The classical school is the oldest formal school of management thought. Its roots pre-date the twentieth century. The classical school of thought generally concerns ways to manage work and organizations more efficiently. Three areas of study that can be grouped under the classical school are scientific management, administrative management, and bureaucratic management.
The classical school (of management) has sought to define the essence of management in the form of universal fundamental functions. These, it was hoped, would form the cognitive basis for a set of relevant skills to be acquired, by all would-be managers through formal education.
Body of the classical school's management thought was based on the belief that employees have only economical and physical needs, and that social needs and need for job-satisfaction either don't exist or are unimportant. Accordingly, this school advocates high specialization of labor, centralized decision making, and profit maximization. See also behavioral school of management, contingency school of management, quantitative school of management, and systems school of management.
Weaknesses of the Classical Management Theories
Classical theories and the principles derived from them continue to be popular today with some modifications. Many criticisms have been directed at the classicists. Several major ones are discussed here.
Reliance on Experience
Many of the writers in the classical school of management developed their ideas on the basis of their experiences as managers or consultants with only certain types of organizations. For instance, Taylor's and Fayol's work came primarily from their experiences with large manufacturing firms that were experiencing stable environments. It may be unwise to generalize from those situations to others' especially to young, high-technology firms of today that are confronted daily with changes in their competitors' products.
Many of the assumptions made by classical writers were based not on scientific tests but on value judgments that expressed what they believed to be proper life-styles, moral codes, and attitudes toward success. For instance, the classical approaches seem to view the life of a worker as beginning and ending at the plant door. Their basic assumption is that workers are primarily motivated by money and that they work only for more money. They also assume that productivity is the best measure of how well a firm is performing. These assumptions fail to recognize that employees may have wants and needs unrelated to the workplace or may view their jobs only as a necessary evil.
Failure ot Consider The Informal Organization
In their stress on formal relationships in the organization, classical approaches tend to ignore informal relations as characterized by social interchange among workers, the emergence of group leaders apart from those specified by the formal organization, and so forth. When such things are not considered, it is likely that many important factors affecting satisfaction and performance, such as letting employees participate in decision making and task planning, will never be explored or tried.
Classical approaches aim at achieving high productivity, at making behaviors predictable, and at achieving fairness among workers and between managers and workers; yet they fail to recognize that several unintended consequences can occur in practice. For instance, a heavy emphasis on rules and regulations may cause people to obey rules blindly without remembering their original intent. Oftentimes, since rules establish a minimum level of performance expected of employees, a minimum level is all they achieve. Perhaps much more could be achieved if the rules were not so explicit.
Classical theories leave the impression that the organization is a machine and that workers are simply parts to be fitted into the machine to make it run efficiently. Thus, many of the principles are concerned first with making the organization efficient, with the assumption that workers will conform to the work setting if the financial incentives are agreeable.
Organizations are influenced by external conditions that often fluctuate over time, yet classical management, theory presents an image of an organization that is not shaped by external influences. Since many of these criticisms of the classical school are harsh, several points need to be made in defense of writers during this period. First, the work force was not highly educated or trained to perform many of the jobs that existed at the time. It was not common for workers to think in terms of what "career" they were going to pursue. Rather, for many, the opportunity to obtain a secure job and a level of wages to provide for their families was all they demanded from the work setting. Second, much of the writing took place when technology was undergoing a rapid transformation, particularly in the area of manufacturing. Indeed, for many writers, technology was the driving force behind organizational and social change. Thus, their focus was on finding ways to increase efficiency. It was assumed that all humankind could do was to adapt to the rapidly changing conditions. Finally, very little had been done previously in terms of generating a coherent and useful body of management theory. Many of the classical theorists were writing from scratch, obliged for the most part to rely on their own experience and observations. Thus their focus is understandably narrow.
The strength and weakness of Classical School?
As Oliver Wendel Holmes quoted, "When we want to know what is going on today or want to make sure what will happen tomorrow, I will look back the past."
We can find out the process of development from this sphere to nowadays in a deep-going way by reviewing organizational behavior history which has gone through Classical School of Management, Behavioral School of Management and Human Relations School of Management.
Organizations can be viewed as two or more people coordinate and combine in use of their knowledge as well as technique for the purpose of accomplishing common objectives that transform resources into goods and service which are needed by consumers.
Organizational behavior refers to the systematic study that primarily access influence of individuals, groups and structure on interior organizational conducts in order that organizational effectiveness can be improved and perceived.
The Classical School of Management was effectively the first coherent set of theoretical perspectives about organization and management covering Scientific Management, Administrative Management and Structuralized Management.
As we know, F.W.Taylor, Henri Fayol, and Max Weber are outstanding contributors of Classical School of management thought who made great contribution and laid a foundation for contemporary management.
"Realist Perspectives on Management and Organisations" by Stephen Ackroyd, Steve Fleetwood