Tutorial CRN: 74854 Tutor Name: Hugh Dromey
SBUS10040 Foundations of Management Thought
University College Dublin
Title: Critique Barley and Kunda’s (1992) assertion that American managerial discourse has progressed in waves that have alternated between normative and rational rhetorics of control.
Student Name: Ted Collins Student Number: 14446392
Submission Deadline: Monday 1st of Decmeber 2014 “By submitting your work via this link you declare that all materials included in this submission are the product of your own work and that due acknowledgement have been given in the submission body and in the bibliography
…show more content…
However it is very difficult to realise that the alteration between the normative and rational rhetorics does not necessarily mean that rationality is completely absent in the normative phases. American Industry was born in the early nineteenth century and ever since companies and factories have had to deal with management.
Barley and Kunda regularly refer to different phases of management over the last couple of centuries. These phases all seemed to occur in and around significant events such as the World Wars and the great Depression. The emergence of the human relations approach in 1915 which Barely and Kunda specifically point out as during the first world war. Abrahamson is one author who agrees with Barley and Kunda as he particularly points at 1915 as the time of this rhetorics emergence. Barley and Kunda also mentioned that the middle of the Second World War in 1943 was the period when systems rationalism emerged. (2) Barley and Kunda portray how managerial discourse alternates between rational and normative as different ideologies come along such as industrial betterment, human relations, scientific management, systems rationalism and organisational culture. Results have illustrated that the alternating phases of managerial rhetorics are related to the rise
…show more content…
Organisational culture is the organisation. Organisations should develop shared values, shared values means that everyone present in an organization is striving for the same goals such as high quality output or excellent customer service. Culture can be thought of in at least two ways, two of these are “critical variable” and a “root metaphor”. A critical variable is the belief that organizational culture can be managed. Culture as a root metaphor refers to something that the organisation is rather than what the organisation has. (3) Organisational culture’s supporters often openly criticise system rationalists. Rationalisation was criticised for rewarding specialisation and calculative involvement at the cost of loyalty and commitment. Critics say it will not last when environments become turbulent. Good economic performance in turbulent environments demands the responsibility and commitment of the employees to both themselves and the
Production became more effective with the implementation of fordism, scientific management, and the “American Plan” in factories. While fordism was a system of assembly-line manufacturing and mass production, scientific management emphasized stopwatch efficiency to improve factory performance. However, the American Plan represented an entirely different approach to business. Document D is excerpted from an essay by Daniel Rodgers titled “The Progressive Era to the New Era, 1900-1929,” which examines the cultural shift of the 1920s. Rodgers explains that 1919 saw laborers striking against their employers and demanding the right to unionize.
(Howell & Shamir, 2005). This goes towards Reagan’s humanistic approach to management.
The rapid industrialization and urbanization of the late 19th century brought prosperity and wealth to America and improved the living standards of almost all citizens. Refined machinery, fresh innovations, and the management revolution accelerated the production and quality of products while minimizing costs. Despite the developments and improvements that occurred during this era, they came at a price. Along with industrialization came the issues of overcrowded housing, unsanitary conditions, and corruption in large corporations, to name a few. Business leaders of such corporations often exploited workers and repressed competition in a suffocating and monopolistic manner.
The early 20th century was a great time for America. Industrialization was booming as more and more factories were coming up in the most populous cities. Stockyard jobs were created in exponential numbers, employing many young people as well as immigrants. Hiring these naive individuals allowed for the hierarchical manipulation of these people. Capitalism was a large problem, feeding the bosses large suppers as the workers starved.
“Much of the blame heaped on the captains of industry in the late 19th century is unwarranted.” (Document F). The Gilded Age was a time where the U.S. economy grew very quickly and rapidly, due to the inventive minds and entrepreneurs of that time; but it has different perspectives of opinions in history today. This era led the U.S. to its state and place in the present world, thanks to its important contributors, (who are involved in the main debate of whether they were robber barons, unethical men who yearn for money, or captains of industry, leaders who add positive ideas and methods to benefit their country.) The industrial leaders of the Gilded Age are captains of industry, worthy of some gratitude and credit for how our society’s structure
The Industrial Revolution brought many advancements in technology and the economy. However, it also uncovered many issues for the working class, ones that ran dominant and unchecked during the Gilded Age. The mindset of the American working population also began to develop in their mindset to question and fight against the conditions they were forced to endure. Progressives headed the movement, bring on their own era of change and justice. The transition and duration of the Gilded Age to Progressive Era brought many adaptations to worker’s rights and regulations in the workplace.
The Progressive Era, from 1890- 1920 was an influential time in American history. There was political reform in an effort to bring about social justice, but it was also a time when big businesses thrived. However, in the past their prominence and power went unchecked, now liberal radicals started fighting for justice, making the government control the corporations before they destroyed the country. With big businesses growing at a quick pace, they needed more management, known as middle management, to control it. Alfred Chandler, a business professor, specifically a economist, analyzes this in chapter eight, “Mass Production” from his book, The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business.
6. What are the primary strengths and weaknesses of the book? The primary strength of this book is how much organizational theory has largely sanitized the notion of evil, also creating more inherent characteristics of modern organizations that allows evil to be administratively sanitized, accepted as rational and proper in terms of efficiency and the masking may be inadvertent. The weakness of this book is that precision on when the virtues of modern administrative practices will be realized without encouraging administrative evil.
In the second quarter of the nineteenth century, a lot of Americans were moving away from their rural country lives, to work in enormous industrial urban areas. Urban communities were developing, manufacturing production was extending, and immigration from European nations was expanding. Because of growing production lines, the connection between factory owners or managers and their workers radically transformed from the apprentice system. Moreover, factories made a working-class and a middle-class causing a separation. Another way the relationship changed was managers and their apprentices could never again go out to a bar together after work because there were too many workers.
By doing so he wanted to have more control therefore the type of hierarchy culture is also applied to J.C. Penney under his leadership (Kreitner, 2013,
The Importance of a Company’s Culture The culture of a company is one of the most important and sometimes overlooked factors in an organization. The culture can increase employee engagement and increase productivity which will allow a company to reach its goals, “From productivity and engagement in the organization’s day-to-day, to an employer brand that naturally fuels recruiting efforts, to creating a lasting brand that customers immediately recognize, there’s no escaping it – culture radiates outward into the marketplace” (Straz 2015). The culture can have a great impact on the employees. Employees thrive in a positive working environment and the ability to engage with their managers without fear of retaliation.
The organisational culture is a set of certain assumptions, values, and norms being shared by the members within an organisation. Employees are informed about the importance of an organisation through the values helping in increase of organisational effectiveness. The culture is also known for performing different functions within an organisation. The organisational culture has influence on the organisational behaviour and other aspects of management that are important to understand for management (Bell & Smith, 2010). For this reason, the purpose of the paper is to provide the analysis of organisational culture, management practices, motivation and performance, group dynamics, and conflict management within Tesco.
It resulted in what is popularly known as the ‘Hawthorne Effect’, which is a 112%rise in productivity, by workers who are under the impression that they are being studied in some manner. This essay aims to compare and contrast both these theories of management and provide an insight into the critical analysis of them. With relevant examples of the usage of these theories in today’s world this essay is intended to provide a complete and detailed investigation of these theories. American engineer Frederick Winslow Taylor apprenticed at
`For the purpose of this assignment I have chosen to compare and contrast the contribution of Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856-1915) and Henri Fayol (1841-1925) to the field of management. I will outline the similarities and differences between Taylor and Fayol and then conclude and elaborate on how these two theorists’ work influenced the world of management both in the past and at the present moment. Frederick Winslow Taylor born in focused his theories heavily on the scientific method, finding the ‘one best way’ to manage a firm and its personnel, (Kanigel 1999). Taylor focused on the operative level, he believed that the application of scientific methods from the bottom of the industrial hierarchy upwards was the key to success. Taylor
Reference • http://www.toolshero.com/management/14-principles-of-management/ • Fayol, H. (1949). General and Industrial Management. Martino Fine