Management of Organisational Behavior 

Introduction to Management:-

 Management concept , signification,  levels ,functions management as an art, science and profession , F .W Taylor's scientific management theory 

Management is understood in different ways by different people. Economists regard it as a factor of production. Sociologists see it as a class or group of persons while practitioners of management treat it as a process. For our understanding, management may be viewed as what a manager does in a formal organization to achieve the objectives. In the words of Mary Parker Follet  management is “the art of getting things done through people”. This definition throws light on the fact that managers achieve organizational goals by enabling others to perform rather than performing the tasks themselves.

Management as Science 

Management as Science To gain a correct perspective as to what management is, let us examine the exact nature of management – whether it is a science or an art? An understanding, therefore, of the exact nature of science as well as art may help in understanding the discipline in a better. Any branch of knowledge to be considered a science, (like the ones we have – physics, chemistry, engineering, etc.) should fulfill the following conditions the existence of a systematic body of knowledge encompassing a wide array of principles principles have to be evolved on the basis of constant inquiry and examination  principles must explain a phenomenon by establishing cause effect relationship the principles should be amenable for verification in order to ensure accuracy and universal applicability. Looked at from this angle, management as a discipline fulfills the above criterion. 

Over the years, thanks to the contributions of many thinkers and practitioners, management has emerged as a systematic body of knowledge with its own principles and concepts. Principles help any practicing manager to achieve the desired goals. However, while applying the principles, one should not lose sight of the variables in the situation, since situations differ from one to another. Thus, the importance of personal judgment cannot be undermined in the application of principles. 

Further, management is a dynamic subject in that, it has drawn heavily from economics, psychology, sociology, engineering and mathematics, to mention a few. It is multi-disciplinary in nature, but a word of caution. Though management considering its subject matter and the practical utility may be considered as ‘science’, for reason discussed below, it cannot be viewed as an ‘exact science’. In other words, it is a science, but an ‘inexact science’ because  Firstly, management by definition involves getting the things done through people. Compared to the other inputs, ‘people’, who constitute the human resource of any organization are unique in respect of their aspirations, attitudes, perceptions and the like. Dissimilarities in the behavior pattern are so obvious that standard research may not be obtained in otherwise similar conditions. ӹ Secondly, the behavior of the human beings cannot be accurately predicted. Hence, ready made and standard solutions cannot be prescribed. Thirdly, management is more concerned with future which is complex and unpredictable. As the saying goes, ‘many a slip between the cup and the lip’, 

changes in the environment may affect the plans and render even the most well drawn plans ineffective. Lastly, since a business organization exists in an environment, it has a two way interaction with the environment. The organization influences the environment by its several decisions and in turn is influenced by the various elements of the environment. Important among these are technological, economic, horticultural and political factors. The whole thing is so complex that however effective the plans are, one is prone to be taken over by the unexpected changes in the environment. Unlike the pure or exact sciences where the results are accurate in the case of management, the various factors discussed above may force even the excellent plans and the strategies go haywire. Too many complexities and uncertainties render management an ‘inexact science’

Management as an Art

Art refers to the ‘know-how’ – the ways of doing things to accomplish a desired result. The focus is on the skill with which the activities are performed. As the saying goes ‘practice makes a man perfect’, constant practice of the theoretical concepts (knowledge) contributes for the formation and sharpening of the skills. Therefore, what is required is the right blend of the theory and practice. In a way, the attributes of science 9 and art are the two sides of a coin. Medicine, engineering, accountancy and the like require skills on the part of the practitioners and can only be acquired through practice. Management is no exception.

 As a university gold medalist in surgery may not necessarily turn out to be a good surgeon, similarly a management graduate from the best of the institutes may not necessarily be very effective in practice. In both the cases, the application of the knowledge acquired through formal education, requires ingenuity and creativity on the part of the practitioner. Correct understanding of the variables of the situation calls for pragmatism and resourcefulness. 

Effective practice of any art requires a thorough understanding of the science underlying it. Thus science and art are not mutually exclusive, but are complementary. Executives who attempt to manage without the conceptual understanding of the management principles and techniques have to depend on luck and intuition. With a sound knowledge and the necessary skills to use such knowledge, they stand a better chance to succeed. Therefore, it may be concluded that ‘management is both a science and an art’. 

Management as a Profession:

These are the days where we hear a lot about professional managers and their contribution to the economic development of the nation. Therefore, it is appropriate to know whether management is a profession. McFarland gives the following characteristics of a profession

• existence of an organized and systematic body of knowledge, 
•  formalized methods of acquiring knowledge and skills, 
• existence of an apex level body with professionalization as its goal, 
•  existence of an ethical code to regulate the behavior of the members of the profession,
•  charging of fees based on service, and ӹ concern for social responsibilities. 

A closer examination of management as a profession reveals that unlike medicine or law, management has to go a long way to attain universally acceptable norms of behavior. There is no uniform code of conduct that governs the behavior of managers. The apex level body, the All India Management Association (AIMS) or NIPS [National Institute 10 of Personnel Management] provides only guidelines and does not have any controlling power over the erring members. Managers also differ widely in respect of their concern for the ethics and values of the society in which they function. Many a time, in their obsession with profit, the societal interests are either neglected or compromised. However, as in the case of other professions, it is implied that managers are expected to set an example in doing good to the society.

 While making decisions, they should be conscious of the impact of their decisions on the society. The larger interests of the society must be given top priority rather than short-term temptations. After all, given the enormous resources they have at their command, the expectation that managers should address themselves to the problems of society is not unnatural. It must, however, be remembered that unlike professions like engineering, medicine, law, accountancy, etc., the entry to management profession is not restricted to individuals with a special degree.

 In other words, one need not necessarily possess M.B.A or any other management degree or diploma to practice management. To quote Peter Drucker, “no greater damage could be done to an economy or to any society than to attempt to professionalize management by licensing managers or by limiting access to management to people with a special academic degree”. In spite of the growing number of management institutes and the large number of people trained in the management, it is an irony that we still hear the debate - “whether managers are born or made”. The successes achieved by a few visionaries and great entrepreneurs are often sighted in support of the argument. It is true that many founding fathers of the industry in India and elsewhere too did not study management in the formal way. 

The native wisdom coupled with their vision in understanding the market and organizing the enterprises helped them earn name and fame. Huge industrial empires were built with sheer business acumen and commonsense. The Marwaris and Parsees in the north and Chettiars, and Naidus in the south India, the Jews in the west and the Samurai community in Japan, for instance, offer a classic example of such success stories. The successes achieved by the pioneers in these cases amply demonstrate that success in business requires much more than academic degrees. 

F .W Taylor's scientific management theory 

F. W. Taylor was born in 1856 in Philadelphia, USA. Taylor joined the Midvale Steel Works as an apprentice in 1978 and rose to a chief engineer in 1984. In 1998, he joined at Bethlehem Steel Company as a consultant engineer to management where he tested his ideas and found that there was increased efficiency. Taylor, an engineer by training and profession, is regarded as the father of scientific management. He did not attempt to study any specific organization rather concentrated on the intensive analysis of work processes at the level of individual workers. Based on his experiences and experiments, he developed fundamental principles of scientific management. Thus, scientific management theory is a management approach, formulated by F.W. Taylor that sought to determine scientifically the best methods for performing any task and for selecting, training and motivating workers.

 1. The development of a true science of management: The first principle was finding the best way of doing a job so that the best method for performing each task could be determined. The most efficient ways of completing tasks and standard work procedures were believed to enhance productivity. Taylor introduced/ implemented the time and motion studies at Midvale Steel Works to determine the highest level of output in accordance with a particular procedure. By doing so, Taylor was able to find the 'one best way' of doing a job.  

2. The scientific selection of workers: It involved the scientific selection and progressive development of the workers so that each worker would be assigned responsibility for the task for which he/she was best suited. By introducing this principle, it was expected that management can better identify the inherent strengths and weaknesses of each worker which, in turn, help management to maximize his/her capacities.

3. Bringing science of work and the scientifically selected workers together: The third principle was fusing the science of doing the job with the scientifically selected workers. Taylor emphasized that unless the science of doing work and the workers are brought together, all efforts will be lost. According to him, the success of scientific management depends on the fusion of work procedures and workers and it is the most important responsibility of management. 

4. Equal division of work and responsibility between management and workers: He stressed that equal division of responsibility would ultimately promote intimate and friendly cooperation between management and workers which, in turn, would help