CHAPTER 11

THE BEHAVIORAL SCHOOL

There are three well-established schools of management thought- classical, behavioral,
and quantitative. All three have contributed to manager’s understanding of organizations and to
their ability to manage them. Each offer a different perspective for defining management
problems and opportunities and for developing ways to deal with them. Stoner and Wankel
(1987) believe that in their current state of evolution, each of the three aforementioned
approaches overlooks or deals inadequately with important aspects of organizational life.
Behavioral school-emerged in part because managers found that the classical approach
did not achieve complete production efficiency and workplace harmony.
 Hugo Munsterberg- applying the tools of psychology to help achieve increased
productivity was Hugo major contribution. He suggested in Psychology and Industrial
Efficiency, his major work. The productivity could be increased on three ways:

a. Through finding the best possible person

b. Through creating the best possible work
c. Through the use of psychological influence, which Munsterberg calls “the best
possible effect” to motivate employees.

 Elton Mayo
 From 1924 to 1933, a series of studies of human behavior in work situations was
conducted at Western Electric’s Hawthorne plant near Chicago. These studies,
which eventually became known as the “Hawthorne Studies” began as an attempt
to investigate the relationship between the level of lighting in the workplace and
the productivity of workers.
 Elton Mayo and his associates concluded that employees would work harder if
they believed management was concerned about their welfare and supervisors
paid special attention to them. The phenomenon was subsequently labeled the
Hawthorne effect.
 Another conclusion made by the researchers was that informal work groups- the
social environment of employees—have a great influence on productivity.
 Thus, to Mayo, the old concept of “rational man” motivated by personal
economic needs had to be replaced by the concept of “social man”

Contributions and Limitations of the Human Relations Approach

The contributions and limitations of the human relations approach have been identified
by Stoner and Wankel (1987) as follows:
Contributions:
1. By stressing social needs, the human relations movement improved on the classical
approach, which treated productivity almost exclusively as an engineering problem. In a
sense, Mayo had rediscovered Robert Owen’s century- old dictum that a true concern for
workers—those “vital machines”-paid off.
2. The Hawthorne Studies researchers spotlighted the importance of manager’s style and
thereby revolutionized management training. It focused on teaching people-management
skills, as opposed to technical skills.
3. The work of the researchers led to a new interest in the dynamic of groups. Managers
began thinking in terms of group processes and group rewards to supplement their former
concentration on the individual worker.
Limitations:
1. The research had many weaknesses of design, analysis, and interpretation.
2. The concept of “social man” was an important counterweight to the one-sided “rational
economic man” mode. Many managers and management writers assumed that satisfied
workers would be more productive workers.
3. Apparently, the social environment in the workplace is only one of several interacting
factors that influence productivity. The entire matter of productivity and worker
satisfaction, therefore, has turned out to be more complex than was originally thought.

The Behavioral Science Approach

Although Mayo and his colleagues pioneered the use of the scientific method in their
studies of people in the work environment, it was later researchers who were more rigorously
trained in the social sciences (psychology, sociology, and anthropology) and used more
sophisticated research methods. This later researcher became known as “behavioral scientists”
rather than “human relations theorists”
 The concept of “social man”- motivated by a desire to form relationships with others-
was introduced by Mayo and the human relations theorists.
 Some behavioral scientists, such as Chris Argyris, Abraham Maslow, and Douglas
McGregor, believed that the concept of “self-actualizing man” would more accurately
explain human motivations.
Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs
According to Maslow, the needs that people are motivated to satisfy fall in to hierarchy.
At the bottom of the hierarchy are physical and safety needs. At the top are ego needs (such as
respect, for example) and self-actualizing needs (such as the need for meaning and personal
growth). In general, lower needs must be satisfied before higher-level needs are felt.
Some later behavioral scientists feel that even this model is inadequate to explain fully
what motivations people in the workplace. To other behavioral scientists, the more realistic
model of human motivation is “complex man”. The effective manager is aware that no two
people are exactly alike and tailors his or her attempts to influence people according to their
individual needs.

Contributions and Limitations of the Behavioral Science Approach

Contributions:
1. Behavioral scientists have made enormous contributions to our understanding of
individual motivation, group behavior, interpersonal relationships at work, and the
importance of work to human beings.
2. Their findings have caused managers to become much more sensitive and sophisticated in
dealing with subordinates.
3. They continue to offer new insights in such important areas as leadership, conflict
resolution, the acquisition and use of power, organizational change, and communication.
Limitations:
 1. Despite the impressive contributions of the behavioral scientists to management, many
agreements writers-including behavioral scientists themselves--believe that the potential
of this field has not been fully realized.
2. The model and theories purposed by behavioral scientists are seen by many managers as
too complicated or abstract to be useful or relevant to their specific problems.
3. The tendency of behavioral scientists to use jargon rather than everyday language in
communicating their findings has also inhibited acceptance of their ideas.
4. Because human behavior is so complex, behavioral scientists often differ in their
recommendations for a particular problem, making it difficult for mangers to decide
whose advice to follow.

THE QUANTITATIVE SCHOOL (OPERATIONS RESEARCH AND

MANAGEMENT SCIENCE)

 Operations Research (OR) is the application of the scientific method to

management problems that can be expressed in quantitative terms.
 It was during World War II that the British formed the first operations research
(OR) teams—groups of mathematicians, physicists, and other scientists who were
brought together to solve new and complex problems in warfare.
 After the war, OR was applied to industry, since new industrial technologies were
being put into use and transportation and communication had become more
complicated, and because these development brought with them a host of
problems that could not be solved easily by conventional means.
 OR specialists were called on increasingly to help managers come up with new
answers to these new problems.
 OR procedures were formalized into what is new called the “management
science school”
According to Stoner and Wankel, the management science approach to solving
problems begins when a mixed team of specialists from relevant disciplines is called in to
analyze the problem and propose a course of action to management.
Contributions and Limitations of the Management Science Approach
Contributions:
1. The techniques of management science are a well-established part of the problem-solving
armory of most large organizations, including the civilian and military branches of
government.
2. Management science techniques are used in such activities as capital budgeting and cash
flow management, production scheduling, development of product strategies, planning
for human resource development programs, maintenance of optimal inventory levels, and
aircraft scheduling.
Limitations:
1. In spite of widespread use for many problems, management science has not yet reached
the stage where it can effectively deal with the people side of an enterprise.
2. In greatest contributions to management have been in planning and control activities. But
they are still very modest in the area of organizing, staffing, and leading the organization.
3. Some managers complained that the concepts and language of management science are
too complicated for ready understanding and implementation.
4. Others feel they are not enough involved with management scientists in developing
decision-making techniques.
5. Management scientist, for their part, sometimes feel that they have not achieved their full
potential for solving management problems.
 THE SYSTEMS APPROACH
The system approach to management attempts to view the organization as a unified,
purposeful system composed of interrelated parts. The system approach gives managers a way of
looking at an organization as a whole and as a part of the larger environment.
Systems theory call attention to the dynamic and interrelated nature of organization and
the management task. Thus, systems theory provides a framework within which managers can
plan action and anticipate both immediate and far-reaching consequences as they may develop.
It has been conjectured that systems seems most likely to emerge as a perspective that
becomes incorporated into the thinking of all the major schools, and the systems approach has
already permeated management thinking. However, some quarters believe that only time will tell
if the system approach to management will continue to evolve to the point at which it does
absorb, synthesize, and integrate all other approaches.
THE CONTINGENCY APPROACH

 The contingency approach was developed by managers, consultants, and researchers

who tried to apply the concepts of the major schools to real-life situations.
 According to the contingency approach, the task of managers is to identify which
technique will, in a particular situation, under particular circumstances, and at a
particular time, best contribute to the attainment of management goals.
 The behavioral science theorist may seek to create a psychologically motivating climate
and recommend the opposite work enrichment.
 A manager who has studied the contingency approach would not be satisfied with
simply analyzing a particular problem. He would be equally concerned with how well a
particular solution fits in with the structure, resources, and goals of the entire
organization.

CRITERIA TO USE IN JUDGING THE APPROPRIATENESS OF A SPECIFIC

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
The structure for a specific organization should fit with the organization’s people,
technology, informal structure, management practices, and so on. Peter Drucker has suggested
several criteria that managers should consider in judging the appropriateness of a specific
organizational structure.
 Clarity, as opposed to simplicity. The Gothic cathedral is not a simple design, but your
position inside it is clear.
 Economy of effort to maintain control and minimize friction.
 Direction of vision toward the product rather than the process, the result rather than the
effort.
 Understanding by each individual of his or her own tasks as well as that of the
organization as a whole.
 Decision making that focuses on the right issues, is action-oriented, and is carried out at
the lowest possible level of management.
 Stability, as opposed to rigidly, to survive turmoil, and adaptability to learn from it.
Perpetuation and Self-renewal, which require that an organization be able to produce
tomorrow’s leaders from within, helping each person develop continuously; the structure must
also be open to new ideas.
THE INFORMAL ORGANIZATION
 The managers must realize the beneath the cloak of formal relationship in every
organization there is a more complex system of social relationships consisting of many informal
organizations. Management experts have emphasized that the informal organization is a powerful
influence on productivity and job satisfaction. Both the formal and informal organizations are
necessary for group activity.
Definition of Informal Organization
 Is a network of personal and social relations not established or required by the formal
organizations but arising spontaneously as people associate with one another.
 The emphasis within informal organization on people and their relationships, while
formal organization emphasizes official positions in terms of authority and
responsibility.
Figure 11.2

Differences Between Formal and Informal Organization

FORMAL BASES OF INFORMAL

ORGANIZATION COMPARISON ORGANIZATION
 Official  General nature  Unofficial
 Authority and  Major concepts  Power and politics
responsibility
 Position  Primary focus  Person
 Delegated by  Source of leader power  Given by group
management  Guidelines for behavior
 Rules  Sources of control  Norms

 Rewards and penalties  Sanctions

Source: John W. Newstrom and Keith David, Organizational Behavior, 9TH ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993), p. 435

Another definition of informal organization is given by Herbert A. Simon who describe

it as “the interpersonal relationships in the organization that affects decisions within it but either
are omitted from the formal scheme or are not consistent with it.”

BENEFITS AND PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH INFORMAL ORGANIZATIONS

Informal organizations bring a number of benefits to both employers and employees; they
may also lead to several problems.
Benefits of Informal Organizations:
1. They blend with formal systems to make an effective total system. Formal plans and
policies cannot meet every problem in a dynamic situation because they are
preestablished and partly inflexible.
2. They lighten the work load on management. When managers know that the infomal
organization is working with them, they feel less compelled to check on the workers to be
sure everything is shipshape.
3. They also may act to fill gaps in a manager’s abilities. If a managers is weak in planning,
an employee may informally help with planning.
4. They gave satisfaction and stability to work groups. Informal organizations are the means
by which workers feel a sense of belonging and security.
5. They can be useful channels of employee communication.
6. They can safety valves for employee frustrations and other emotional problems.
7. They encourage managers to plan and act more carefully that they would otherwise.
Problems Associated with Informal Organizations
 1. While useful information is being spread by one part of the system, another part may be
communicating a malicious rumor.
2. Resistance to change. What has been good is believed to be good enough for the future.
3. The informal organization can be a significant cause of employee conformity.
4. Conformity is encouraged by norms, which are informal group requirements for the
behavior of members. These norms may be strong or weak, depending on the importance
of the behavior to the group.
5. The group whose norms a person accepts is reference group. Employees may have more
than one reference group.
6. Informal organizations may develop role conflict.
7. The informal organizations is not subject to management’s direct control. The “authority”
that the informal group depends on is the social system rather than management.
8. Informal organizations also develop interpersonal and intergroup conflicts that can be
damaging to their organization.
HOW MANAGEMENT CAN INFLUENCE INFORMAL ORGANIZATIONS
Although management did not establish informal organizations, and it cannot abolish
them, nevertheless management can learn to live with them and have some measure of the
influence on them. Guidelines for management action include the following:
1. Accept and understand informal organization.
2. Consider possible effects on informal system, when taking any kind of action.
3. Integrate as far as possible the interests of informal group with those of the formal
organization.
4. Keep formal activities from unnecessary threatening informal organizations.
What is the Most Desirable Combination of Formal and Informal Organizations?
The most desirable combination of formal and informal organizations appear to be a
predominant formal system to maintain unity toward objectives, along with a well-developed
informal system to maintain group cohesiveness and teamwork.
THE ORGANIZATION CHART
Managers and subordinates need a clear understanding on how the activities fit in to the
larger picture of what the organization is and does. Most organizational structures are too
complex to be conveyed verbally. To show the organization’s structure, managers usually draw
up an organization chart, which diagrams the functions, departments, or positions of the
organization and shows how they are related. The separate units of the organizations usually
appear in boxes, which are connected toe ach other by solid lines that indicate the chain of
command.

The organization chart illustrates five major aspects of an organization’s structure:

1. The division of work
2. Managers and subordinates
3. The type of work being performed
4. The grouping of work segments
5. The levels of management
One advantage of organization charts is that employees and others are given a picture of
how the organization is structured. Managers, subordinates, and responsibilities are delineated.
In addition, if someone is needed to handle a specific problem, the chart indicates where the
person may be found.

SUMMARY

Organizations are institutions established to achieve specified goals. Organizing is the

process of making the organization’s structure fit with its objectives, its resources, its
environment. The organizational structures specifies the following:
 division of work activities
 shows how different functions or activities are linked
 and indicates the organization’s hierarchy and authority structure.
It also refers to the process of organizing-the way work is arranged and allocated among
members of the organization so that the goals of the organization can be efficiently achieved.

ORGANIZING IS A MULTISTEP PROCESS

Organizing has been described by Ernest Dale as a multi-step process:
1. detailing all the work that must be done to attain the organization’s goals
2. dividing the total work load into activities that can logically and comfortably be
performed by one person or by a group of individuals.
3. Combining the work of the organization’s members in a logical and efficient manner.
4. Setting up a mechanism to coordinate the work of organization members into a unified,
harmonious whole.
5. Monitoring the effectiveness of the organization and making adjustments to maintain or
increase effectiveness.

FIVE ELEMENTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

Organizational structure can be analyzed in terms of five elements, namely:
1. specialization of activities
2. standardization of activities
3. coordination of activities
4. centralization and decentralization of decision making; and
5. size of the work unit

There are three well-established schools of thought on the subject of organization in

particular and on management in general-classical, behavioral, and quantitative. All three have
contributed to manager’s understanding of organizations and to their ability to manage them.
Each offers a different perspective for defining management problems and opportunities and for
developing ways to deal with them. Each has its strengths and weaknesses, its contributions as
well as limitations. It is believed that each of the three approaches overlooks or deals
inadequately with important aspects of organizational life. Accordingly, the newer systems
approach, along with the contingency approach have already been developed to the extent that
they now offer valuable insights for the practicing manager.

The chapter also presented Peter F. Drucker’s criteria which managers can use in
judging the appropriateness of a specific organizational structure, continued with a discussion of
the benefits and problems associated with informal organizations, together with some guidelines
on how management can influence informal organizations, and concluded with a description of
the organization chart.