I could use all the help I can get please:
1. What are some examples of organizational theories? Which theory do you think is most applicable? Why?
2. What are some recent innovations in organizational design? Which one of these innovations do you find most interesting? Why?
3. Why is it important to create alliances between and organization and its internal and external stakeholders?
4. What is organizational development? Why is organizational development important in today's society?© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com July 21, 2018, 5:08 pm ad1c9bdddf
Let's take a closer look. I also attached a supporting article for further reading.
1 What are some examples of organizational theories? Which theory do you think is most applicable? Why?
Some examples of organizational theories include: Classical, Neoclassical, Contingency Theory, and Systems Theory. Each theory has advantages and explains some aspect of the organization. (also see other links for other theories at the end of the article attached).
The following except expands on these theories and ideas
1. Classical Organization Theory
Classical organization theory evolved during the first half of this century. It represents the merger of scientific management, bureaucratic theory, and administrative theory.
Frederick Taylor (1917) developed scientific management theory (often called "Taylorism") at the beginning of this century. His theory had four basic principles: 1) find the one "best way" to perform each task, 2) carefully match each worker to each task, 3) closely supervise workers, and use reward and punishment as motivators, and 4) the task of management is planning and control.
Initially, Taylor was very successful at improving production. His methods involved getting the best equipment and people, and then carefully scrutinizing each component of the production process. By analyzing each task individually, Taylor was able to find the right combinations of factors that yielded large increases in production. While Taylor's scientific management theory proved successful in the simple industrialized companies at the turn of the century, it has not faired well in modern companies. The philosophy of "production first, people second" has left a legacy of declining production and quality, dissatisfaction with work, loss of pride in workmanship, and a near complete loss of organizational pride.
Max Weber (1947) expanded on Taylor's theories, and stressed the need to reduce diversity and ambiguity in organizations. The focus was on establishing clear lines of authority and control. Weber's bureaucratic theory emphasized the need for a hierarchical structure of power. It recognized the importance of division of labor and specialization. A formal set of rules was bound into the hierarchy structure to insure stability and uniformity. Weber also put forth the notion that organizational behavior is a network of human interactions, where all behavior could be understood by looking at cause and effect.
Administrative theory (i.e., principles of management) was formalized in the 1930's by Mooney and Reiley (1931). The emphasis was on establishing a universal set of management principles that could be applied to all organizations.
Classical management theory was rigid and mechanistic. The shortcomings of classical organization theory quickly became apparent. Its major deficiency was that it attempted to explain peoples' motivation to work strictly as a function of economic reward.
2. Neoclassical Organization Theory
The human relations movement evolved as a reaction to the tough, authoritarian structure of classical theory. It addressed many of the problems inherent in classical theory. The most serious objections to classical theory are that it created overconformity and rigidity, thus squelching creativity, individual growth, and motivation. Neoclassical theory displayed genuine concern for human needs. One of the first experiments that challenged the classical view was conducted by Mayo and Roethlisberger in the late 1920's at the Western Electric plant in Hawthorne, Illinois (Mayo, 1933). While manipulating conditions in the work environment (e.g., intensity of lighting), they found that any change had a positive impact on productivity. The act of paying attention to employees in a friendly and nonthreatening way was sufficient by itself to increase output. Uris (1986) referred to this as the "wart" theory of productivity. Nearly any treatment can make a wart go away--nearly anything will improve productivity. "The implication is plain: intelligent action often delivers results" (Uris, 1986, p. 225).
The Hawthorne experiment is quite disturbing because it cast doubts on our ability to evaluate the efficacy of new management theories. An organization might continually involve itself in the latest management fads to produce a continuous string of Hawthorne effects. "The result is usually a lot of wheel spinning and cynicism" (Pascale, 1990, p. 103). Pascale believes that the Hawthorne effect is often misinterpreted. It is a "parable about researchers (and managers) manipulating and 'playing tricks' on employees." (p. 103) Erroneous conclusions are drawn because it represents a controlling and manipulative attitude toward workers.
Writing in 1939, Barnard (1968) proposed one of the first modern theories of organization by defining organization as a system of consciously coordinated activities. He stressed in role of the executive in creating an atmosphere where there is coherence of values and purpose. Organizational success was ...
By responding to the questions, this solution addresses various topics, including organizational theories, some recent innovations in organizational design, the importance to create alliances between and organization and its internal and external stakeholders and organizational development.