Humanistic Theories of Organizations

Review Classical Theories of Organizations Taylors Theory of Scientific Management Fayols Administrative Theory Webers Theory of !rea!cracy

"!manistic Theories of Organizations "!man Relations Theory The "awthorne St!dies Chester arnard Mc#regors Theory $ and Theory %

"!man Reso!rces Theory &i'erts Systems Theory (Fo!r Systems of Management) la'e and Mo!tons ( la'e and McCanse) Managerial #rid

Classical Theories Reviewed Classical Theories of Organizations Taylors Theory of Scientific Management (tas's) Fayols Administrative Theory (management) Webers Theory of !rea!cracy (organizational str!ct!re) All * theories attem+t to enhance managements ability to +redict and control the behavior of their wor'ers Considered only the tas' f!nction of comm!nication (ignored relational and maintenance f!nctions of comm!nication) ,esigned to +redict and control behavior in organizations

Classical vs. Humanistic Classical theories em+hasized coercion- control- and +!nishment (FOC.S O/ TAS0S 12RO,.CT3O/)4

 Maintain +redictability and control ,ecision5ma'ing +ower at to+ of hierarchy Minimize in+!t from lower5level em+loyees Rely on science and r!les to g!ide behavior Reg!late comm!nication to increase +redictability and decrease mis!nderstandings Res!lt6 Wor'ers feel they have no control over their wor' sit!ation Management does not care abo!t their ideas Feelings and ideas of wor'ers are !nim+ortant

"!manistic theories were develo+ed to +romote the CO/C7R/S of the individ!al wor'er in an atmos+here that was too foc!sed on +rod!ction (FOC.S O/ R7&AT3O/A& 8 MA3/T7/A/C7 F./CT3O/S) Principles of Human Relations Theory "!man relations theory is characterized by a shift in em+hasis from TAS0 to WOR07R #o beyond +hysical contrib!tions to incl!de creative- cognitive- and emotional as+ects of wor'ers ased on a more dyadic (two5way) conce+t!alization of comm!nication4

SOC3A& R7&AT3O/S"32S are at the heart of organizational behavior55effectiveness is contingent on the social well5being of wor'ers Wor'ers comm!nicate o+inions- com+laints- s!ggestions- and feelings to increase satisfaction and +rod!ction Origins ("awthorne St!dies 8 wor' of Chester arnard) "!man Relations School of Management 5 7lton Mayo ("arvard)

Origins of Human Relations Theory 9The "awthorne St!dies:

 Illumination Study (/ovember ;<=>) ,esigned to test the effect of lighting intensity on wor'er +rod!ctivity "e!ristic val!e6 infl!ence of h!man relations on wor' behavior Relay ssem!ly Test Room Study (;<=?5;<*=) Assembly of tele+hone relays (*@ +arts 5 > machine screws) 2rod!ction and satisfaction increased regardless of 3A mani+!lation Wor'ers increased +rod!ction and satisfaction related to s!+ervisory +ractices "!man interrelationshi+s are im+ortant contrib!ting factors to wor'er +rod!ctivity ottom &ine6 S!+ervisory +ractices increase em+loyee morale A/, +rod!ctivity

Interviewing Program (;<=B5;<*C) 3nvestigate connection between s!+ervisory +ractices and em+loyee morale 7m+loyees eD+ressed their ideas and feelings (e4g4- li'es and disli'es) 2rocess more im+ortant than act!al res!lts "an# $iring Room O!servation Study (/ovember ;<*; 5 May ;<*=) Social gro!+s can infl!ence +rod!ction and individ!al wor' behavior RE6 "ow is social control manifested on the sho+ floorF 3nformal organization constrains em+loyee behavior within formal organizational str!ct!re Hawthorne Studies % Implications Illumination Study (/ovember ;<=>) The mere +ractice of observing +eo+les behavior tends to alter their behavior ("awthorne 7ffect) Relay ssem!ly Test Room Study (;<=?5;<*=) Relationshi+s between wor'ers and their s!+ervisors are +owerf!l "!man interrelationshi+s increase the amo!nt and G!ality of wor'er +artici+ation in decision ma'ing Interviewing Program (;<=B5;<*C)

 ,emonstrated +owerf!l infl!ence of !+ward comm!nication Wor'ers were as'ed for o+inions- told they mattered- and +ositive attit!des toward com+any increased "an# $iring Room O!servation Study (/ovember ;<*; 5 May ;<*=) &ed f!t!re theorists to acco!nt for the eDistence of informal comm!nication Ta#en together& these studies helped to document the powerful nature of social relations in the wor#place and moved managers more toward the interpersonal aspects of organizing. Hawthorne Studies % Criticisms /ot cond!cted with the a++ro+riate scientific rigor necessary Too few s!bHects (/I@) /o control gro!+s S!bHects re+laced with more 9coo+erative: +artici+ants WORT"&7SS #ROSS 7RRORS 3/COM27T7/C7 The 'mergence of Communication Chester "arnard Considered a bridge between classical and h!man relations theories The Functions of the Executive (;<*B) Arg!es for 4 4 4 strict lines of comm!nication 5 classical theory a 9h!man5based system of organization: The +otential of every wor'er and the centrality of comm!nication to the organizing +rocess

SiD 3ss!es Relevant to Organizational Comm!nication Formal vs4 3nformal Organization

Coo+eration Comm!nication 3ncentives A!thority Jone of 3ndifference

Si( Issues Relevant to Organizational Communication

Formal vs4 3nformal Organization Formal Organization 5 a system of conscio!sly coordinated activities or forces of two or more +ersons4 (definite- str!ct!red- common +!r+ose) 2ersons are able to comm!nicate with one another Willing to contrib!te action To accom+lish a common +!r+ose

3nformal Organization 5 based on myriad interactions that ta'e +lace tho!rgho!t an organizations history4 3ndefinite Str!ct!reless /o definite s!bdivisions of +ersonnel Res!lts6 c!stoms- mores- fol'lore- instit!tions- social norms- ideals 55 may lead to formal organization

Coo+eration /ecessary com+onent of formal organization The eD+ression of the net satisfactions or dissatisfactions eD+erienced or antici+ated by each individ!al in com+arison with those eD+erienced or antici+ated thro!gh alternative o++ort!nities Comm!nication Critical to coo+eration The most !niversal form of h!man coo+eration- and +erha+s the most com+leDis s+eech

 The most li'ely reason for the s!ccess of coo+eration and the reason for its fail!re System of comm!nication6 'nown- formal channels which are as direct (short) as +ossible- where the com+lete line of comm!nication is !sed- the s!+ervisory heads m!st be com+etent- the line of comm!nication sho!ld not be interr!+tedand every comm!nication sho!ld be a!thenticated4 arnards system lac's relationshi+ formation and maintenance mechanisms

3ncentives Sho!ld be available /ot disc!ssed in detail A!thority Associated with sec!ring coo+eration for organizational members The interrelationshi+ among the originator of the comm!nication- the comm!nication itself- and the receiver A!thority of +osition OA7R A!thority of &eadershi+ ('nowledge 8 ability)4 Jone of 3ndifference 5 orders followed Mar's the bo!ndaries of what em+loyees will consider doing witho!t G!estionbased on eD+ectations develo+ed on entering the organization4 arnard drew attention away from formal organizational str!ct!res toward comm!nication- coo+eration- and the informal organization4 "is wor' was integrated by other theorists in the h!man relations movement4

Theory ) and Theory *+ ,ouglas -c.regor

,ouglas -c.regor /0123401356 Artic!lated basic +rinci+les of h!man relations theory The Human Side of Enterprise (;<KC- ;<B@) To !nderstand h!man behavior- one m!st discover the theoretical ass!m+tions !+on which behavior is based 7s+ecially interested in the behavior of managers toward wor'ers 97very managerial act rests on ass!m+tions- generalizations- and hy+otheses55 that is to say- on theory 4 4 4 Theory and +ractice are inse+arable4:

 Two ObHectives6 2redict and control behavior Ta+ .nrealized +otential

Theory $ 5 Classical Theory Theory % 5 "!man Relations Theory FOC.S6 Managers ass!m+tions abo!t ".MA/ /AT.R7 Theory ) 4 Classical Theory Three Ass!m+tions The average h!man being has an inherent disli'e of wor' and will avoid it4 Most +eo+le m!st be coerced- controlled- directed- and threatened with +!nishment The average h!man being +refers to be directed- wishes to avoid res+onsibility- has relatively little ambition- wants sec!rity4

/either eD+lains nor describes h!man nat!re Theory * 4 Human Relations Theory Ass!m+tions 2hysical and mental effort in wor' is similar to +lay 1 rest4 7Dternal control and the threat of +!nishment are not the only strategies Commitment to obHectives is a f!nction of the rewards associated with their achievement The average h!man being learns- !nder +ro+er conditions- not only to acce+t b!t to see' res+onsibility The ca+acity to eDercise a high degree of imagination- ingen!ity- and creativity in the sol!tion of organizational +roblems is widely distrib!ted in the +o+!lation 3ntellect!al +otentialities of the average h!man being are !nder!tilized

A more +ositive +ers+ective of h!man nat!re

 The 07% to control and G!ality +rod!ction is commitment to organizational o!7ectives Theory * Prototype+ The Scanlon Plan 2artici+ative Management Two Central Feat!res Cost4reduction sharing for organizational mem!ers 4 sharing the economic gains from im+rovements in organizational +erformance 'ffective participation 5 a formal means of +roviding o++ort!nities to every member of the organization to contrib!te ideas for im+roving organizational effectiveness4

M!st be im+lemented a++ro+riately Wastes time and !ndermines managerial +owerF Magic form!la for every organizational +roblemF CO/C7R/ for R7&AT3O/S"32S in the organization4 As the need to increase commitment grows- so does the need to develo+ strongcomm!nication5based relationshi+s among organizational members- +artic!larly between s!+ervisor and s!bordinate4

Human Resources Theory

,iffic!lt to ado+t +rinci+les of h!man relations theory 55 misa++lications and mis!nderstandings of both classical theory and h!man relations theory led to "!man Reso!rces Theory The 'ey element to "!man Relations Theory- +artici+ation- was !sed only to ma'e wor'ers feel as if they were +art of the organizational decision5ma'ing +rocesses 0ey to classical and h!man relations theory is com+liance with managerial a!thority Wor'ers are told that they are im+ortant b!t were not treated as s!ch MaHor ,istinctions between "!man Reso!rces and "!man Relations Theory All +eo+le (not H!st managers) are reservoirs of !nta++ed reso!rces 5 manager res+onsibility to ta+ +hysical and creative reso!rces Many decisions can be made more effectively and efficiently by wor'ers most directly involved with their conseG!ences

Relationshi+ between em+loyee satisfaction and +erformance 5 im+roved satisfaction and morale contrib!te bac' to im+roved decision ma'ing and control

3ncreased satisfaction is related to the im+roved decision ma'ing and self5control that occ!rs d!e to +artici+ation that is gen!inely solicited and heard Two +revalent "!man Reso!rces Theories Rensis &i'er la'e 8 Mo!ton ( la'e 8 McCanse) 8our Systems of -anagement+ Rensis 9i#ert Management is crticial to all organizational activities and o!tcomes Contin!!m that ranges from more classically oriented system to one based on h!man reso!rces theory Of all the tas's of management- managing the h!man com+onent is the central and most im+ortant tas' "igh +rod!cing de+artments and organizations tend toward System 3AL low +rod!cing !nits favor System 3 System 3 5 7D+loitative A!thoritative System 33 5 enevolent A!thoritative System 333 5 Cons!ltative System 3A 5 2artici+ative "la#e and -outon:s -anagerial .rid Stresses interrelationshi+ between +rod!ction (tas') and +eo+le Managements main +!r+ose is to +romote a c!lt!re in the organization that allows for high +rod!ction at the same time that em+loyees are fostered in their +rofessional and +ersonal develo+ment Managerial #rid 5 now &eadershi+ #rid ( la'e 8 McCanse) (Fig!re *4*- +4 @<) FOC.S6 Mangers Ass!m+tions abo!t CO/C7R/ for 27O2&7 and CO/C7R/ for 2RO,.CT3O/ Concern for 27O2&7 ,egree of +ersonal commitment to ones Hob

 Tr!st5based acco!ntability (vs4 obedience5based acco!ntability) Self5esteem for the individ!al 3nter+ersonal relationshi+s with co5wor'ers Concern for 2RO,.CT3O/ .se of +eo+le and technology to accom+lish organizational tas's Concern for is not abo!t G!antity or G!ality Assessment instr!ment does not re+resent +ersonality traits of the manager 55 insteadindicate a s+ecific orientation to +rod!ction and +eo+le uthority Compliance /1&06 Classical theory Country Clu! /0&16 Informal grapevine Impoverished /0&06 9aissez4faire -iddle4of4the4Road /;&;6 Compromise /carrot < stic#6 Team /1&16 Human Resources pproach Promote the conditions that integrate creativity& high productivity& and high morale through concerted team action

S.MMAR% "!manistic Theories of Organizations "!man Relations Theory The "awthorne St!dies Chester arnard Mc#regors Theory $ and Theory %

"!man Reso!rces Theory &i'erts Systems Theory (Fo!r Systems of Management) la'e and Mo!tons ( la'e and McCanse) Managerial #rid The +rinci+les of h!man reso!rces theory attem+t to integrate the concern for +rod!ction from classical theory with the concern for the wor'er from h!man relations theory 55 more effective and satisfyingM

Principles of Human Relations Approach The basic principles of human relations approach are: 1. 2. . Human beings are not interested only in financial gains. They also need recognition and appreciation. Workers are human beings. So they must be treated like human beings and not like machines. Managers should try to understand the feelings and emotions of the workers. !n organisation works not only through formal relations" but also through informal relations. Therefore" managers should encourage informal relations in the organisation along with formal relations. Workers need a high degree of $ob security and $ob satisfaction. Therefore" management should gi%e $ob security and $ob satisfaction to the workers. Workers want good communication from the managers. Therefore" managers should communicate effecti%ely without feelings of ego and superiority comple'. )n any organisation" members do not like conflicts and misunderstandings. Therefore" managers should try to stop conflicts and misunderstandings among the members of the organisation. Workers want freedom. They do not want strict super%ision. Therefore" managers should a%oid strict super%ision and control o%er the workers. +mployees would like to participate in decision making" especially" in those matters affecting their interests. Therefore" management must encourage workers, participation in management. This will increase producti%ity and $ob satisfaction.

#. &. (.

*.
B4

6 main Features of Human Relations Theory 1. The worker is a human being" who is also member of a team. 2. His contribution to output is determined as much by his physical capacity as his willingness to work. . -on.economic rewards play a central role in making him a willing worker. #. /ue to their social nature workers form primary groups among themsel%es" which do not follow any formal rule of principle0 &. ! manager should 1a2 +ncourage the formation of such groups" 1b2 3se them as a supplementary force to strengthen the formal organisation" 1c2 4uild ade5uate channels of communication" formal and informal" with the workers and their groups" and

1d2 6ollow a relations.oriented rather than task.oriented style of leadership. (. 7articipation in decision making may also result in more output from the workers.

Critical ppraisal "!man Relations Theory has a landmar' contrib!tion to the evol!tion of administrative tho!ght4 3ts significance lies in discovering and em+hasizing theinformal organizations and facilitates teamwor' and collaboration4 "owever- it is also not an !nmiDed blessing4 Some im+ortant limitations of and criticisms against this theory have been s!mmed !+ below6 N &oren aritz has criticized the "!man Relations Theory as being +ro5management and anti5 !nionist4 The .nited A!to Wor'ers have labeled the "!man Relation Theorists as OCow Sociologists4 N endics and Fisher said that 7lton Mayo failed to define shar+ly the ethical +res!++ositions of his scientific wor'4 N Amitai 7tzioni remar'ed that h!man relations theorists tend to devote m!chattention informal relations among wor'ers and between wor'ers ands!+ervisors- b!t little to the formal ones4 This is a severe limitation of the theory4 N 3t is also +ointed o!t that the "!man Relations Theory co!ld not eD+lore the m!lti5dimensional +henomenon of h!man motivations com+letely4 N Finally- MarDists say that Mayoism is a new techniG!e to eD+loit wor'ers as it has de5 em+hasized the economic factors in an organization4 ,es+ite these limitations- it needs to be ta'en in to acco!nt that the "!man Relations Theory not only bro!ght abo!t a revol!tion in organizational analysis b!t also contrib!ted significantly to the history of administrative tho!ght as well4 7ven today- organizations stress on inter+ersonal relations as tools of im+roving the +rod!ctivity of wor'ers in organizations4

Human Relations in Management

Human relations refers to the study of how organizations manage and interact with their employees in their efforts to improve employee and organizational effectiveness. Human relations is a broad term that includes such previously discussed subjects as leadership, organizational design, extent of decentralization, and willingness to delegate authority and responsibility. In addition, it involves such fundamental issues as individual, group, and organizational needs; motivation; and attempts to improve the uality of wor! life. Essential Concept

 " manager#s success in directing depends on his ability to create such a healthy human relations climate. $eaders need to understand wor!ers as human beings with social and emotional needs. Why should Human Relations in Management? %o remove conflict between individual and organization. %o remove individual differences. %o achieve the goals of institution. %o ma!e a good wor!ing environment. %o ma!e a coordination between different sections. %o increase uality and uantity of products and services. Human Relations Theorists &ary 'ar!er (ollett )lton &ayo Mary Parker Follett (1 ! "1#$$% *nown as a visionary genius &utual influence is developed when people wor! together. +o not try to control people. ,ontrol the situation together. &eorge Elton Mayo (1 '"1#(#%

-uccessful "cademic and ,linical 'sychologist &ayo had discovered a fundamental concept. .or!ing places should be li!e as a social environments and good relationship should be maintained between all the wor!ers. 'eople are motivated by much more than self/interest. %hus, %H) H0&"1 2)$"%I31- )2" H"+ 4)5016 &uidelines )or E))ecti*e Human Relationship "daptive leadership 4e optimistic 4e positive 4e genuinely interested in others -mile and develop sense of humor ,all people by respectfully ,ommunicating effectively ,onditioning behavior $isten actively to others "lways help to others

%hin! before you act &anagement should be a positive attitude towards wor!ers %oo concerned with wor!er satisfaction Increase the team/wor! Involving individuals and groups in decision/ma!ing %he wor!place environment should focus on needs of employees. &anagement re uires effective social s!ills.

Ha+thorne studies, revealed that money and job security are not the only sources of employee motivation and led to the development of the human relations approach to motivation.
Features Human 2elations %heory has three elements or features. %hey are, the Individual, the Informal 3rganization, and 'articipative &anagement. The Individual The Theory recognizes the im+ortance of emotions and+erce+tions of individ!als4 3t holds the vi ew that the level of wor'ers+rod!ction and organizational o!t+!t is determined by the h!man relations at wor' and not so m!ch by the +hysical and economic conditions of wor'4 Informal Organizations The "!man Relations Theory em+hasizes the informal organizations4 According to "ic's and #!llet- 9The informal shadow organization that eDists within the str!ct!re of the formal organization is em+hasized4 Attention is foc!sed on the social as+ects of man whoseoverriding need is seen as a desire to belong- to be acce+ted by and stand well in his wor' gro!+4: Participative -anagement "!man Relations Theory advocates the style of +artici+ative management4 3n other words- the manager sho!ld cons!lt thewor' gro!+s and their informal leaders before introd!cing a change of +rogramme4 This +artici+ative management is meritorio!s beca!se it +ermits the wor'ers to infl!ence the decisions that affect them- develo+s a sense of +artici+ation in the gro!+- ma'es the wor'ing environment more +leasant-+revents the alienation of wor'ers from the management- facilitates theacce+tance of organizational goals by the wor'ers- and above all- res!lts in higher +rod!ctivity4

-ources7 "dapted from .illiam 5. 3uchi and "lfred &. 8aeger, %ype 9 3rganizations7 -tability in the &idst of &obility,: "cademy of &anagement 2eview ; <=>?@A http7BBwww.scribd.comBdocB;?;;>@C?BHuman/2elations/%heory http7BBstudypsychologyonline.blogspot.comBDC=;BCEBcriticism/of/human/relation/theory.html

Classical Management Theory And "!man Relations Th4 Anti Essays4 Retrieved ,ecember ;>=C;*- from the World Wide Web6 htt+611www4antiessays4com1free5essays1<B??=4html (=CC<- C;)4 "!man Relation Theories4 StudyMode.com4 Retrieved C;- =CC<- from htt+611www4st!dymode4com1essays1"!man5Relation5Theories5;<C=@=4html