Henry E.

Towne (1844-192) -called for the establishment of a science of management and the development of management principles that could be applied across management situations.

henry fayol -Fayol developed theory of management. According to him managerial excellence is a technically ability and can be acquired. He developed theories and principles of management which are universally accepted and make him universalistic. He was pioneer of the formal education in management. Fayol's principles of management meet the requirements of modern management. Henry Fayol, a frech industrialist, offered fourteen principles of management for the first time in 1916. During the period of 1920-40 in the U.S. many authors did hard work in developing and testing various principles of management. Today, there is a very lengthly list of management principles and it is not possible to give an exhaustive lot of these management principles. Here, we are giving some important principles of management. Henry Fayol's Principle of Management Following are the fourteen principles of management developed by the Henry Fayol: Division of Work

According to Henry Fayol under division of work, "The worker always on the same post, the manager always concerned with the same matters, acquire an ability, sureness and accuracy which increases their output. In other words, division of work means specialization. According to this principle, a person is not capable of doing all types of work. Each job and work should be assigned to the specialist of his job. Division of work promotes efficiency because it permits an organizational member to work in a limited area reducing the scope of his responsibility. Fayol wanted the division of work not only at factory but at management levels also. Authority and Responsibility Authority and responsibility go together or co-existing. Both authority and responsible are the two sides of a coin. In this way, if anybody is made responsible for any job, he should also have the concerned authority. Fayol's principle of management in this regard is that an efficient manager makes best possible use of his authority and does not escape from the responsibility. In other awards when the authority is exercised the responsibility. In other awards when the authority is exercised the responsibility is automatically generated.

Discipline According to Henry Fayol discipline means sincerity about the work and enterprise, carrying out orders and instructions of superiors and to have faith in the policies and programmes of the business enterprise, in other sense, discipline in terms of obedience, application, energy and respect to superior. However, Fayol does not advocate warming, fines, suspension and dismissals of worker for maintaining discipline. These punishments are rarely awarded. A well disciplined working force is essential for improving the quality and quantity of the production. Unity of Command A subordinate should take order from only one boss and he should be responsible and accountable to him. Further he claimed that if the unit of command is violated, authority is undermined, disciplined in danger, order disturbed and stability threatened. The violation of this principle will face some serious consequences. In this way, the principle of unity of command provides the enterprise disciplined, stable and orderly existence. It creates harmonious relationship between officers and subordinates, congenial atmosphere of work. It is one of the Fayol's important essential principle of management. Unity of direction Fayol advocates "One head and one plan" which means that group efforts on a particular plan be led and directed by a single person. This enables effective co-ordination of individual efforts and energy. This fulfils the principles of unity of command and brings uniformity in the work of same nature. In this way the principle of direction create dedication to purpose and loyalty. It emphasizes the attainment of common goal under one head. Subordination of individual interests to general interests The interest of the business enterprise ought to come before the interests of the praise individual workers. In other words, principle of management state that employees should surrender their personnel interest before the general interest of the enterprise. Sometimes the employees due to this ignorance, selfishness, laziness, carelessness and emotional pleasure overlook the interest of the organisation. This attitude proves to be very harmful to the enterprise. Fair Remuneration to employees According to Fayol wage-rates and method of their payment should be fair, proper and satisfactory. Both employees and ex-employers should agree to it. Logical and appropriate wage-rate and methods of their payment reduces tension and differences between workers and management, create harmonious relationship and a pleasing atmosphere of work. Further Fayol recommends that residential facilities be provided including arrangement of electricity, water and facilities. Centralization and Decentralization There should be one central point in the organisation which exercises overall direction and control of all the parts. But the degree of centralization of authority should vary according to the needs of situation. According to Fayol there should be centralization in small units and proper decentralization in big organisation. Further, Fayol does not favor centralization or decentralization of authorities but suggests

that these should be proper and effective adjustment between centralization and decentralization in order to achieve maximum objectives of the business. The choice between centralization and decentralization be made after taking into consideration the nature of work and the efficiency, experience and decisionmaking capacity of the executives. Scalar chain The scalar chain is a chain of supervisors from the highest to the lowest rank. It should be short-circuited. An employee should feel the necessity to contact his superior through the scalar chain. The authority and responsibility is communicated through this scalar chain. Fayol defines scalar chain as "the chain of superiors ranging from the ultimate authority to the lowest rank." The flow of information between management and workers is a must. Business opportunities must be immediately avoided of. so we must make direct contact with the concerned employee. Business problems need immediate solution, so we cannot always depend on the established scalar chain. It requires that direct contact should be established. Order: According to Fayol there should be proper, systematic and orderly arrangement of physical and social factors, such as land, raw materials, tools and equipments and employees respectively. As per view, there should be safe, appropriate and specific place for every article and every place to be used effectively for a particular activity and commodity. In other words, principles that every piece of land and every article should be used properly, economically and in the best possible way. Selection and appointment of the most suitable person to every job. There should be specific place for every one and every one should have specific place. This principle also stresses scientific selection and appointment of employees on every job. Equity The principle of equality should be followed and applicable at every level of management. There should not be any discrimination as regards caste, sex and religion. An effective management always accords sympathetic and human treatment. The management should be kind, honest and impartial with the employees. In other words, kindness and justice should be exercised by management in dealing with their subordinates. This will create loyalty and devotion among the employees. Thus, workers should be treated at par at every level. Stability of use of personnel Principle of stability is linked with long tenure of personnel in the organisation. This means production being a team work, an efficient management always builds a team of good workers. If the members of the team go on changing the entire process of production will be disturbed. It is always in the interest of the enterprise that its trusted, experienced and trained employees do not leave the organisation. Stability of job creates a sense of belongingness among workers who with this feeling are encouraged to improve the quality and quantity of work.

Initiative Under this principle, the successful management provides an opportunity to its employees to suggest their new ideas, experiences and more convenient methods of work. The employees, who has been working on the specific job since long discover now, better alternative approach and technique of work. It will be more useful, if initiative to do so is provided to employees. In simple, to ensure success, plans should be well formulated before they are implemented. Spirit of Co-operation (Spirit de crops) In order to achieve the best possible results, individual and group effort are to be effectively integrated and coordinated. Production is a team work for which the whole-hearted support and co-operation of the members at all levels is required. Everyone should sacrifice his personal interest and contribute his best energies to achieve the best results. it refers to the spirit of loyalty, faithfulness on the part of the members of the group which can be achieved by strong motivating recognition and importance of the members for their valuable contribution, effective coordination, informal mutual social relationship between members of the group and positive and constructive approach of the management towards workers' welfare.

Abraham maslow Father of Modern Management Psychology Welcome to Abraham Maslow.com. Our goal is to share Abraham Maslow's teachings with the world, so everyone can benefit from the wisdom and books of this great man.

Abraham Maslow, through his books and teachings brought us Management Psychology, the SelfActualization theory, Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and many more concepts that have improved life for humanity as a whole. Enjoy his biography to learn more of how he came to be such a self-actualized person Managerials skills? A professional association of practicing managers, the American Management Association, has identified important skills for managers that encompass conceptual, communication, effectiveness, and interpersonal aspects. These are briefly described below: Conceptual Skills: Ability to use information to solve business problems, identification of opportunities for innovation, recognizing problem areas and implementing solutions, selecting critical information from masses of data, understanding the business uses of technology, understanding the organization's business model.

Communication Skills: Ability to transform ideas into words and actions, credibility among colleagues, peers, and subordinates, listening and asking questions, presentation skills and spoken format, presentation skills; written and graphic formats Effectiveness Skills: Contributing to corporate mission/departmental objectives, customer focus, multitasking; working at multiple tasks at parallel, negotiating skills, project management, reviewing operations and implementing improvements, setting and maintaining performance standards internally and externally, setting priorities for attention and activity, time management. Interpersonal Skills: Coaching and mentoring skills, diversity skills; working with diverse people and culture, networking within the organization, networking outside the organization, working in teams; cooperation and commitment. In today's demanding and dynamic workplace, employees who are invaluable to an organization must be willing to constantly upgrade their skills and take on extra work outside their own specific job areas. There is no doubt that skills will continue to be an important way of describing what a manager does?

Theory x and y

Theory X and Theory Y represent two sets of assumptions about human nature and human behavior that are relevant to the practice of management. Theory X represents a negative view of human nature that assumes individuals generally dislike work, are irresponsible, and require close supervision to do their jobs. Theory Y denotes a positive view of human nature and assumes individuals are generally industrious, creative, and able to assume responsibility and exercise self-control in their jobs. One would expect, then, that managers holding assumptions about human nature that are consistent with Theory X might exhibit a managerial style that is quite different than managers who hold assumptions consistent with Theory Y. The first section explains the development of Theory X and Theory Y. Second, the effect of Theory X and Theory Y on management functions is discussed. Third is a criticism of Theory Y followed by the concluding section, Theory X and Theory Y in the twenty-first century. CONCEPTUALIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT After the Hawthorne experiments and the subsequent behavioral research of the 1930s and 1940s, the human relations approach to management joined the classical perspective as a major school of management thought. Whereas the classical school as espoused by management pioneers such as

Frederick Taylor and Henri Fayol focused on principles of management, scientific selection and training, and worker compensation, the human relations approach emphasized behavioral issues such as job satisfaction, group norms, and supervisory style. The human relations model was hailed as a more enlightened management paradigm because it explicitly considered the importance of individual and how managers could increase productivity by increasing workers' job satisfaction. The end goal for management increased employee productivity; the assumption was that satisfied workers would be more productive compared with workers who felt antagonized by the companies they worked for. In the 1950s, Douglas McGregor (1906-1964), a psychologist who taught at MIT and served as president of Antioch College from 1948-1954, criticized both the classical and human relations schools as inadequate for the realities of the workplace. He believed that the assumptions underlying both schools represented a negative view of human nature and that another approach to management based on an entirely different set of assumptions was needed. McGregor laid out his ideas in his classic 1957 article "The Human Side of Enterprise" and the 1960 book of the same name, in which he introduced what came to be called the new humanism. McGregor argued that the conventional approach to managing was based on three major propositions, which he called Theory X: 1. Management is responsible for organizing the elements of productive enterprise-money, materials, equipment, and people-in the interests of economic ends. 2. With respect to people, this is a process of directing their efforts, motivating them, controlling their actions, and modifying their behavior to fit the needs of the organization. 3. Without this active intervention by management, people would be passive-even resistant-to organizational needs. They must therefore be persuaded, rewarded, punished, and controlled. Their activities must be directed. Management's task was thus simply getting things done through other people. According to McGregor, these tenets of management are based on less explicit assumptions about human nature. The first of these assumptions is that individuals do not like to work and will avoid it if possible. A further assumption is that human beings do not want responsibility and desire explicit direction. Additionally, individuals are assumed to put their individual concerns above that of the

organization for which they work and to resist change, valuing security more than other considerations at work. Finally, human beings are assumed to be easily manipulated and controlled. McGregor contended that both the classical and human relations approaches to management depended this same set of assumptions. He called the first style of management "hard" and identified its methods as close supervision, tight controls, and coercion. The hard style of management led to restriction of output, mutual distrust, unionism, and even sabotage. McGregor called the second style of management "soft" and identified its methods as permissiveness and need satisfaction. McGregor suggested that the soft style of management often led to managers' failure to perform their managerial role. He also pointed out that employees often take advantage of an overly permissive manager by demanding more but performing at lower levels. McGregor drew upon the work of Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) to explain why Theory X assumptions led to ineffective management. Maslow had proposed that man's needs are arranged in levels, with physical and safety needs at the bottom of the needs hierarchy and social, ego, and self-actualization needs at upper levels of the hierarchy. Maslow's basic point was that once a need is met, it no longer motivates behavior; thus, only unmet needs are motivational. McGregor argued that most employees already had their physical and safety needs met and that the motivational emphasis had shifted to the social, ego, and self-actualization needs. Therefore, management had to provide opportunities for these upper-level needs to be met in the workplace, or employees would not be satisfied or motivated in their jobs. Such opportunities could be provided by allowing employees to participate in decision making, by redesigning jobs to make them more challenging, or by emphasizing good work group relations, among other things. According to McGregor, neither the hard style of management based on the classical school nor the soft style of management inspired by the human relations movement were sufficient to motivate employees. Thus, he proposed a different set of assumptions about human nature as it pertains to the workplace. McGregor put forth these assumptions, which he believed could lead to more effective management of people in the organization, under the rubric of Theory Y. The major propositions of Theory Y include the following: 1. Management is responsible for organizing the elements of productive enterprise-money, materials, equipment, and people in the interests of economic ends.

2. People are not by nature passive or resistant to organizational needs. They have become so as a result of experience in organizations. 3. The motivation, potential for development, capacity for assuming responsibility, and readiness to direct behavior toward organizational goals are all present in people-management does not put them there. It is a responsibility of management to make it possible for people to recognize and develop these human characteristics for themselves. 4. The essential task of management is to arrange organizational conditions and methods of operation so that people can achieve their own goals by directing their efforts toward organizational objectives. Thus, Theory Y has at its core the assumption that the physical and mental effort involved in work is natural and that individuals actively seek to engage in work. It also assumes that close supervision and the threat of punishment are not the only means or even the best means for inducing employees to exert productive effort. Instead, if given the opportunity, employees will display self-motivation to put forth the effort necessary to achieve the organization's goals. Thus, avoiding responsibility is not an inherent quality of human nature; individuals will actually seek it out under the proper conditions. Theory Y also assumes that the ability to be innovative and creative exists among a large, rather than a small segment of the population. Finally, it assumes that rather than valuing security above all other rewards associated with work, individuals desire rewards that satisfy their self-esteem and self-actualization needs. Although McGregor did not believe that it was possible to create a completely Theory Y-type organization in the 1950s, he did believe that Theory Y assumptions would lead to more effective management. He identified several approaches to management that he felt were consistent with the precepts of Theory Y. These included decentralization of decision-making authority, delegation, job enlargement, and participative management. Job enrichment programs that began in the 1960s and 1970s also were consistent with the assumptions of Theory Y. In the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, McGregor's conceptualization of Theory X and Theory Y were often used as the basis for discussions of management style, employee involvement, and worker motivation. Empirical evidence concerning the validity of Theory X and Theory Y, however, was mixed. Some writers suggested that organizations implementing Theory Y tended to revert back to Theory X in tough economic times.

Others suggested that Theory Y was not always more effective than Theory X, but that the contingencies of each managerial situation determined which of the approaches was more appropriate. Still others suggested extensions to Theory Y. One of these, William Ouchi's Theory Z, attempted to combine the strength of American management philosophies based on Theory Y with Japanese management philosophies. Along with writers such as Argyris and Likert, McGregor was one of several important humanist writers of the mid-twentieth century who argued that traditional organizational hierarchies create a state of dependence between subordinates and their managers and served as a bridge between the human relations school and a new form of organizational humanism based on Theory Y. EFFECT ON MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS In their well-known textbook, Harold Koontz and Cyril O'Donnell illustrated how the managerial functions of planning, leading, and controlling might be affected by Theory X and Theory Y assumptions. In regard to planning, Theory X assumptions might lead to the superior setting of objectives with little or no participation from subordinates. Theory Y assumptions, conversely, should lead to cooperative objectives designed with input from both employees and managers, resulting in a higher commitment by subordinates to accomplish these shared objectives. Under Theory X, managers' leadership styles are likely to be autocratic, which may create resistance on the part of subordinates. Communication flow is more likely to be downward from manager to the subordinates. In contrast, Theory Y may foster leadership styles that are more participative, which would empower subordinates to seek responsibility and be more committed to goal achievement. Theory Y leadership should increase communication flow, especially in the upward direction. In regard to control, Theory X is likely to result in external control, with the manager acting as a performance judge; the focus is generally on the past. Conversely, Theory Y should lead to control processes based on subordinates' self-control. The manager is more likely to act as a coach rather than a judge, focusing on how performance can be improved in the future rather than on who was responsible for past performance. Although the conceptual linkages between Theory X and Theory Y assumptions and managerial styles are relatively straightforward, empirical research has not clearly demonstrated that the relationship between these assumptions and managers' styles of planning, organizing, leading, and controlling is consistent with McGregor's ideas.

CRITICISM OF THEORY Y The goal of managers using Theory X management styles was to accomplish organizational goals through the organization's human resources. McGregor's research suggested that when work was better aligned with human needs and motivations, employee productivity would increase. As a result, some critics have suggested that, rather than concern for employees, Theory Y style managers were simply engaged in a seductive form a manipulation. Even as managers better matched work tasks to basic human motivational needs through participative management, job rotation, job enlargement, and other programs that emerged at least partly from McGregor's work, managers were still focusing on measures of productivity rather than measures of employee well-being. In essence, critics charge that Theory Y is a condescending scheme for inducing increased productivity from employees, and unless employees share in the economic benefits of their increased productivity, then they have simply been duped into working harder for the same pay. THEORY X AND THEORY Y IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY McGregor's work on Theory X and Theory Y has had a significant impact on management thought and practice in the years since he first articulated the concepts. In terms of the study of management, McGregor's concepts are included in the overwhelming majority of basic management textbooks, and they are still routinely presented to students of management. Most textbooks discuss Theory X and Theory Y within the context of motivation theory; others place Theory X and Theory Y within the history of the organizational humanism movement. Theory X and Theory Y are often studied as a prelude to developing greater understanding of more recent management concepts, such as job enrichment, the job-characteristics model, and self-managed work teams. Although the terminology may have changed since the 1950s, McGregor's ideas have had tremendous influence on the study of management. In terms of the practice of management, the workplace of the early twenty-first century, with its emphasis on self-managed work teams and other forms of worker involvement programs, is generally consistent with the precepts of Theory Y. There is every indication that such programs will continue to increase, at least to the extent that evidence of their success begins to accumulate.

Managerial (MANAGEMENT) Accounting process of identification, measurement, accumulation, analysis, preparation, interpretation,and communication of financial information that is used by management to plan, evaluate, and control within an organization. It is the accounting used for the planning, control, and decision-making activities of an organization. Managerial accounting is concerned with providing information to internal managers who are charged with directing, planning, and controlling operations and making a variety of management decisions. Managerial accounting can be contrasted with Financial Accounting which is concerned with providing information,via financial statements, to stockholders, creditors, and othersoutside the organization. More specifically, the differences between financial and managerial accounting are summarized here: Financial Accounting Managerial Accounting (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Provides data forexternal users Is required by FASB. Is subject to GAAP. Must generate accurate and timely data. Emphasizes the past. Looks at the business as a whole Primarily stands by itself. Is an end in itself. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Provides data for internal use. Is not mandated by FASB. Is not subject to GAAP. Emphasizes relevance and flexibility of data. Has more emphasis on the future. Focuses on parts as well. Draws heavily from other disciplines such as finance, economics, and operations research. Is a means to an end.