Mary Parker Follett's Theory Of Business Administration

1194 Words3 Pages

The period of orthodoxy - the time between the first and second World War during which public administration developed ideologies which held the belief that administration is a ‘science’, and government’s responsibilities could be separated into decision-making and efficient implementation - faced scholarly challenges on many fronts. The challenges moved the study and practise of public administration into the realm of organisational design and towards the behavioural sciences.
The greatest challenge came from Herbert Simon. In “Administrative Behavior,” [Simon, H. A. (1946.) The proverbs of administration. Public Administration Review, 6(1), 53-67.] Simon lobs criticism at the thinking that was prevalent during the orthodox; he deduces that …show more content…

P. (1926). The giving of orders. Scientific foundations of business administration.] provides a strong foundation for considering the application of behavioural science to public administration. Follet 's study focused on the worker and his reaction to directives issued by managers. She focuses on worker histories and how their backgrounds and beliefs shape their perceptions and subsequent reaction to management 's orders. Management was examined as well in that she wanted to learn their workplace language and provide workers with the ability to provide feedback. I view this as critical to the success of an organisation; beliefs translate into attitudes, and those attitudes into behaviours that, in the workplace, translate into the manner in which workers and managers communicate with one another to carry out the organisation 's mission. In my experience, effective communication in the workplace could contribute more to operational effectiveness than most process reeingeering …show more content…

McGregor - but I saw little to distinguish McGregor’s work in 1960 [McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York, 21, 166.] from Maslow 's earlier work in terms of what motivates humans. McGregor 's structure of human needs incorporated basic physiological needs such as food and shelter and then safety needs, followed by social interaction, self-confidence, independence, and status and praise/recognition - mirroring Maslow in all respects. McGregor believes that management is inherently afraid of workers reaching fulfillment in the areas of social and self-esteem needs because fulfillment of those needs threatens organizations. McGregor asserts, conversely, that attaining these basic needs is not a threat but, rather, beneficial to the organisation. If anything, knowing the type of worker with whom the managers are dealing is what helps the organisation, mcgregor believes. If a worker is of the "Theory X" variety, ie, one who is ambitionless and attempts to avoid work and therefore must be controlled and threatened with punishment in order to give a minimal amount of effort; or the "Theory Y" type that is responsible, self-directed and committed to achieving his objectives then the approach used to manage those workers can be tailored to benefit both worker and organisation. Here lies a point of distinction, but it is between the views of McGregor and Taylor. whereas Taylor 's beliefs

Open Document