Columns and Trends

Essay Question ‘A comparison of  the key differences between scientific management and the contingency approach to management.'
Rosalin E. Chirillo ACU National
Introduction
‘Management is the process of coordinating work activities so that they are completed efficiently and effectively with and through other people’ (Robbins et al., 2006, p.9). Two major approaches which are concerned with efficiently and effectively managing organisations is Scientific Management and the Contingency approach towards Management.		These two significant approaches to management are different due to their perspectives, yet neither is invalid and they are both concerned with the same matters (Robbins et al., 2006). This essay compares and contrasts the key differences between the two theories and the relevance of these approaches in modern management systems.
Defining the Theories
Scientific management is a well established approach towards management, and it can be traced back to the work of Frederick Taylor (1856-1915), whereas the contingency theory is a contemporary approach which is based on contingency variables. The scientific theory is mechanistic, as it considers everything is red-terminable by that which preceded it (Yolles, 1999). One way to identify scientific management is ‘the use of scientific methods to define the one best way for a job to be done’ (Robbins et al., 2006, p.45). Frederick Taylor, also known as the ‘Father of Scientific Management’, was highly regarded as an efficiency expert. He discovered the ‘best ways to perform tasks’ and he used the scientific approach in developing the ‘best practice’ (Sofo, 1999, p.252). Scientific management succeeded in formalising the division between workers, decision-making management and separating job design from job execution (Sofo, 1999). Taylor wanted to ensure maximum prosperity for the employer and his employees, to make certain that the individual had reached their highest state of efficiency (Taylor, 1967).		The contingency theory applies a contemporary approach towards management. In contrast to the scientific theory, this approach acknowledges that there is not one best way to manage in a given situation, and that situational variables from both the internal and external environments impact on management practices (Robbins et al., 2006). This open system perspective stresses the importance of organisations facing different contingencies, and thus requires different styles of management (Robbins et al., 2006). The theory emphasises situational suitability rather than rigid adherence to universal principles as stressed by scientific management, and it creates the impression that an organisation is confined to its situation (Kreitner, 2004). Scientific management’s Frederick. W. Taylor was concerned with first line managers, as he was concerned with worker’s inefficiencies and wanted to improve productivity, whereas the contingency approach is concerned with learning to manage in accordance with organisational variables. Although multiple organisational forms and management styles are standardised, the contingency theory recognises the importance of judgment as a managerial tool, and identifies the importance of the interaction with the environment and organisation (Jones, 1997).
The Foundations
The foundation of each approach varies, yet they are both concerned with increasing productivity and effectiveness. Scientific management first emerged when Taylor began looking at human work systematically in 1885, whilst working at the Midvale Steel Works as a chief engineer. He examined individual tasks and identified every action and movement involved in order to determine the optimum time required to complete a task. His information supported managers in determining whether employees were performing at their best and if they could increase productivity (Crainer, 1997). Scientific management advanced when Frederick Taylor conducted his pig iron experiment. His observations from this experiment reduced costs by introducing a piece rate system, which was implemented at the Bethlehem Iron Company of South Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in 1899. After working at Bethlehem for two years, he achieved a 200% increase in productivity (Clegg et al., 2005). Scientific methodology is based on these early pig iron experiments, and they offer some very useful lessons to management researchers (Wrege et al., 2000). The contingency approach is based on the parameters in an organisation that effects organisational decisions. This approach emphasises that effective planning, organising, leading, and controlling must be customised to the particular circumstances faced by an organisation (Barnett, 2006).  It recognises that managers must interpret and understand the situational contingencies in an organisation before deciding the best way to work with and through others, as they coordinate activities (Robbins et al., 2006). The basis of the two different management approaches reflect different management techniques. However they are both concerned with managing effectively. Opposing the situational approach, Frederick Taylor had four universal principles of scientific management which were implemented to improve production and efficiency. The main principles were; scientific research & analysis of work, which replaced the ‘rule of thumb method’; scientific selection, training, and development of workers; intimate cooperation with workers to ensure the development of scientific work principles; and the equal division of responsibility among managers in functional areas (Sofo, 1999, p.265). He emphasised the application of the scientific principles in the selection, training, and utilisation of workers by stressing the need for planning and supervising rather than the "rule of thumb" (Bruce et al., 2001). In contrast, one of the primary values of the contingency theory is the perception that management cannot be based on simplistic or universal rules for managers to follow in their jobs (Robbins et al., 2006). In an organisation, the contingency approach towards management reviews variables that arise. Common contingency variables that occur in organisations are ‘the organisational size, routineness of task technology, environmental uncertainty and individual differences’ (Robbins et al., 2006, p.56).		Organisational size is significant as it impacts the effectiveness of different organisational forms (Barnett, 2006). Managers in smaller organisations may have direct control, but larger organisations encompass a more indirect control system and require more complex mechanisms. In addition to the contingency variable of organisational size; customer diversity, environmental uncertainty and the globalisation of an organisation may require product/service diversity, employee diversity, and even the creation of special units or divisions to adapt to national trends (Barnett, 2006). Furthermore, economic conditions affect an organisation's employment and retrenchment practices, and technological change can significantly affect an organisation, as the use of mechanisms affects the level and types of skills needed from employees (Barnett, 2006). Accordingly the principles in which scientific management is based upon is in direct contrast to the contingency approach. Both the scientific method and the contingency approach have specific views on employees within an organisation. The scientific approach recognises that there is a certain suitability of certain people for specific occupations, yet it ignores the fact that management is rarely identical, as well as the economic interests and suggestions by workers (Barnett, 2006). In contrast the situational approach allows empowerment and interaction from employees within an organisation. Taylorism views workers simply as uniform machines to be made efficient by removing unnecessary or wasted effort. It leaves no room for imagination or individual initiative, as people are regarded as mechanical labour to achieve a particular task (Crainer, 1997). As a result, workers worked harder, but became dissatisfied with the work environment due to the lack of attendance to their various needs and the unappreciative approach by management to the social context of employees. In contrast, the contingency theory takes into consideration the various need of individuals, as employees are seen as common contingency variables. Other significant supporters and advocates of scientific management were the followers of F. W Taylor, Frank & Lilian Gilbreth. They extended Taylor's idea through a more intensive study of what workers actually did, classified as motion studies. They were innovative, since application of their ideas has led to the elimination of unnecessary motions and distances that workers hands and arms travel with standard practices (Crainer, 1997). The classical management theorists identified and emphasised management principles that they believed would make companies more successful. However, the advocates of scientific management were challenged in the 1950s and 1960s from management researchers who believed this approach was inflexible and did not consider environmental contingencies (Barnett, 2006). The contingency approach to management assumes that there is no universal answer to the correct technique of managing because organisations, people, and situations vary and change over time. Hence, the correct method to management depends on a complex and intricate variety of critical environmental and internal contingencies (Barnett, 2006).
The Theories in Practice
Both approaches to management are seen in today's organisations and management systems. Many of Taylor’s scientific management principles can be applied today with impressive results (Robbins et al, 2001). The scientific management approach is a form of industrial engineering that established the organisation of work in Ford's assembly line (Taylor, 1967). This form of task-oriented work is nearly universal today in menial industries, most notably in assembly lines and fast-food restaurants (Wikipedia, 2006). The Australian Defence Force also uses the scientific approach to management. During routine marches soldiers are ordered to take ten minute breaks for every hour of marching, which allows a much longer routine march. As workers were taught to take rest breaks during work, productivity improved considerably (Wikipedia, 2006). In retrospect, the 1899 pig iron experiments are highly significant as they show that minimisation of costs (one of the primary goals of management) has not changed in over a century. However, the experiments indicate the importance of management being more systematic and sophisticated in their approach to reaching their goals. At the same time, this approach has proven extremely important in helping organisations maintain a competitive stance (Wrege et al., 2000). Similarly the contingency approach is a theory used widely in current organisations, as environmental uncertainty and contingency variables contribute significantly within organisations.		After the 1990s, organisational behaviour was studied and applied in a contingency framework, as most contemporary management styles and organisational behaviour concepts are contingency based (Robbins et al., 2001). If organisations use a management approach which is applied in a variable framework they are considered more aware and secure. Commonly, organisations which are responsible for critical infrastructure have been urged to take a more comprehensive approach to contingency planning and management, as they have been advised to consider environmental disasters that could impact on their business, even though there may be a low probability of any occurring (Contingency planning, 2004). Organisations that use the contingency approach in management include organisations which are easily affected by changes or influenced by the environment. For instance, Boost Juice Bars and Virgin Airlines both apply their management systems in a variable framework to adhere to changes in the market. Another illustration of an organisation that utilises the contingency approach is McWilliams Wines, as it is proactive with situations that are likely to influence its organisation (McWilliams Wines, 2004). Many management commentators suggest that in the near future more managers will use the contingency approach due to uncertainty and continuous modernisation to maximise their effectiveness. Consequently both approaches are common in today's organisations; however the contingency theory is becoming increasingly more popular due to environmental uncertainty.
Conclusions
The scientific approach and the contingency approach in management are diverse in their perspectives regarding productivity, organisations, employees and how to achieve organisational goals. Yet both theories are concerned with the same concept and are aimed at achieving efficiency and effectiveness, whilst maintaining organisational goals.		In today's society the contingency theory is applied more commonly than the scientific approach, due to the wide variety of contingency variables and environmental uncertainties that influence organisations. However both approaches are still valid and relevant to management theory and practice.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Barnett, T. & Hofler, D. (2006). Contingency Approach to Management. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from website: www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Comp-De/Contingency-Approach-to-Management.html Boost Juice (2006). Retrieved March 24, 2006, from website: www.boostjuice.com.au Brown, G., & Cochran, J.J. (2006). Contingency Approach to Management. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from website: www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Log-Mar/Management-Science.html Bruce, Kyle, Nyland, Chris. (Dec 2001). Scientific Management, Institutionalism, and Business Stabilization: 1903-1923.  In Journal of Economic Issues, 35, p.955 (24).  Retrieved February 28, 2006, from Expanded Academic ASAP via Thomson Gale: http://ezproxy.acu.edu.au. Clegg, S., Kornberger, M. & Pitsis, T. (2005). Managing and Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Contingency planning; Infrastructure must plan for terrorist threats. (March 9, 2004) Computer Weekly, p8.  Retrieved February 28, 2006, from Expanded Academic ASAP via Thomson Gale: http://ezproxy.acu.edu.au. Crainer, S., Hamel, G. (1997) The ultimate business library: 50 books that made management. United Kingdom: Capstone Publishing Limited. Jones, S. (1997). Contingency Theory. Retrieved March 10, 2006, from website: www.canberra.edu.au/uc/lectures/mantech/manpol/sem972/unit4207/Contingency_theory.html Kreitner, R. (2004). Management (9th Ed). Arizona: Houghton Mifflin Company McWilliam’s Wines (2004). Retrieved March 4, 2006, from website: http://www.mcwilliams.com.au Pangarkar, Nitin, Klein & Saul. (2004). The Impact of Control on International Joint Venture Performance: A Contingency Approach.  In Journal of International Marketing, 12, p86 (21).  Retrieved February 28, 2006, from Expanded Academic ASAP via Thomson Gale: http://ezproxy.acu.edu.au. Robbins, S., Millet, B., Cacioppe, R., & Watersmith, T. (2001). Organisational behaviour learning and managing in Australia and New Zealand (3rd Ed). Sydney: Pearson Education Australia. Robbins, S., Bergman, R., Stagg, I., & Coulter, M. (2003). Management (3rd Ed). Sydney: Pearson Education Australia. Robbins, S., Bergman, R., Stagg, I., & Coulter, M. (2006). Foundations of Management (2nd Ed). Sydney: Pearson Education Australia Sofo, F. (1999). Human Resource Development: Perspectives, Roles and Practice Choices. Sydney: Business & Professional Pty Ltd. Taylor, F.W. (1967). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper & Row Publishers Incorporated. Retrieved March 18, 2006, from website: www.eldritchpress.org/fwt/t1.html. Virgin Blue Airlines (2006).  Retrieved March 24, 2006, from website: www.virginblue.com.au Washbush, J, B. (Oct 2002). Deming: a new philosophy or another voice? (Management History:  Reflections on Key Thinkers in Management, Part 2) (W. Edwards Deming).  In Management Decision, 40, p.1029-1036.  Retrieved February 24, 2006, from Expanded Academic ASAP via Thomson Gale: http://ezproxy.acu.edu.au. Wrege, Charles, D., Hodgetts, Richard, M. (Dec 2000). Frederick W. Taylor's 1899 Pig Iron Observations: Examining Fact, Fiction, and Lessons for the New Millennium. In Academy Of Management Journal, 43, p.1283.  Retrieved February 24, 2006, From Expanded Academic Asap Via Thomson Gale: http://ezproxy.acu.edu.au. Yolles, M. (1999). Management system: a viable approach. London: Financial times Professional Limited.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY
Rosalin Chirillo is currently in her 3rd year of her Bachelor of Business (Accounting) degree at ACU National. She has worked with her Father in his own charted accounting practice for over three years since having finished High School. She also plans to continue her studies to facilitate certification in either the CA or CPA program. She has enjoyed the challenge associated with her career choice and is interested in furthering her career in Accounting.
BACK TO TOP Close window to return to contents