EVALUATION OF MANAGEMENT THOUGHT AND THE

PATTERN OF MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS

Introduction
Through the practice of management and the continued development of commerce
and wealth we are transforming our lives. In Massachusetts (USA) in the 1850s the
life expectancy of a male would have been 37 years of age and a female 40: in
1929 it was 58 for a male and 61 for a female; nowadays life expectancy would be
in the region 70-80 years.
While appreciating the past success of management we would also recognize that
todays accelerating pace of change is putting pressure on our organizations to be
at the forefront of management thinking. If we want to maintain our standard of
living our rate of change has to be comparative to the rest of the world.
But our present day management thinking has evolved from a whole range of
influences over an extraordinary long period of time. In his comprehensive book
The Evolution of Management Thought Daniel A Wren writes:
"Within the practices of the past there are lessons of history for tomorrow in a
continuous stream. We occupy but one point in this stream. The purpose is to
preset the past as a prologue to the future."
So with the aim of accelerating the development of our management practice for
the future let us examine that stream of evolving management thought of the past.
Our Christian past has taught that us that there was a beginning (Adam & Eve) and
there will be an end (Armageddon) and in between we should hear the word of god
and obey his commandments. We therefore tend to think linearly as well as in terms
of authority and compliance. In contrast the religions of the East emphasize the
cyclical and regenerative properties of nature. They therefore think in terms of
cyclical processes and of being at one with God and authority.
The Greek influence is evident in that we retain the Socratic concept of searching
for the truth by the judging of a proposition by stringent examination to confirm its
validity. It is a process of thesis antithesis synthesis. It is uncomfortable with halftruths and poor at building up solutions from parallel thoughts.

From Aristotles analytical skills we have developed problem solving methods that
break down complex issues into component parts. But in this process we often lose
sight of the whole and how important is the interrelationship of all the parts.
Hierarchical control structures were recorded in the writings of the Chinese General
Sun Tzu of 600BC China, and it is of note than our own military command structures
still resemble those of ancient times.
Father Luca Pacioli invented the double entry bookkeeping system in 1494. Our
accounting systems to this day are based around these principles.
During the Middle Ages the Catholic Church dominated life and provided the hope of
afterlife as the only consolation for this one. It discouraged the pursuit of gain. With
the reformation our beliefs move onto considering that salvation comes from a life
of diligence and industry the work ethic is nurtured and established. And at the
same time comes the importance of education - the reformers of the sixteenth
century Scotland had the stated aim of having a college or grammar school in every
burgh.
From this general movement comes the liberty ethic where we as individuals
establish our rights and start talking about government by the people for the
people. And onto the Market ethic of the eighteenth century with Adam Smiths
Wealth of Nations and the encouragement of free enterprise.
And into this evolving culture comes James Watts work in the development of the
steam engine as a source of power for factories and the resultant move from
cottage industries and into factories
At one in the same time we have the development of mathematical thought. Isaac
Newton and Simon Laplaces findings encourage the view of the universe being a
gigantic mechanism, which follows determinable laws. In other words when we work
out these laws we will be able to find the root cause of events and be able to predict
future outcomes from established structures. In terms of society we come to believe
that it is possible to identify the one cause of a happening -or the person who was
at fault. Our legal system is based on this misconception.
Into this growing of industrial society comes another Scot Daniel McCallum as
President of the New York to Eire Railroad. In 1854 he was facing specific problems
related to the size of his organisation and a workforce that was in the main
uneducated. His workers were immigrant and with an agricultural background and
not used to a factory discipline imposed by management. In this environment he
determines sound management as being based on:

Good discipline

Specific and detailed job descriptions

Frequent and accurate reporting of performance

Pay and promotion based on merit

Clearly defined hierarchy of superiors and subordinates

Enforcement of personal responsibility and accountability.

The search for and correction of errors

From this thinking he follows the classic hierarchical organization chart.

Historical Preview

Charles Darwins work on The Origin of the Species is published in 1859. Herbert
Spencer (1820-1903) subsequently develops the theme of survival of the fittest in
his Social Darwinism. Our society accepts the essential nature of competition,
survival of the fittest and adulation of winners.
Ivan Pavlov does experiments with dogs to develop classical conditioning. He pairs
an artificial stimulus with a natural one. He gives the dog a piece of meat while at
the same time ringing a bell. In time he can make the dog salivate purely by ringing
the bell. B F Skinner develops this train of thought into operant conditioning or
positive re-enforcement. Do this and you will get that. This work gives legitimacy
to the belief that you can motivate a worker by offering rewards. From this grows
the widespread use of bonus and commission systems.
Scientific Method would be described as the practice of postulating a theory and
then conducting disciplined experiments to confirm or disprove the theory. It is the
method by which science has developed over the centuries. By the early 1900s
Frederick Taylor (1856-1915) was credited with bringing scientific disciplines into the
ethos of management. He is known as the father of Scientific Management. He paid
particular attention to the study and subsequent planning of tasks. Time and motion
study evolved which would lead into the setting of standards and performance
measurement. Unfortunately the majority of Taylor's excellent work is clouded by
his misconception that workers restrict output from the natural instinct and
tendency of men to take it easy. He referred to it as soldering
Henri Fayol (1841-1925) writes about leadership and the theory of management
and Max Weber (1864-1920) develops organizational structures Weber would be
the originator of the term bureaucracy management by the office. From these
writings evolve the corporate structures of Alfred Sloan, CEO of General Motors
1918-57. The need of these practitioners was to develop principles whereby large
corporations could be controlled and developed.

In parallel to this need to manage and control people a social dimension emerges.
Robert Owen in his New Lanark experiments (1795) recognizes the importance of
the human element in an enterprise. Karl Marx, within a society that contained
extremes of poverty and wealth, challenged the basis of the capitalist system. He
questioned the control of societys means of production by the few, while it had
the many trapped in burdensome and meaningless work. The social sciences
emerge through the work of Mary Parker Folett where she recognizes the
interdependencies between the individual, the work and the environment. There are
the human behavior studies of the Hawthorne experiments of the late 1920s, and
the subsequent research into motivation by Mayo, Maslow, Hetzberg, McClelland
etc. In 1960 Douglas McGregor writes "The answer to the question managers often
ask how do you motivate people? is - you dont." We all come to work already
motivated; the organization either captures or destroys that motivation. David
McClelland (1970s) of Harvard University researches motivation for 10 years over
19 different cultures. He identifies Primary Social Motives (PSM), the three main
ones of which are Achievement, Affiliation and Power. The individual or society tends
to be energized by one or other of these Primary Social Motives. With
Achievement the focus is on achieving tasks. Affiliation considers relationships
and friendship. Power is concerned with status and influence over others. He
considers observed behavior is a function of the situation and the Primary Social
Motive of the individual. Meredith Belbin (1980s) identifies the team roles we enact
when participating in teamwork situations.
In parallel is the development of psychology. Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) identifies
subconscious human drives and that we are not in fact rational beings. In the 1960s
we have Thomas Harris developing Transactional Analysis recognizing that our
subconscious retains memories of all events we have experienced and those
memories strongly influence our emotions and actions. Stuart Sutherland in his
book on Irrationality (1992) argues that irrational behavior is the norm not the
exception.
From the writings of Norman Vincent Peale (1952) through to Scotlands own guru
Jack Black (Mindstore 1994) we recognize the considerable benefits of Positive
Thinking within the individual, their organization and society.
In the past century mathematical thought was also transforming through Einstein,
Shewhart, Poincare etc with the recognition of relativity, variation and chaos. They
challenge the deterministic concepts of Newton and Laplace. With so many
variables impinging on circumstances we can longer with confidence trace root
causes and identifies blame. There is no one answer. Our old simplistic linear
thinking is being challenged by systems theory. There is recognition of feedback
loops and the nature of interdependence.
Shewhart (1930s) from his experiments at the Bell Laboratories develops Statistical
Process Control to assist the analysis of data in the context of variation. He

develops the control chart to help us understand variation and focuses on the need
to reduce variation and complexity if we are to achieve quality. He also reemphasizes the need for scientific method in the context of developing our
concepts of management. He insists that each of our management theories need to
be systematically tested.
In 1945 Japan finds itself decimated and desperate to rebuild their economy for
basic survival. Furthermore many of their pre-war industrial leaders are jailed or defranchised by their American conquerors. New managers emerge that are wide open
to the latest of management concepts. Into this receptive vacuum the Americans
pour the expertise of Sarashon, Protzman, Deming and later Juran. But this new
thinking is also in tune with their ancient culture of seeing the cyclical and
regenerative nature of the world and their respect for and being part of the
authority within society. Japans manufacturing success challenges the domination
of the West. The Deming prize is instituted in Japan in 1952 and to this day is
regarded as the premier quality award for a Japanese company.
One of the major mindset changes offered to the Japanese by Deming and Juran is
to see their organizations holistically and as an overall system. Demings drawing
production viewed as a system is reproduced below:

1979 - BS 5750 is developed from Ministry of Defense quality assurance system, It

is now revised into ISO 9000 2000. The government supports its application. It is
marketed through the threat that if a company is not accredited then it will not be

included on tender lists. By the 1990s a large number of organizations have secured
accreditation. The model is being extended worldwide. The standard follows the flow
of work through the organization it reflects systems thinking.
In the context of systems thinking we see back in 1920s Mary Parker Follet was
talking about the authority of the function "the dispatch clerk has more authority
in dispatching work than the president." She also identifies the need for each part to
influence each party through open interaction for the benefit of all. From the 1950s
Deming and Juran recognize that 85-95% of the output from a function is dependent
on the design of the system in which the individual works. Only a small portion of
the responsibility for outcomes is reliant on the diligence of the individual. By the
1980s system thinking is a recognized discipline with such contributors as Russell
Ackoff and Peter Senge They acknowledge that workers "are prisoners of the
system." The task of leadership is primarily the design of systems that allow people
to contribute.
Richard Dawkins (1986) in his paper Nice guys finish first develops the prisoners
dilemma software to establish that co-operative strategies are more successful
than competitive strategies. He refutes the long held belief of the survival of the
fittest. He proves that we progress by co-operation rather than by competition. No
Contest The Case Against Competition by Alfie Khon first published in 1986.
Getting to Yes by Fisher and Ury is published in 1981 and in 1989 John Carlisle
publishes "Beyond Negotiation and proceeds to work with the Oil industry to
redeem their customer supplier relationships. We start to question the
confrontational tendering approach for securing best value. Having recognized the
validity of self-interest we develop strategies that secure win-win scenarios for all
parties. The Oil industry and many others start to talk about partnership
agreements.
Alfie Khon in his book "Punished by Rewards" (1993) represents the growing
argument against positive re-enforcement, that motivation can be secure through
extrinsic rewards. He argues that we are in fact driven by our intrinsic needs from
work. Rewards disrupt that intrinsic motivation, ruptures relationships, avoids
underlying reasons, greatly increases complexity and in the end only secures
temporary compliance.
We are aware that the market in the latter part of the 20 th century is changing.
While in the past commerce was dominated by the efficient use of capital the future
is going to be dominated by the knowledge industries. While 50 years ago less than
5% of the population received a university degree it is now over 30%. In the future
our competitiveness is going to be a function of how well we capture the thinking
potential of our employees.
Peter Senge in The Fifth Discipline The Learning Organization (1990) highlights
that employees cannot be commanded to commit to an organization. As individuals

we have choice we can commit to the goals of the enterprise or grudgingly comply
with instructions. There is a vast difference in benefit to the organization, and the
individual, between these two states.
Peter Senge, to create the Learning Organization, argues for a holistic approach
incorporating:

Systems Thinking seeing cyclical processes

Personal Mastery commitment to life-long learning

Mental Models challenging deeply ingrained assumptions

Shared Vision creating an aim with which employees can identify

Team Learning it is the organization that learns through people

Edwards Deming (1900-1993) in his 93 rd year propounds his System of Profound

Knowledge in his book The New Economics. He has four components that must
work together as a system, they are:

Systems Thinking seeing cyclical processes

Variation the need to appreciate variation and statistical process control

Theory of Knowledge The need to test our theories or assumptions.

Psychology of individuals, society and change

We are also witnessing significant developments in our understanding of how the

brain works and how we learn. Tony Buzan on the one hand is highlighting the
patterning nature of the mind. Thomas Kuhn (1962) and Noel Baker (1992) talk
about paradigms and the difficulty we experience in seeing new concepts because
of our past conditioning. Steven Pinker (1997) writes that mental activity is a form
of computation. Furthermore writers such as Edward de Bono are challenging the
analytical and confrontational styles of Aristotle and Plato in their search for the
truth. He talks about lateral thinking and developing solutions by building on
peoples half baked ideas (parallel thinking).
We are now starting to talk about democracy within organizations. While we have
been committed to democracy relative to government for hundreds of years our
commercial organizations are not lead by elected members nor are they held
accountable to the employees within the company. However Ricardo Semler of
Semco in his book Maverick (1993) explains how he was able to transform a
traditional hierarchical organization into one in which the employees appoint their
respective leaders.

Margaret Wheatly in her book Leadership and the New Sciences (1994) starts
exploring modern scientific thought in respect to organizations and their leadership.
In the context of Quantum Theory, Self-organizing Systems and Chaos Theory she
talks about a vision of the inherent orderliness of the universe, of the creative
processes and dynamic, continuous change that still maintains order. From which
she develops concepts of leadership that guides organizational energy rather than
attempting to control and dominate it. She suggests that information allied to the
thinking potential of our people is going to be the driver of change for the future.
There is going to be much less need for direction. This argument is developed in her
subsequent book "A Simpler Way" where she focuses on our natural ability to selforganize.
And finally we come to the electronic age. Information and knowledge is going to be
readily available to us all. E-commerce is going to revolutionize the way we work,
and the way we are led. The World Wide Web reflects how the brain works and
appears to be in tune with Margaret Wheatly's concept of self-organizing systems.
The future is going to be dominated by our need to understand systems.

Different Schools of Management Thought

The schools of management thought are theoretical frameworks for the study of
management. Each of the school of management thought are based on somewhat
different assumptions about human beings and the organizations for which they
work. Since the formal study of management began late in the 19th century, the

study of management has progressed through several stages as scholars and

practitioners working in different eras focused on what they believed to be
important aspects of good management practice. Over time, management thinkers
have sought ways to organize and classify the voluminous information about
management that has been collected and disseminated. These attempts at
classification have resulted in the identification of management schools.
Disagreement exists as to the exact number of management schools. Different
writers have identified as few as three and as many as twelve. The most discussed
five schools are:
(1) The Classical School
(2) The Behavioral School
(3) The Quantitative or Management Science School
(4) The Systems School
(5) The Contingency School
The formal study of management is largely a twentieth-century phenomenon, and
to some degree the relatively large number of management schools of thought
reflects a lack of consensus among management scholars about basic questions of
theory and practice.

THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL

The classical school is the oldest formal school of management thought. Its roots
pre-date the twentieth century. The classical school of thought generally concerns
ways to manage work and organizations more efficiently. Three areas of study that
can be grouped under the classical school are scientific management,
administrative management, and bureaucratic management.
Scientific Management
In the late 19th century, management decisions were often arbitrary and workers
often worked at an intentionally slow pace. There was little in the way of systematic
management and workers and management were often in conflict. Scientific
management was introduced in an attempt to create a mental revolution in the
workplace. It can be defined as the systematic study of work methods in order to
improve efficiency. Frederick W. Taylor was its main proponent. Other major
contributors were Frank Gilbreth, Lillian Gilbreth, and Henry Gantt.
Scientific management has several major principles. First, it calls for the application
of the scientific method to work in order to determine the best method for

accomplishing each task. Second, scientific management suggests that workers

should be scientifically selected based on their qualifications and trained to perform
their jobs in the optimal manner. Third, scientific management advocates genuine
cooperation between workers and management based on mutual self-interest.
Finally, scientific management suggests that management should take complete
responsibility for planning the work and that workers' primary responsibility should
be implementing management's plans. Other important characteristics of scientific
management include the scientific development of difficult but fair performance
standards and the implementation of a pay-for-performance incentive plan based on
work standards.
Scientific management had a tremendous influence on management practice in the
early twentieth century. Although it does not represent a complete theory of
management, it has contributed to the study of management and organizations in
many areas, including human resource management and industrial engineering.
Many of the tenets of scientific management are still valid today.
Administrative Management
Administrative management focuses on the management process and principles of
management. In contrast to scientific management, which deals largely with jobs
and work at the individual level of analysis, administrative management provides a
more general theory of management. Henri Fayol is the major contributor to this
school of management thought.
Fayol was a management practitioner who brought his experience to bear on the
subject of management functions and principles. He argued that management was
a universal process consisting of functions, which he termed planning, organizing,
commanding, coordinating, and controlling. Fayol believed that all managers
performed these functions and that the functions distinguished management as a
separate discipline of study apart from accounting, finance, and production. Fayol
also presented fourteen principles of management, which included maxims related
to the division of work, authority and responsibility, unity of command and direction,
centralization, subordinate initiative, and team spirit.
Although administrative management has been criticized as being rigid and
inflexible and the validity of the functional approach to management has been
questioned, this school of thought still influences management theory and practice.
The functional approach to management is still the dominant way of organizing
management knowledge, and many of Fayol's principles of management, when
applied with the flexibility that he advocated, are still considered relevant.

Bureaucratic Management
Bureaucratic management focuses on the ideal form of organization. Max Weber
was the major contributor to bureaucratic management. Based on observation,
Weber concluded that many early organizations were inefficiently managed, with
decisions based on personal relationships and loyalty. He proposed that a form of
organization, called a bureaucracy, characterized by division of labor, hierarchy,
formalized rules, impersonality, and the selection and promotion of employees
based on ability, would lead to more efficient management. Weber also contended
that managers' authority in an organization should be based not on tradition or
charisma but on the position held by managers in the organizational hierarchy.
Bureaucracy has come to stand for inflexibility and waste, but Weber did not
advocate or favor the excesses found in many bureaucratic organizations today.
Weber's ideas formed the basis for modern organization theory and are still
descriptive of some organizations.

THE BEHAVIORAL SCHOOL

The behavioral school of management thought developed, in part, because of
perceived weaknesses in the assumptions of the classical school. The classical
school emphasized efficiency, process, and principles. Some felt that this emphasis
disregarded important aspects of organizational life, particularly as it related to
human behavior. Thus, the behavioral school focused on trying to understand the
factors that affect human behavior at work.
Human relations
The Hawthorne Experiments began in 1924 and continued through the early 1930s.
A variety of researchers participated in the studies, including Clair Turner, Fritz J.
Roethlisberger, and Elton Mayo, whose respective books on the studies are perhaps
the best known. One of the major conclusions of the Hawthorne studies was that
workers' attitudes are associated with productivity. Another was that the workplace
is a social system and informal group influence could exert a powerful effect on
individual behavior. A third was that the style of supervision is an important factor in
increasing workers' job satisfaction. The studies also found that organizations
should take steps to assist employees in adjusting to organizational life by fostering
collaborative systems between labor and management. Such conclusions sparked
increasing interest in the human element at work; today, the Hawthorne studies are
generally credited as the impetus for the human relations school.
According to the human relations school, the manager should possess skills for
diagnosing the causes of human behavior at work, interpersonal communication,
and motivating and leading workers. The focus became satisfying worker needs. If

worker needs were satisfied, wisdom held, the workers would in turn be more
productive. Thus, the human relations school focuses on issues of communication,
leadership, motivation, and group behavior. The individuals who contributed to the
school are too numerous to mention, but some of the best-known contributors
include Mary Parker Follett, Chester Barnard, Abraham Maslow, Kurt Lewin, Renais
Likert, and Keith Davis. The human relations school of thought still influences
management theory and practice, as contemporary management focuses much
attention on human resource management, organizational behavior, and applied
psychology in the workplace.
Behavioral Science
Behavioral science and the study of organizational behavior emerged in the 1950s
and 1960s. The behavioral science school was a natural progression of the human
relations movement. It focused on applying conceptual and analytical tools to the
problem of understanding and predicting behavior in the workplace. However, the
study of behavioral science and organizational behavior was also a result of
criticism of the human relations approach as simplistic and manipulative in its
assumptions about the relationship between worker attitudes and productivity. The
study of behavioral science in business schools was given increased credence by
the 1959 Gordon and Howell report on higher education, which emphasized the
importance to management practitioners of understanding human behavior.
The behavioral science school has contributed to the study of management through
its focus on personality, attitudes, values, motivation, group behavior, leadership,
communication, and conflict, among other issues. Some of the major contributors to
this school include Douglas McGregor, Chris Argyris, Frederick Herzberg, Renais
Likert, and Ralph Stogdill, although there are many others.

THE QUANTITATIVE SCHOOL

The quantitative school focuses on improving decision making via the application of
quantitative techniques. Its roots can be traced back to scientific management.
Management Science
Management science (also called operations research) uses mathematical and
statistical approaches to solve management problems. It developed during World
War II as strategists tried to apply scientific knowledge and methods to the complex
problems of war. Industry began to apply management science after the war.
George Dantzig developed linear programming, an algebraic method to determine
the optimal allocation of scarce resources. Other tools used in industry include
inventory control theory, goal programming, queuing models, and simulation. The
advent of the computer made many management science tools and concepts more

practical for industry. Increasingly, management science and management

information systems (MIS) are intertwined. MIS focuses on providing needed
information to managers in a useful format and at the proper time. Decision support
systems (DSS) attempt to integrate decision models, data, and the decision maker
into a system that supports better management decisions.

Production and Operations Management

This school focuses on the operation and control of the production process that
transforms resources into finished goods and services. It has its roots in scientific
management but became an identifiable area of management study after World
War II. It uses many of the tools of management science.
Operations management emphasizes productivity and quality of both
manufacturing and service organizations. W. Edwards Deming exerted a
tremendous influence in shaping modern ideas about improving productivity and
quality. Major areas of study within operations management include capacity
planning, facilities location, facilities layout, materials requirement planning,
scheduling, purchasing and inventory control, quality control, computer integrated
manufacturing, just-in-time inventory systems, and flexible manufacturing systems.

SYSTEMS SCHOOL
The systems school focuses on understanding the organization as an open system
that transforms inputs into outputs. This school is based on the work of a biologist,
Ludwig von Bertalanffy, who believed that a general systems model could be used
to unite science. Early contributors to this school included Kenneth Boulding,
Richard Johnson, Fremont Kast, and James Rosenzweig.
The systems school began to have a strong impact on management thought in the
1960s as a way of thinking about managing techniques that would allow managers
to relate different specialties and parts of the company to one another, as well as to
external environmental factors. The systems school focuses on the organization as a
whole, its interaction with the environment, and its need to achieve equilibrium.
General systems theory received a great deal of attention in the 1960s, but its
influence on management thought has diminished somewhat. It has been criticized
as too abstract and too complex. However, many of the ideas inherent in the
systems school formed the basis for the contingency school of management.

CONTINGENCY SCHOOL
The contingency school focuses on applying management principles and processes
as dictated by the unique characteristics of each situation. It emphasizes that there
is no one best way to manage and that it depends on various situational factors,
such as the external environment, technology, organizational characteristics,
characteristics of the manager, and characteristics of the subordinates. Contingency
theorists often implicitly or explicitly criticize the classical school for its emphasis on
the universality of management principles; however, most classical writers
recognized the need to consider aspects of the situation when applying
management principles.
The contingency school originated in the 1960s. It has been applied primarily to
management issues such as organizational design, job design, motivation, and
leadership style. For example, optimal organizational structure has been theorized
to depend upon organizational size, technology, and environmental uncertainty;
optimal leadership style, meanwhile, has been theorized to depend upon a variety
of factors, including task structure, position power, characteristics of the work
group, characteristics of individual subordinates, quality requirements, and problem
structure, to name a few. A few of the major contributors to this school of
management thought include Joan Woodward, Paul Lawrence, Jay Lorsch, and Fred
Fiedler, among many others.

CONTEMPORARY "SCHOOLS" OF MANAGEMENT THOUGHT

Management research and practice continues to evolve and new approaches to the
study of management continue to be advanced. This section briefly reviews two
contemporary approaches: total quality management (TQM) and the learning
organization. While neither of these management approaches offers a complete
theory of management, they do offer additional insights into the management field.
Total Quality Management
Total quality management (TQM) is a philosophy or approach to management that
focuses on managing the entire organization to deliver quality goods and services to
customers. This approach to management was implemented in Japan after World
War II and was a major factor in their economic renaissance. TQM has at least four
major elements. Employee involvement is essential in preventing quality problems
before they occur. A customer focus means that the organization must attempt to

determine customer needs and wants and deliver products and services that
address them.
Benchmarking means that the organization is always seeking out other
organizations that perform a function or process more effectively and using them as
a standard, or benchmark, to judge their own performance. The organization will
also attempt to adapt or improve the processes used by other companies. Finally, a
philosophy of continuous improvement means that the organization is committed to
incremental changes and improvements over time in all areas of the organization.
TQM has been implemented by many companies worldwide and appears to have
fostered performance improvements in many organizations. Perhaps the best-known
proponent of this school of management was W. Edwards Deming.
Learning Organization
The contemporary organization faces unprecedented environmental and
technological changes. Thus, one of the biggest challenges for organizations is to
continuously change in a way that meets the demands of this turbulent competitive
environment. The learning organization can be defined as one in which all
employees are involved in identifying and solving problems, which allows the
organization to continually increase its ability to grow, learn, and achieve its
purpose. The organizing principle of the learning organization is not efficiency, but
problem solving. Three key aspects of the learning organization are a team-based
structure, empowered employees, and open information. Peter Senge is one of the
best-known experts on learning organizations.

The End

Assignment on
The Evolution of Management Thought
&
The Pattern of Management Analysis

Prepared By:
Md. Rizwanur Rahman
ID No : 80117061
Session : Summer, 2011, EMBA
Dept. of International Business
Faculty of Business Studies
University of Dhaka

Prepared For:
Prof. Dr. Abu Hosain Siddique
Course Instructor
Principles of Management
Faculty of Business Studies
University of Dhaka
Date of Submission : 17th August, 2011