantorovich, made a great contribution to the development and development of economic and mathematical methods (EMM).

A special place belongs to D.E. Slutsky, known for his work on probability theory and mathematical statistics. In 1915, he published an article "On the Theory of Balanced Consumer Budgets", which had a great influence on the development of economic and mathematical theory. After 20 years, this article has received worldwide recognition.

The country's first Laboratory of Economic and Mathematical Methods was established in 1958 at the Academy of Sciences B.C. Nemchinov.

In 1930, in Cleveland (USA), the association "International Society for the Development economic theory in connection with statistics and mathematics”, which included well-known bourgeois economists I. Schumpeter, I. Fischer, R. Frisch, M. Kalecki, J. Tinbergen and others. The association began to publish the journal Econometrics. The formation of this association served as the starting point for the creation of the mathematical school of economists.

A distinctive feature of management science is the use of models. Models become especially important when it is necessary to make decisions in complex situations that require the evaluation of several alternatives.

Thus, the 50s. 20th century characterized by the formation of a new stage in the development of managerial thought. Based on the synthesis of ideas put forward in previous periods, researchers came to understand the need integrated approach to management. In addition, the idea was formulated that management is not only a science, but also an art. .

3. Modern management

managerial scientific management school

3.1 Management concepts of modern management

Approaches based on the identification of different schools. In the first half of the 20th century, 4 schools were developed, which significantly influenced the development of managerial thought. The most staunch adherents of each of these directions (the school of scientific management, the classical school, the schools of human relations and the behavioral sciences) believed at one time that they had managed to find the key to the most effective achievement of the goals of the organization. More recent research and unsuccessful attempts to apply the theoretical findings of schools in practice have shown that many answers to management questions were only partially correct in limited situations. And yet, each of these schools has made significant and tangible contributions to the field. Even the most progressive modern organizations still use certain concepts, principles and techniques developed within these schools.

Concepts and schools 1940-1960 somewhat expanded the understanding of management problems (the pragmatic school and the school of management science).

Process, system and situational approaches. The process approach in management arose already in the 20s of the last century (within the framework of the administrative school), but it was developed only in the second half of the 50s.

The process approach considers management as a single process, representing a continuous sequence of interrelated management functions (planning, organizing, stimulating and controlling).

The systems approach considers the organization as an open system operating in interaction with the external environment. The system approach directs managers to consider the organization as a set of interdependent elements of the organization (internal variables), such as people, structure, tasks and technology, the management of which should be aimed at achieving the goals of the organization in the face of changing environmental factors and the impact of these changes on the organization.

The situational approach focuses on the fact that the suitability and effectiveness of the use of various management methods is determined by the situation. The management process itself must be considered as a system of interrelated internal variables of the organization, environmental factors and specific management methods. Since there are many factors, both in the organization itself and in the environment, there is no single "best" way (method) to manage the organization. The most effective in a particular situation is the method that best suits the situation.

Development of the concepts of modern management. Period 1960-1990 was marked by a serious development of social production, in which effective management played a big role.

The development of scientific thought and practical management from the 60s to the present is commonly called modern management.

Conventionally, this period can be divided into two stages: 1960-1980s and 1980-1990s.

Management in the 1960s-1980s is characterized by further simultaneous development different approaches to management, including the process approach, systems and situational approaches, as well as the use quantitative methods in management (quantitative approach), which originated in the 50s.

The management of the 1980s-1990s is characterized by the development of various concepts aimed at solving the problems of adapting the organization to changes in the external environment and increasing the efficiency of modern management in a highly dynamic environment of modern society. Of paramount importance in the theory of organizational management are the problems of the organization's interaction with the external environment, taking into account changes in the external environment in the activities of individual companies, orientation and adaptation of the organization in the current conditions of its functioning.

The following modern management concepts are best known:

· adaptation concept,

· global strategy concept,

· target orientation concept.

The considered concepts of the modern manager indicate that at the present stage in the theory of management, the rational that was achieved in all previous phases of its development has been selected.

3.2 System concepts. System approach in management

The theory of systems was developed and applied for the first time in the exact sciences and technology. However, its application in management at the end of the 50s became a turning point in the development of managerial thought and in the development of practical management.

System concepts. Examples. Cars, computers, televisions, biological systems.

A system is defined (in systems theory) as a whole, consisting of interrelated parts, each of which contributes to the characteristics of the whole.

All organizations are systems. People are social components organizations, together with other internal components, they constitute the socio-technical systems (subsystems) of the organization.

There are two types of systems: open and closed. A closed system has rigid fixed boundaries, its actions are relatively independent of the environment surrounding the system. An open system is characterized by interaction with the external environment. Possible objects of exchange with the external environment: information, energy, materials, etc. An open system depends on information, energy, materials and other factors that affect the system from the external environment. An open system has the ability to adapt to changes in the external environment and must do so in order to ensure its functioning.

The development of a systematic approach was a turning point in the development of managerial thought. Organizations also represent open systems, since the functioning and survival of any organization depends on the external environment. The organization has become impossible to consider as a closed system due to the fact that its activities can no longer be separated from interaction with the external environment.

The constituent parts (elements) of complex systems can themselves be systems. These constituent parts are called subsystems. Subsystems, in turn, can be composed of smaller subsystems.

Systems approach. The application of a systematic approach in management allows you to see the organization in the unity of its constituent parts, which are inextricably linked with the external environment. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that a systems approach is a way of thinking in relation to the organization and management, helping the manager to better understand the organization and more effectively achieve its goals.

The system approach is based on the idea of decomposition and integration of the system, its subsystems and elements in the analysis of the relationship of the organization with the external environment and the adoption of managerial decisions that provide an integrated approach to its functioning and obtaining the desired result, taking into account the combined impact of external and internal factors.

In a simplified form, “an organization can be represented as an open system (Fig. 1), which receives information, capital, human resources, materials and equipment (technology) from the external environment through inputs, and returns products or services to the external environment.

In the process of functioning of this system, the transformation of inputs (incoming resources) into outputs is carried out. With the effective transformation of resources, the added value of outputs in relation to inputs is formed, as a result of which additional outputs are formed: sales increase, profit is formed, market share increases, the social responsibility of the organization is realized, the needs of employees are satisfied, the organization grows, etc.

Figure 1. Organization as an open system

The process of managing an organization, carried out using management mechanisms, is a purposeful and rational process. As a result of this process, the initial situation at the input of the system (1) is transformed into the desired situation at its output (0), which is determined by strategic management aimed at achieving certain goals of the organization. For the optimality and purposefulness of the process, the implementation of the necessary control function must be ensured.

The decomposition of the system, implemented within the framework of the system approach, is the main way to penetrate into the essence of a particular object, problem, without violating the integrated approach in the formation of management decisions. The system approach allows taking into account the relationship between the elements of the system (that is, the organization) and specific environmental factors in their relationship. Decomposition and structuring of the system, its subsystems and elements, combined with the integration of the assessment of the consequences of decisions made, are the main tools of a systematic approach in the complex work of managing an organization.

3.3 Situational approach in management

The situational approach was developed in the late 1960s and made a great contribution to the development of control theory. The central point in it is the situation, which includes a specific set of internal and external situational factors in relation to the organization that significantly affect the effectiveness of its activities at the given moment in time. The situational approach does not contain prescriptive guidelines for the effective management of an organization. It is a way of thinking about organizational problems and their solutions.

The essence of the situational approach is that in each case of decision-making, management should concentrate on situational differences between organizations and within them, identifying and highlighting specific situational factors (internal and external) that are significant for a given situation and determine the effectiveness of a particular organization.

The methodology of the situational approach can be described as a four-link thinking algorithm for the manager:

Understanding the management process, group and individual behavior, tasks and content of system analysis, planning and control methods, including quantitative decision-making methods. Understanding should be formed in the process of familiarization (training) with the means of professional management, which have shown their effectiveness.

The ability to anticipate the likely consequences (positive and negative) when using a particular methodology or concept in a particular situation, based on a clear assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of known and applied management concepts and techniques.

Correct interpretation and analysis of a specific situation, aimed at determining the most important factors in this situation and assessing the likely effect that a change in one or more situational variables may entail.

The ability to link specific decision-making techniques (concepts, methods) that would cause the least negative consequences with the situation under consideration in order to achieve goals in the most efficient (rational) way.

The key element of the situational approach and the manager's action algorithm is the correct interpretation of a specific situation, the identification of relevant situational factors and their influence on the success or failure of the organization.

The situational approach represents the most satisfactory system developed to date for the effective management of an organization. At the same time, it is impossible to determine all the variables that affect the performance of an organization. For practical purposes, managers consider only the most significant factors for the organization that can affect its success. There are a limited number of such factors that can be divided into two groups: internal variables and external factors.

3.4 Modern management concepts

At the present stage, the problems of interaction with the external environment, taking into account changes in the external environment and the activities of individual companies, and the orientation of the enterprise in the current conditions are of paramount importance in management theory. The search for solutions to these problems has led to the formation of a number of modern management concepts aimed at ensuring the effective operation of organizations in the modern world.

The most famous (recognized) modern management concepts are: the concept of adaptation, the concept of global strategy and the concept of target orientation.

The concept of adaptation. The essence of the concept of adaptation (or adaptation strategy) is that in real economic activity, an organization's strategy is always a combination of the most beneficial actions, taking into account environmental factors. These actions provide strategies for maneuvering in the distribution and redistribution of production and goods between specific enterprises located in different countries depending on the level of production costs, the cost of labor, the rate of economic growth, the political stability of the country of their location.

Concept of global strategy. It provides for the concentration of management attention on the need to develop a unified strategy aimed at optimizing the activities of the entire organization (enterprise, corporation), and not its individual parts. Within the framework of the global strategy, there are various directions of this concept, including:

· the global concept can be aimed at the realization of many goals and is focused on maximizing profits as the main goal of the organization; this direction was called the theory of multiple goals;

· the global concept can be aimed at optimizing all activities (all types of activities) of the organization in order to maximize its profit;

· the global concept can be aimed at optimizing the organization's activities by better adapting its structure to the conditions of the external environment and more efficient use of its internal capabilities to maximize the organization's profit;

· the global concept can be aimed at improving the basic management functions in order to optimize (increase efficiency) of the organization's activities.

Target orientation concept. Orients the enterprise to the organization of its activities with the dominant role of goal setting at all stages of the management process (in the processes of planning, organization, control and motivation).

The given modern concepts and many other concepts of modern management, known from foreign publications, are aimed at improving the strategies of individual organizations in order to obtain the planned profits (achieving the goals).

At the heart of modern management as a concept of market management lies the objective process of socialization of production, as a result of which the largest companies have the opportunity: firstly, to influence the market by dividing it; secondly, to influence the nature and mechanism of economic relations that regulate the relationship between the market and the producer.

Management as a concept of market management is aimed at improving the organization of management of the activities of individual enterprises.

This concept, more than others, reflects the connection of individual enterprises with market relations, or rather, with the problem of regulating market relations.

Attaching great importance to the regulation of market relations, modern researchers and management theorists place special emphasis on the need to adapt the enterprise to market requirements for each specific product manufactured by the manufacturer. Therefore, the organizational and technical aspect of this theory is aimed at the so-called "product planning", which covers a system of measures to study the market for a particular product, draw up programs and forecasts, develop and introduce a new product to the market, as well as measures to enhance demand for goods and make a profit. from their implementation.

The establishment and regulation of market relations according to this concept is based on the economic strength and scientific and production potential of the participants in these relations. Each enterprise strives not only to maintain its market share, but also to change it in its favor, pushing competitors out, ruining them or subordinating them to its influence and control.

This concept of management not only provides a theoretical justification for the need to regulate the market in modern conditions, but also serves as a source of practical recommendations for the development of new forms and methods of economic activity of enterprises (corporations).

The implementation of management in the practical activities of enterprises acts as a management system.

Modern management as a science of management seeks to find and develop means and methods that would contribute to:

· the most effective achievement of the goals of the organization;

· increasing labor productivity and profitability of production based on the prevailing conditions in the internal and external environments of the organization.

This led to the emergence and development in modern management of new approaches to management, focused on solving the problems of large industrial organizations, including transnational corporations.

Conclusion

In this paper, the main stages of the evolution of managerial thought were considered. Thus, all the schools listed above made important and tangible contributions to governance, but since they acted in defense of " better way”, considered only part of the internal environment of the organization or ignored the external environment, none of them guaranteed complete success in all situations.

The School of Management Science uses quantitative methods. Its influence is growing as it is seen as complementary to the existing and widely used conceptual framework of the process, systems and situational approaches.

In this work, I have focused on the scientific schools of management. Therefore, in order to sum up the overall result of the work, I will give them comparative characteristic, which includes the features, advantages and disadvantages of these management schools (see Appendix).

The very first studies in management were made by the classical school.

The results of these studies have shown that it is impossible to determine parameters by character traits, that even such a thing as intelligence, in some cases, may not be of paramount importance in management. In the end, it was found that the concept of character traits simply did not work.

The first major step towards considering management as a science was made by F. Taylor (1856-1915), who led the scientific management movement. He became interested in the effectiveness of the organization, which marked the beginning of the development of the school of scientific management.

List of sources

1.Basovsky L.E. "Management" M.: INFRA-M. - 2003. - 352 p.

2.Vikhansky O.S., Naumov A.I. "Management" - M .: "Firma Gardika", 2000. - 560 p.

3.Gerchikova I.N. "Management": Textbook. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: Banks and stock exchanges, UNITI, 1995. - 370 p.

4.Egorshin A.P. "Personnel Management". - N. Novgorod: NIMB, 1997. - 400 p.

.Kabushkin N.I. "Fundamentals of Management", Moscow: CJSC "Econompress", 2003 - 350 p.

7.Lukashevich V.V. "Personnel Management" Moscow 2001. - 420 p.

."Management of 100 exam answers", Express - a guide for university students: Rostov n. / D, 2002. - 350 p.

.Rifard L. Daft, "Management", Peter 2002. - 265 p. Send a request with a topic right now to find out about the possibility of receiving a consultation.

Modern views on management theory, the foundation of which was laid by the scientific schools of management, are very diverse. The article will tell about the leading foreign management schools and the founders of management.

The birth of science

Management has an ancient history, but management theory began to develop only at the beginning of the 20th century. The emergence of management science is credited to Frederick Taylor (1856-1915). The founder of the school of scientific management, Taylor, along with other researchers, initiated the study of the means and methods of leadership.

Revolutionary thoughts about management and motivation arose earlier, but were not in demand. For example, the project of Robert Owen (beginning of the 19th century) turned out to be very successful. His factory in Scotland was highly profitable by creating working conditions that motivated people to work efficiently. The workers and their families were provided with housing, worked in better conditions, and were encouraged by bonuses. But the businessmen of the time were not ready to follow Owen.

In 1885, in parallel with the Taylor school, an empirical school arose, whose representatives (Druker, Ford, Simons) were of the opinion that management is an art. And successful leadership can only be based on practical experience and intuition, but is not a science.

It was in the United States at the dawn of the 20th century that favorable conditions developed in which the evolution of scientific management schools began. A huge labor market has formed in a democratic country. The availability of education has helped many smart people to show their qualities. The development of transport and the economy contributed to the strengthening of monopolies with a multi-level management structure. New ways of leadership were needed. In 1911, Frederick Taylor's book "The Principles of Scientific Management" was published, which marked the beginning of research in the field of a new science - leadership.

Taylor School of Scientific Management (1885-1920)

The father of modern management, Frederick Taylor, proposed and systematized the laws of rational organization of work. With the help of research, he conveyed the idea that labor must be studied

Taylor's innovations are methods of motivation, piecework, rest and breaks at work, timing, rationing, professional selection and training of personnel, the introduction of cards with the rules for performing work.
Together with his followers, Taylor proved that the use of observations, measurements and analyzes would help facilitate manual labor, make it more perfect. The introduction of achievable norms and standards made it possible to increase the wages of more efficient workers.
Supporters of the school did not ignore the human factor. The introduction of incentive methods made it possible to increase the motivation of workers and increase productivity.
Taylor dismembered labor practices, separated the management functions (organization and planning) from actual work. Representatives of the school of scientific management believed that people with this specialty should perform managerial functions. They were of the opinion that focusing different groups of employees on what they are more capable of makes the organization more successful.

The system created by Taylor is recognized as more applicable to the lower management level in the diversification, expansion of production. The Taylor School of Scientific Management has created a scientific foundation to replace obsolete practices. The supporters of the school included such researchers as F. and L. Gilbert, G. Gantt, Weber, G. Emerson, G. Ford, G. Grant, O.A. Yermansky.

Development of the school of scientific management

Frank and Lillian Gilbreth studied the factors that affect productivity. To fix movements during operations, they used a movie camera and a device of their own invention (microchronometer). Research allowed to change the course of work, eliminating unnecessary movements.

The Gilbreths applied standards and equipment in production, which later led to the emergence of work standards, which were introduced by scientific management schools. F. Gilbreth studied the factors influencing labor productivity. He divided them into three groups:

Variable factors related to health, lifestyle, physique, cultural level, education.
Variable factors related to working conditions, environment, materials, equipment and tools.
Variable factors associated with the speed of movements: speed, efficiency, automaticity and others.

As a result of research, Gilbert came to the conclusion that the factors of movement are the most significant.

The main provisions of the scientific management school were finalized by Max Weber. The scientist formulated six principles for the rational functioning of an enterprise, which consisted in rationality, instruction, regulation, division of management, regulation of functions and subordination to a common goal.

The F. Taylor school of scientific management and his work were continued by the contribution of Henry Ford, who supplemented Taylor's principles by standardizing all processes in production, dividing operations into stages. Ford mechanized and synchronized production, organizing it on the principle of a conveyor, due to which the cost decreased by 9 times.

The first scientific schools of management became a reliable foundation for the development of management science. Taylor's school is distinguished not only by many strengths, but also by disadvantages: the study of management from the angle of a mechanical approach, motivation through the satisfaction of the utilitarian needs of workers.

Administrative (classical) school of scientific management (1920-1950)

The administrative school laid the foundation for the development of the principles and functions of management, the search for systematic approaches to improve the efficiency of managing the entire enterprise. A. Fayol, D. Mooney, L. Urvik, A. Ginsburg, A. Sloan, A. Gastev made a significant contribution to its development. The birth of the administrative school is associated with the name of Henri Fayol, who worked for more than 50 years for the benefit of a French company in the field of coal and iron ore processing. Dindall Urwick served as a management consultant in England. James Mooney worked under Alfred Sloan at General Motors.

The scientific and administrative schools of management developed in different directions but complement each other. Supporters of the administrative school considered it their main goal to achieve the effectiveness of the entire organization as a whole, using universal principles. The researchers were able to look at the enterprise from the point of view of long-term development and identified characteristics and patterns common to all firms.

In Fayol's book General and Industrial Administration, management was first described as a process that includes several functions (planning, organization, motivation, regulation and control).

Fayol formulated 14 universal principles that allow an enterprise to succeed:

division of labor;
combination of powers and responsibilities;
maintaining discipline;
unity of command;
common direction;
subordination of own interests to collective interests;
employee remuneration;
centralization;
interaction chain;
order;
justice;
job stability;
encouraging initiative;
corporate spirit.

School of Human Relations (1930-1950)

Classical scientific schools of management did not take into account one of the main elements of the organization's success - the human factor. The shortcomings of previous approaches were resolved by the neoclassical school. Her significant contribution to the development of management was the application of knowledge about interpersonal relationships. The Human Relations and Behavioral Sciences movements are the first scientific schools of management to make use of advances in psychology and sociology. The development of the school of human relations began thanks to two scientists: and

Ms. Follett was the first to think that management is getting work done with the help of other people. She believed that the manager should not only formally treat his subordinates, but should become a leader for them.

Mayo proved through experiments that clear standards, instructions and decent pay do not always lead to increased productivity, as the founder of the Taylor school of scientific management believed. Team relationships often trump management efforts. For example, the opinion of colleagues may become a more important incentive for an employee than instructions from a manager or material rewards. Thanks to Mayo, the social philosophy of management was born.

Mayo carried out his experiments for 13 years at the plant in Horton. He proved that it is possible to change the attitude of people to work through group influence. Mayo advised the use of spiritual incentives in management, for example, the connection of an employee with colleagues. He urged leaders to pay attention to relationships in the team.

The Horton Experiments were the beginning of:

studying collective relationships in many enterprises;
accounting for group psychological phenomena;
identification of labor motivation;
studies of relationships between people;
identifying the role of each employee and a small group in the work team.

School of Behavioral Sciences (1930-1950)

The end of the 1950s is the period of the transformation of the school of human relations into the school of behavioral sciences. It was not methods for building interpersonal relationships that came to the fore, but the effectiveness of the employee and the enterprise as a whole. Behavioral scientific approaches and management schools have led to the emergence of a new management function - personnel management.

Significant figures in this direction include: Douglas McGregor, Frederick Herzberg, Chris Argyris, Rensis Likert. The objects of research of scientists were social interactions, motivation, power, leadership and authorities, organizational structures, communications, quality of working life and work. The new approach moved away from the methods of building relationships in teams, and focused on helping the employee to realize his own capabilities. The concepts of the behavioral sciences began to be applied in the creation of organizations and management. Supporters formulated the goal of the school: high efficiency of the enterprise due to high efficiency its human resources.

The emergence of the school was due to the development of cybernetics and operations research. Within the framework of the school, an independent discipline arose - the theory of managerial decisions. Research in this area is related to the development of:

methods of mathematical modeling in the development of organizational decisions;
algorithms for selecting optimal solutions using statistics, game theory and other scientific approaches;
mathematical models for phenomena in the economy of an applied and abstract nature;
scale models imitating a society or an individual firm, balance models for costs or output, models for making forecasts of scientific, technological and economic development.

empirical school

Modern scientific schools of management cannot be imagined without the achievements of the empirical school. Its representatives believed that the main task of research in the field of management should be the collection of practical materials and the creation of recommendations for managers. Peter Drucker, Ray Davis, Lawrence Newman, Don Miller became prominent representatives of the school.

The school contributed to the separation of management into a separate profession and has two directions. The first is the study of enterprise management problems and the implementation of the development of modern management concepts. The second is a study of the job responsibilities and functions of managers. "Empirists" argued that the leader creates something unified from certain resources. When making decisions, he focuses on the future of the enterprise or its prospects.

Any leader is called upon to perform certain functions:

setting the goals of the enterprise and choosing ways of development;
classification, distribution of work, creation of an organizational structure, selection and placement of personnel, and others;
stimulation and coordination of personnel, control based on relations between managers and the team;
rationing, analysis of the work of the enterprise and all those employed on it;
motivation based on performance.

Thus, the activity of a modern manager becomes complex. The manager must have knowledge from different areas and apply methods that have been proven in practice. The school has solved a number of significant managerial problems that arise everywhere in large-scale industrial production.

School of Social Systems

The social school applies the achievements of the "human relations" school and considers the worker as a person with a social orientation and needs that are reflected in the organizational environment. The environment of the enterprise also influences the formation of the needs of the employee.

The prominent representatives of the school include Jane March, Amitai Etzioni. This current in the study of the position and place of a person in an organization has gone further than other scientific schools of management. Briefly, the postulate of "social systems" can be expressed as follows: the needs of the individual and the needs of the collective are usually far from each other.

Thanks to work, a person gets the opportunity to satisfy his needs level by level, moving higher and higher in the hierarchy of needs. But the essence of the organization is such that it often contradicts the transition to the next level. The obstacles that arise on the way of the employee's movement towards their goals cause conflicts with the enterprise. The task of the school is to reduce their strength with the help of studies of organizations as complex socio-technical systems.

Human Resource Management

The history of the emergence of "human resource management" dates back to the 60s of the XX century. The model of the sociologist R. Milles considered the staff as a source of reserves. According to the theory, good management should not become the main goal, as the scientific schools of management preached. Briefly, the meaning of "human management" can be expressed as follows: the satisfaction of needs should be the result of the personal interest of each employee.

A great company always manages to retain great employees. Therefore, the human factor is an important strategic factor for the organization. It's vital important condition to survive in a difficult market environment. The goals of this type of management include not just hiring, but stimulating, developing and training professional employees who effectively implement organizational goals. The essence of this philosophy is that employees are the assets of the organization, capital that does not require much control, but depends on motivation and stimulation.

School of Scientific Management

It has been noted that organization and management become an independent subject of study for science at a time when the level of development of engineering and technology comes into sharp conflict with the established system of production relations. This was revealed with all obviousness in the era of the transition of classical capitalism to its highest, monopolistic stage, i.e. at a time when the objective prerequisites for the emergence of scientific management in the United States and the activities of its leader F.U. Taylor.

The emergence of modern management science dates back to the beginning of the 20th century. And associated with the names of FW Taylor, Frank and Lily Gilbreth and Henry Gantt. An important merit of this school was the position that it is possible to manage "scientifically", relying on economic, technical and social experiment, as well as on the scientific analysis of the phenomena and facts of the management process and their generalization.

This research method was first applied to a single enterprise by the American engineer F.W. Taylor, who should be considered the founder of scientific production management.

The term "scientific management" was first proposed in 1910 by L. Bridays. Since Taylor's death, the name has gained general acceptance in relation to his concept.

The functions of carrying out the interaction of elements of production were assigned to the planning or distribution bureau of the enterprise, which was given a central place in the Taylor system.

Frank Gilbreth and his wife Lillian Gilbreth dealt with the rationalization of the work of workers and the study of opportunities to increase output through increased labor productivity.

Second half of the 19th century - an era of significant changes in the structure and organization of business entrepreneurship in the United States: the creation of huge national and multinational corporations in transport and industry, which absorbed everything new and advanced.

On the contrary, the change in the organization of labor in the shop and at the enterprise proceeded extremely slowly. That was one of the contradictions that determined the need for the emergence of scientific management. However, within the factory system itself, no less contradiction was revealed. The transition from handicraft production of the 18th century to machine production of the 19th century was uneven and protracted. By the second half of the 19th century, a system of industry was generally formed, which historians call the first, or old factory system (the second factory system is called in-line production of the beginning of the 20th century). True, by the beginning of the 20th century, it no longer satisfied the needs of social production and did not correspond to the latest achievements of science and technology. outdated and social organization labor in the enterprise, the central figure of which was the master.

The basic principles of Taylor and his school can be formulated as follows:

Creation of a scientific approach (methodology) to the organization of the implementation of specific work. This approach included dividing the work into separate elements and determining a scientifically based way of doing it based on the scientific study of each element, replacing the old traditional and practically established methods of work.

Selecting workers for a specific job based on scientific criteria, training them and teaching them new ways to do it.

Cooperation between the administration and workers in the practical implementation of a scientifically developed system of labor organization.

Equal distribution of labor and responsibility between management and workers.

An important contribution of this school was the systematic use of incentives to motivate workers to increase productivity and output. The key element in this approach was that people who produce more should receive higher rewards.

Thus, the concept of scientific management has become the initial stage in the formation and recognition of management as a science and an independent field of study. The beginning of the development of the school of scientific management was laid by Taylor's book "Principles of Scientific Management".

His power was practically unlimited: he was responsible for production management, production costs, and personnel management. The foreman single-handedly hired and fired workers, promoted them or demoted them, controlled the system of training workers, the distribution of tasks, was responsible for maintaining discipline, set working hours, attendance times and production rates. It is clear that his real role in production was not much inferior to that of a manager.

Classical (administrative) school in management

Fayol's merit lies in the fact that he divided all management functions into general, related to any field of activity, and specific, related directly to the management of an industrial enterprise.

Fayol's followers, who developed and deepened the main provisions of his doctrine, are Lindal Urvik, L. Gyulik, M. Weber, D. Mooney, Alfred P. Sloan, G. Church.

Based on the developments of Fayol and his followers, a classical model of organization was formed, based on the main principles:

Division of labor. Specialization is the natural order of things. The purpose of the division of labor is to do more and better work with the same effort. This is achieved by reducing the number of goals to which attention and effort must be directed.

Authority and responsibility. Authority is the right to give orders, and responsibility is its opposite. Where authority is given, there responsibility arises.

Discipline. Discipline offers obedience and respect for the agreements reached between the firm and its employees. Establishing these agreements binding the firm and employees from which disciplinary formalities arise must remain one of the chief tasks of managers. Discipline also implies fair application of sanctions.

Unity of command. An employee should receive orders from only one immediate superior.

unity of direction. Each group operating within the same goal must be united by a single plan and have one leader.

Subordination of personal interests to the general. The interests of one employee or group of employees should not prevail over the interests of a company or organization of a large scale.

Staff remuneration. Workers should receive a fair wage for their service.

Centralization. Like the division of labor, centralization is the natural order of things. However, the appropriate degree of centralization will vary depending on specific conditions. Therefore, the question arises about the right proportion between centralization and decentralization. It is a problem of determining the measure that will provide the best results.

Scalar chain. A scalar chain is a series of individuals in leadership positions, ranging from the person holding the highest position in this chain to the bottom manager. It would be a mistake to abandon a hierarchical system unnecessarily, but it would be an even greater mistake to maintain this hierarchy when it harms business interests.

Order. A place for everything, and everything in its place.

Justice. Justice is a combination of kindness and justice.

Workplace stability for staff. High employee turnover reduces the efficiency of the organization. A mediocre manager who holds on to a position is certainly preferable to an outstanding, talented manager who leaves quickly and does not hold on to his position.

Initiative. Initiative means developing a plan and ensuring its successful implementation, this gives the organization strength and energy.

corporate spirit. Union is the force that results from the harmony of the staff.

Thus, according to A. Fayol, management is a universal process consisting of several interrelated functions. The implementation of the basic principles of management contributes to improving the efficiency of production management.

School of Psychology and Human Relations

One of the shortcomings of the scientific management school and the classical school was that they did not fully understand the role and importance of the human factor, which is ultimately the main element in the effectiveness of the organization. Therefore, the school of psychology and human relations that eliminated the shortcomings of the classical school is often called the neoclassical school.

The first attempt to apply psychological analysis to practical problems of production was made by G. Munsterberg, a professor at Harvard University in the USA.

In the 20-30s of our century, a school of human relations was born, in the center of which is a person. The emergence of the doctrine of "human relations" is usually associated with the names of American scientists E. Mayo and F. Roethlisberger, who are known for their research in the sociology of industrial relations.

One of the main differences between the school of psychology and human relations is the introduction of behaviorism into it, i.e. theories of human behavior.

One of the founders of the School of Psychology and Human Relations is Harvard University Business School Professor Elton Mayo.

Representatives of the school of "human relations" recommended that serious attention be paid to changing the informal structure while restructuring the formal structure of the organization. The formal manager should strive to become an informal leader by winning the "affections of the people." This is not an easy task, but "social art".

However, despite the criticism that the school of psychology and human relations was subjected to, its main provisions were subsequently reflected in new, more complex and modern concepts of management.

School of Behavioral Sciences and Human Resource Theory. The School of Behavioral Sciences emerged in the 1930s. The revitalization of the school's activity falls on the 1950-1960s. The school got its name from the well-known psychological terms "behavior", "behaviorism" (behavior, the science of behavior). The basic premise of behaviorism is that it is necessary to study not consciousness, but human behavior, which is a response to a stimulus.

In management, this approach was transferred to the working person and specifically to the relationship between managers and workers. The essence of these relations is based on the fact that the employee, receiving a good reward (material and moral) from the manager, responds to it with a positive reaction - a good job.

The school of behavioral sciences can be seen as a development and deepening of the concept of human relations, but at the same time, other concepts have emerged within the framework of the new school that are significantly different from the school of human relations.

The beginning of a new concept in the science of management was laid by W. Barnard, who published the work "Administrator's Functions" in 1938. Among the later followers of this concept, it should be noted: R. Likert, F. Herzberg, A. Maslow, D. McGregory. These and other researchers have studied social interaction at the enterprise, the motivation of needs, the nature of management, forms of communication in the team, leadership in the organizational structure. The main goal of this school was to find ways to increase the efficiency of the organization by increasing the efficiency of its human resources. Therefore, the new concept was called the theory of human resources. The new approach was aimed at developing such management techniques that would contribute to a person's awareness of his capabilities based on the application of the basic concepts of the behavioral sciences to the management of an organization.

Within the framework of this theory, a number of concepts and provisions were developed about the individual and "cooperation", formal and informal systems, motivation and needs, and leadership in the organization.

Thus, the merit of the school is the study of the problem of motives and needs, as well as the possibilities of their effective use in management. Employee motivation has three levels: needs, goals, rewards. For the effective use of an employee, two more factors should be taken into account: the factors of human effort and ability.

The conclusion of this school that a person's work will be successful if positive motivation is accompanied by sufficient effort and certain abilities became the program for effective workforce management, and the scientific concept became known as human resource theory.

Schools 1940-1960s

1940-1960 characterized by the development of management within several schools other than the school of behavioral sciences. These schools were: the empirical or pragmatic school of management, the schools associated with the theories of technocratic management, and the school of management science. These schools left a certain mark in the development of managerial thought, but basically they were in the nature of a private development of certain areas and problems of managing an organization.

Empirical (pragmatic) school of management. The founders of the school: E. Petersen, G. Simon, R. Davis and others. Representatives of big business took part in the development of the school. The specialists of this school did not deny the importance of theoretical principles and the use of the achievements of specific sciences, but considered it more important to analyze the direct experience of management. The main contribution of the school to the development of managerial thought can be defined as follows:

1. Development of intra-company management, including the development of recommendations on management structures, on the organization of linear and functional services, technical and information management systems and other management issues.
2. Research and introduction into management practice of new, effective methods of training managers (example: Sloan school of managers).
3. The ideologists of the school made an attempt to develop a number of problems that became especially relevant in the 70-80s (issues of centralization and decentralization of management, the introduction of targeted management, the classification of management functions, the organization of work of managers, etc.).
4. Professionalization of management.

Theories of technocratic management. In the 1950s-1960s. the most famous were the concepts (schools): the theory of elites, the theory of technocracy and the theory of industrial society.

1. Theory of elites. This concept is based on the division of society into an omnipotent elite and a crowd subordinate to it; in management, this approach corresponds to the allocation of qualified leaders and unskilled masses.
2. Theory of technocracy. The essence of the concept: the coming era will be the era of the state of engineering and technical intelligentsia. The management of the future will be the management of the technocracy (representatives of science and technology).
3. The theory of industrial society. The provisions of the theory include two key points: the contradictions in society are explained by the different degrees of education of people, and the leading role in management is given to technocratic management. The factor of education is basic in the economic life of society. When solving the problem of effective management, preference is given to a group solution.

Theories of technocratic management have introduced new elements into management thought with their focus on improving the quality (educational) level of society and management.

School of Management Science. Developed in the 50s as a result of the use of advances applied mathematics and engineering sciences in the development of managerial thought. Attention should be paid to the difference in the translations of the two concepts scientific management (scientific management), which in American literature is directly associated with the Taylor school and his followers, and management science (management science), which is associated with the use of quantitative methods in management.

Quantitative methods under the general name "operations research" were developed to solve applied problems during the Second World War (effective use of air defense systems, submarine warfare while escorting convoys, mining Japanese ports, etc.).

Operations research, at its core, was the use of scientific research methods to solve management problems based on situation models. The use of models has made it possible to simplify complex problems for their deeper study and understanding.

A key characteristic of the management science school is the use of mathematical models to quantify and analyze the processes and problems under study. The development of computer technology significantly influenced the development of quantitative methods in management, which made it possible to develop and use in practical research mathematical models of increasing complexity, approaching real processes.

Thus, we can draw the following conclusion on the considered chapter: the school of scientific management, the classical (administrative) school, the school of psychology and human relations, the school of management science (quantitative school), as well as outstanding representatives of these schools, such like F. Taylor, A. Fayol, E. Mayo and others.