In the beginning of 19^th Century, managers were trying to find the ways of increasing production and technology changing the paradigm of production methods. Traditional methods became outmoded and no longer assisting in production improvement.

Scientific Management denotes application of scientific methods to the problems of management. According to Fredrick Taylor, scientific management is “the art of knowing exactly what you want men to do and then seeing that how they do it in the best and cheapest way.” Taylor emphasized on scientific task setting based on time and motion study, standardization, tools and techniques, working conditions, scientific selection and training of workers and so on. Management, as it today, exists in all forms of organizations, through the years the size and complexity of all organizations have grown, and as a result a well-defined and professional approach of management has become the necessity of time. The foundation stones to modern day theory of management as a whole were laid in the years between the turn of the century and the great depression, 1900 to the 1920’s. This era of management thinking has since been named the Classical School of thought. Thinkers were focused on efficiency, including the subdivisions of administrative, bureaucratic and scientific management. Administrative management emphasized the flow of information within an organization. Bureaucratic management relied on a rational set of structuring guidelines; rules and procedures, hierarchy, and clear divisions of labour. Scientific management however focused on the ‘one best way’ to do a job. The thinkers of these thought are forged in history as the ‘Universalists’ of management, and their ideas are still evident today. By far, the most influential person of the classical era was Fredrick Winslow Taylor (1856-1917) an American engineer. Taylor wrote in a time when factories were creating problems for management who needed new methods to deal with the management challenges bought on by the influence of the Industrial revolution on organizations. Taylor set out to develop and formalize the principals of scientific management. Too often, managers fail to recognize that one of the best ways to learn is to study the past. Proponents of contemporary though argue that history has no relevance to the problems faced by managers in modern times. Still others oppose the study of management theory on the grounds that it is too abstract and has no practical application to the real world. But the truth is that today’s manager benefits from the time-honored practice of assimilating management experience and management theory into a body of successful management practice. Practice of Management is as old as human civilization, but development of management thought and theory is of recent origin. Human civilization, since its origin, used various types of practices to do the task well and on-time. They had followed some basic concepts to achieve their target within the specified time; the theory of human civilization is full of evidence of organisation activity that indicated knowledge of many ideas and concepts. Most probably, there was a jungle of management practices and people used it in their own way to do the task. And they had no idea to acknowledge management and ideas and concepts systematically. It was possible only after the industrial revolution in the 19th century. Systematic approach began with technological advancement, large-scale production, importance of work force in industries, and improvement in practices, etc. However, the study of how managers achieve the results is predominantly a twentieth century phenomena. Efforts were being made to recognize it as a separate discipline. Different contributions had been made by various scholars from different fields. In the 21st century, the situations changed rapidly. The world war had a great impact and demand on the factor of production to move harmoniously and efficiently and this needed efficient management. Great depression demanded also more effective utilization of resources. In recent years now, there has been world-wide complexity in capturing more for power and survival. Managing organisation effectively recognize management as a profession today. The severe competition to stabilize and survive in the economic environment has forced organizations to be efficient and to find out ways and means for efficiency. These factors are vital for the development of efficient management. The efficiency of management can be achieved through the use of various principles and systematic methods, and these principles should be achieved through continuous experiments and observations. These continuous experiments and observations now termed as contribution which is based on various connotations, thoughts and convention are called Approaches and Theories. They are explained below:

(1) Classical Approach,

(2) New-classical Approach, and

(3) Modern Management Approach.

The Classical Approach is one of the oldest approaches in management and is also known by various names, i.e., Empirical, Functional and Management Process Approach. The classical theory represents the traditional thoughts about organizations. It is based on the prototype industrial and military organisation. The theory concentrates on organisation structure and their management. The classical writers include Taylor, Fayol, Weber, Gullick, and Urwick, Mooney and Reiley and others. They placed emphasis on work planning, the technical requirements, principles of management, formal structure, and the assumption of rational and logical behaviour. This theory incorporates three view points:

(i) Taylor view point,

(ii) Fayol Administrative theory,

(iii) Weber’s Bureaucracy.

All these writers concentrated on structure and that why their approach sometimes characterized as ‘structural framework of organisation.’ F.W. Taylor insisted on application of scientific methods to the problems of management. Henri Fayol suggested fourteen principles of management and their universal application. Max Weber introduced rationality in organisation. It is characterized by division of labour, specialization, structure, personnel competency, etc. Scientific management employs scientific methods to the problems of management. He defined scientific management as the art of “Knowing exactly what you want men to do and then seeing that how they do it in the best and the cheapest way.” He advocated scientific task setting based on time and motion study, standardization of materials, tools and working conditions, scientific selection and training of workers and so on. But he was confined to management at the top level. Most of his experiments were carried out in Midvale steel company and Bethlehem steel company. The process of initiation of experiment carried on Midvale steel company was based on ‘time and motion study’, and further at Bethlehem also. However, he conducted experiments mainly on three functions to find out the best way of working:

(a) The pig iron handling,

(b) The shoveling experiments, and

(c) The metal cutting experiments.

He explained the basic philosophy of management in the following terms:

(1) Replacing rule of thumb methods with science,

(2) Scientific selection and training of workers,

(3) Co-operation of labour and management to accomplish work,

(4) Working for maximum output, rather than restricted output, and

(5) A more equal division of responsibility between managers and workers.

Taylor adopted ‘differential piece rate plan’ to motivate the workers for higher efficiency. According to this plan, high wages in the form of incentive was provided to those workers who Scientific management involves a complete mental revolution on the part of the working men engaged in any particular establishment or industry, a complete mental change on the part of these men as to their duties towards their work, towards their fellowmen, and towards their employers. It involves equally complete mental change on the part of those on the managements’ front — the foreman, the superiors, the superintendent, the owners, the Board of Directors — a complete mental revolution on their part as to their duties towards their fellow workers in management. Taylor advocated that without complete mental change on both the sides, scientific management does not exist. The basic theme behind scientific management is to change the mental attitude of the workers and the management towards each other.

It was Henry Fayol who, for the first time, studied the functions and principles of management in a systematic manner. The notable contributions have also been made by Oliver Sheldon, Haldane, Luther Gullick, Mooney and Reiley, Urwick and many others. These defined management in terms of certain functions and then laid down fourteen principles of management which are universally applicable.

Fayol listed fourteen principles based on his experience. However, the list is not exhaustive. They are summarized in the perspective. He noted that these principles are flexible and not absolute, and must be usable regardless of changing and special conditions. Fayol regarded the elements of management as its functions—planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating and controlling. Fayol perceived that management should be viewed as a process consisting of five elements :-

(i) Planning;

(ii) Organizing;

(iii) Commanding;

(iv) Coordinating;

(v) Controlling.

He observes that planning is the most important function and a failure to plan properly leads to inefficiency in the organization. Creation of organizational structure and commanding is necessary to execute the plan. Coordination integrates the activities, controlling asks whether everything is proceeding according to plan. Fayol had emphasized that these principle is applicable everywhere. Since all the organizations require managing, it follows that formulation of a theory of management is necessary for effective teaching of the subject.

Fayol contributions to management thoughts are valuable. Fayol provided a conceptual framework for analyzing the managerial job. Fayol isolated and analyzed management as a separate discipline Fayol provided the management function and gave a universal shape. Fayol developed function principles to be used as guides to managerial action, and made a clean distinction between operative and managerial activities of business. Still, Fayol's theories retain much of its force. Many of the concept and practices are taken for granted by managers now. The principles have the potential to comprehend and cope with the growing complexity of organizations to the extent them to bring order, structure and certain through rules, regulations, policies and practices

The next important form of classical approach is bureaucratic approach of organization. This contribution has been given by a German sociologist Max Weber.9 This particular form of organisation is well known in government and military organizations. Every type of organization possesses some features of bureaucracy in some form; that is ranging between, ‘Line organizations’ to ‘free form organisation’. It aims at high degree of precision, efficiency, objectivity and rationality in the organization to make it more efficient. Weber’s theory recognizes rational-legal authority as the most important in the organisation. However, Weber’s contention that there are three types of legitimate authority in the organisation: (i) Rational legal authority; (ii) Traditional authority; (iii) Charismatic authority. Weber’s contention is based on the display of rational legal authority. Weber’s ideal bureaucracy has been designed to bring rationality and predictability of behaviour in the organisation. It reduces subjectivity, because people have impersonal and formal relationship and they have to comply with rules and regulations. Hierarchy of authority also helps to maintain discipline. Division of labour leads to specialization and rationality brings effectiveness in decision making.

Management can have the most remarkable effects on organization; that is why management has become an essential part of organization. Management may be defined as a set of activities which including planning, and decision making, organizing, leading and controlling with the aim of achieving organizational goals in an deficient and effective manner. Management can also be defined as the process of designing and maintaining an environment in which individuals, working together in groups, efficiently accomplish selected aims. From the time human beings began forming social organizations to accomplish aims and objectives they could not accomplish as individuals, managing has been essential to ensure the coordination of individual efforts. As society continuously relied on group effort, and as many organized groups have become large, the task of managers has been increasing become more important and complex. Henceforth, management theory has become crucial in the way manage complex organizations. In fact, it is not difficult to find examples of Scientific Management in the 21st Century; the car and computer manufacturing plants, the work environments we go to everyday, the hospitals we are treated in and even some of the restaurants we might eat in, - almost all of them function more efficiently due to the application of Scientific Management. In fact, these methods of working seem so commonplace and so logical to a citizen of the modern world that it is almost impossible to accept that they were revolutionary only 100 years ago. Taylor’s scientific management is the first management theory is what is popularly referred to as Frederick Taylor’s Scientific Management and there are five main principles that Taylor developed to rationalize work. These included the study and application of scientific management to have a clear division of tasks and responsibilities between management and workers in a meaningful symbiotic relationship and proposed the managers be fully responsible for job design and planning while the workers concentrate on implementation and execution. The system also use of scientific methods to determine the best way of doing a job or tasks contained in various soles with the aim of improving the efficiency of the workers, e.g. the time and motion study. Furthermore, it also proposed a reform of recruitment processes that ensured recruits were scientifically selected to ensure that the employees employed were fit for the newly designed job. Also, it also suggested in providing training for the selected worker to perform the job in the way specified. Lastly, the system also introduced the concept to surveillance of workers through the use of hierarchies of authority and close supervision.

In majority of today’s workplaces after the workers and job processes are put in place, the managers of the company stay involved and provide supervision to each worker to ensure the job is done in the best way to suit the organization goal. This is very important. Just because a department is designed to be efficient does not prevent workers from falling back into bad work habits. The first principle of Taylor’s Scientific Management state that work should be divided between managers and workers. The mangers apply management principles to planning and supervising the work, and the workers carry out tasks. This theory has been utilize in most modern organization and has lead to an increase in production and also takes some of the pressure off the management.

Among Management Theories, Classical Management Theories are very important as they provide the basis for all other theories of management. Hence this review of Classical Management Theories was done. This study provides the basic knowledge of Classical Management Theories as well as strengths and weaknesses of these theories. According to Drucker (1974) Management is the activity of getting things done with the help of others peoples and resources. It means that management is a process of accomplishing work with the help of other people. According to Weihrich and Koontz (1993) “Management is process of planning, leading, organizing and controlling people within a group in order to achieve goals. It is also the guidance and control of action required to execute a program. On the basis of these definitions it can be concluded that management is a process that includes strategic planning, setting objectives, managing resources, developing the human and financial assets needed to achieve objectives and measuring results. It also includes recording facts and information for later use according to need. Management and leadership are two similar terms which confuse many persons so it is necessary to explain the term leadership also.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE:

The purpose of this form is to examine the corpus of theory that has accumulated in regard to an issue, concept, theory, phenomena. The theoretical literature review helps to establish what theories already exist, the relationships between them, to what degree the existing theories have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested. Often this form is used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems. The unit of analysis can focus on a theoretical concept or a whole theory or framework. This section examines the various studies that are dealt with respect to the contribution of classical approach to management. Management theories in the early period were not really theories, but some discrete practices or experiences. Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. This section is focusing on examining research throughout a period of time, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena emerged in the literature, and then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research. This study had examined the earlier breaking theory on the nature and causes of wealth generation (Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and Jeremy Bentham) and by the time of industrial revolution that contributed to the development of traditional management theories (Henry Towne, Max Weber, Frederick Winslow Taylor, Henry Gantt, and Henri Fayol). Freud revealed complex psychological processes during this time and Pareto concluded that economic theory could never explain human behaviour in the real world. Elton Mayo and his associate emphasized the human aspect. Douglas McGregor at the same time was putting forward the famous theory of X and Y; and highlighted the opposite assumptions about people held by mangers in organizations. Elton Mayo and Fritz J. Roethlisberger and their associates conducted experiments from 1924-1932 at the Hawthorne Works of Western Electric Company; and investigated informal groupings, informal relationships, patterns of communication, and pattern of communication. The National Research Council made a study in collaboration with the Western Electric Company to determine the effect of Illumination and other conditions upon workers and their productivity. Elton Mayo is called as the father of Human Relations Approach and others contributed of this school include Roethlisberger, Dickson, Dewey, Lewin etc. This study further laid down the foundations for human relations movement. It is called socio-psychological theory assumed business organization as a social system in which job satisfaction, group’s dynamics, motivation making an impact on worker performance. The behavioral management theories had been developed into the mid to late 20th century (Mary Parker Follet, Chester Barnard, Elton Mayo, Abraham Maslow, Douglas McGregor, Rensis Likert, Frederick Herzberg, David McGregor, and Chris Argyris). The behavioural work has been drawn on the work of Maslow, McGregor and Herzberg work on human behaviour. Maslow’s need hierarchy explain human behaviour and motivational framework. Maslow proposed that human needs can be arranged in a particular order form the lower to the higher Douglas McGregor’s propounded two contrasting theories called Theory X and Theory Y, these theories containing two pairs of assumptions about human beings. Herzberg’s theory provides an insight into the task of motivation by drawing attention to the importance of job factors and shows the value of job enrichment. Robert Blake and Jane Mouton designed Managerial Grid in the area of leadership. Rensis Likert had identified four management systems. This approach gives major emphasis on increasing productivity through motivation and leadership. The basic aspects of this approach include motivation, Leadership, communication, and participative management. Systems viewpoints supported by contingency theories gained prominence in the 1990s when it was recognized that complex and rapidly changing business environments requires sophisticated systems to help managers make decisions. The late 20th century saw a further shift to the quality management approach which focused on customer satisfaction through the provision of high-quality goods and services. Rapid globalization in the late 20th century necessitates the development of new theories that address cross-cultural issues in management.

Adam Smith (1723 – 1790) pioneered the concept of labour management by advocating making work efficient by means of specialization. David Ricardo (1772 – 1823) in his “Letter to T. R. Malthus, October 9, 1820” (Collected Works, Vol. VIII: p. 278-9) observed that “Political Economy- should be called an enquiry into the laws which determine the division of produce of industry amongst the classes that concur in its formation.” Unlike Smith and Bentham who had a strong belief in the capitalistic principle of the individual pursuit of wealth and happiness, Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) argued that the economic breakdown of capitalism was inevitable, which would be replaced by the doctrine of socialism where the individual’s interests will give way to the state’s interests, and the free market system will yield to the controlled market system for the benefit of the society as a whole. In 1832, Charles Babbage examined the division of labour in his book “On the Economy of Machinery and Manufacturers” and raised important questions about production, organisations and economics. Henry R. Towne (1844 – 1924), also an engineer, proposed the concept of “shop management” and “shop accounting” to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.

Although a radically new idea in the early 1900s, Taylor’s 100-year-old essay, “The Principles of Scientific Management,” remains relevant to everyday business operations (Payne, Young court, and Watrous, 2006) Schechter (2010) provides evidence that Taylor’s work on efficiency has had an enormous impact on management education in the progressive era. Schechter (2010) credits Taylor as being the originator of a science of work.

According to Meiksins, Taylor felt that in order for a factory to work efficiently, the factory should be run by production engineers, thus allowing upper management to "deal with those matters that their subordinates could not handle..."(Meiksins, 1994, 181). “Dubbed the father of modern operational-management theory” (Long, 1997, p.31), Fayol’s ideas and theories on management are founded in his practical 49 years of experience working in the mining and steel industry. However, Fayol was quick to point out that his theories were not confined to his particular industry: “Fayol saw his management principles, including control, as applicable to industry, government and all forms of human organization” (Parker and Louis, 1995, p.223). The general principles and rules those are valuable in industry are equally valuable in the state and vice-versa” (as sited in Breeze, 1995) Hales (1986) argues that if the classical theories are viewed as theories of management functions rather than hypotheses of individual management behavior, then they are neither confirmed nor denied by the later literature.

According to Stoner et al (1995:63), Weber considered the ideal organization to be a bureaucracy whose activities and objectives were rationally thought out and whose divisions of labour were explicitly spelt out. Alexander Styhre argues that an empirical study of bureaucracy underlines the merits of a functional organization, the presence of specialist and expertise groups and hierarchical structures. Max Weber (1864 - 1920), a German Sociologist in his work, developed a theory of bureaucratic management that stressed the need for strictly defined hierarchy, governed by clearly defined regulations and lines of authority. His conclusion was that bureaucratic leadership was indispensable for the mass administration required in modem society (Albers, 1974:25). Thompson (1961:152-171) have been stated dysfunctions of bureaucracy to include; Rigidity, Impersonality, Displacement of Objectives, Limitation of categorization, Cost of controls, Self-perpetuating, Empire building and Anxiety. Based on the theory developed by Max Weber, researchers used bureaucratic theory as an analytical tool to examine organizational structure. Bureaucratic characteristics or dimensions could create different configurations of bureaucracies. Since the 1960s, dimensional approaches to study bureaucracy have been used. Hall (1961) was among the first to measure bureaucratic dimensions in organizations empirically. Hall (1961) was the first to develop a survey instrument to measure the degree of bureaucratization in organizations. After an extensive literature review, he identified six dimensions of bureaucracy: hierarchy of authority, division of labor, rules and regulations, procedural specifications, impersonality, and technical competence. His instrument (Organizational Inventory) has 62 items. All dimensions have 10 items except for hierarchy of authority, which has 12 items. Modified versions of his instrument have been used in educational settings to assess school bureaucratization. Theory is also, a coherent group of assumptions put forth to explain the relationship between two or more observable facts which can be used to provide a sound basis for predicting future events (Stoner et al, 1992:28).It is a systematic grouping of interrelating ideas, whose tasks are to tie together and to give a framework to significant knowledge (Koontz et al, 1980:13). Koontz et al, (2005:12) states that many different writers and practitioners have resulted in different approaches to management and these make up a management theory jungle. This is to say that although Fredrick Winslow Taylor, (1856 - 1915), was known and acknowledged as father of Scientific Management, he was not alone in this area, other notable contributors of this theory were Henry L. Gant (1861 -1919), Frank B. and Lillian M. Gilbreth (1868 - 1924) and (1878 - 1972) respectively. According to Certo (2006), Neo-classical approach is the extended form of classical approach of management. It builds on Classical approach but broadens and expands it; it does not totally divorce itself from its predecessor. Up until about the late 1950s academic writing about organizational structure was dominated by the classical management school. This held that there was a single organizational structure that was effective in all organizations (Miles R, 1975).According to Batrol (2001), the classical school is characterized by highly structured, with emphasis on the formal organization with clearly defined functions and detailed rules, autocratic leadership, (Bartol et al,2001). Neoclassical theorists recognized the importance of individual or group behavior and emphasized human relations. Based on the Hawthorne experiments, the neoclassical approach emphasized social or human relationships among the operators, researchers and supervisors (Hersey, Pand Blanchard K, 1977).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

Problem Statement:

The three classical approaches of management were developed on the same basis and practically implications are same. The main theses of these three theories are related with the increase in production and efficiency by lower the cost of production and profit increment. These are based on specific principles and practices which ensuring effective and efficient operation and optimization of resources and maintain cordial relationship between management and employees. These theories are still in operation and widely used by modern businesses for obtaining efficiency and effectiveness in its operations.

1. Today’s management practice suffers inadequacies like wastages and labour turnover

2. The lay-off of workers and slow growth rate of organization points out the short falls of these theories to the current management practice

3. Non-performing of firms, closing down the business, not attaining the objectives by the firms, and environmental effects; goes a long way to show that though the classical approaches are still in practice today.

Objectives of the study:

Management enables an enterprise to achieve its desired objectives through proper planning and control. It decides what should be done and how. Management continuously strives for reducing inefficiency, wastage and spoilage in the use of resources, through, enhancing productivity. Management finds the way to face the challenges and changes which have been faced by every organisation. Management has to fine the ways to meet the challenges; the knowledge of management theories is basic requirement. The broad objective of this study is to find out the effects of classical management theories on current management practice in today’s organizations.

The specific objectives therefore are:-

1. To evaluate the contributions of classical management theories to the current level of waste and labour turnover in today’s organizations.

2. To find out the implications of the classical management theories on the lay-off of workers, slow pace of growth and development of organizations.

3. To find out the closure of organizations are caused by the application of the theories in management practice of the organizations.

Research Questions:

The research paper is based on the following research questions:-

1. Does the current wastages and labour turnover in today’s organizations arise as a result of the practice of classical management theories?

2. Does the application of classical management theories influence lay-off of workers, slow pace of growth and development of today’s Organizations?

3. Could the closure of some of the organizations be as a result of the application of the theories in the management practice of the organizations and could the application result to low performance of an organization.

Research Hypotheses:

Based on the research objectives, the following hypotheses were formulated for the study

H0:-There is no significant relationship between the application/effect of classical management theories on level of wastages, level of turnover, workers layoff, slow pace of growth and low performance.

H1:-There is a significant relationship between the application of classical management theories and level of wastages and labour turnover

H2:-There is a significant effect of classical management theories on workers layoff, slow pace growth and development

H3:-There is significant relationship between Closure of organizations and low performance and the application of the theories in the management practice of the organizations.

Research Methods:

Two sources of data are used for this research paper. First primary data collected from a sample of three manufacturing firms and the study are carried out through survey method and interview of employees working at different levels in the firms. The secondary data are collected through rigorous review of scholarly literature published in various prestigious peer review journals, books, internets and various government publications. A sample size of 177 was obtained from the population of 320 at 5% error tolerance and 95% degree of freedom using Yamane’s statistical formulae. Out of the sample size distributed, 89% questionnaires are received and 11% are not received back. The questionnaire is based on the Likert Scale and Likert scales are designed by keeping in mind the organizational culture, performance and structure, and for the purpose a pre-test on the questionnaire are conducted to ensure the validity of the instrument To validate their responses, they are asked to complete a given set of questionnaire and the freedom to be given to the employees/worker to demonstrate their views. The frequency tables are formed and used for data collection.

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION:

Classical organization theory evolved during the first half of this century. Management theories in the early period were some discrete practices or experiences, but these are not theories, and these theories consist of some lack of application. Modern theories are also not free from certain limitations. The experiences or practices need to undergo several modifications, syntheses and tests to become theories. Theories to take shape, it’s essential a sound theoretical and conceptual framework. According to Koontz, these chaos called the “the management theory jungle”, and this should require a strong need for a unified and integrated theory. Lack of adequate approach of concept formation is a drawback in the design of unified management theory. Management theory development is an applied science, so it lacks coherent theoretical concepts of its own. Management as a discipline have borrowed its concepts from the other disciplines like anthropology, philosophy, mathematics, statistics and behavioral sciences, and depriving to devise its own conceptual framework independent of related disciplines. Moreover, management research has been kept psychologically and philosophically closer to practice than to theory. 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. Classical approaches represent three theories like scientific management, bureaucratic theory, and administrative theory. 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. While Taylor's scientific management theory proved successful in the simple industrialized companies at the turn of the century, it has not performed 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.

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. 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 was formalized in the 1930's by Mooney and Reiley (1931). Henri Fayol is the major contributor to this school of management thought. The emphasis was on establishing a universal set of management principles that could be applied to all organizations. Administrative management focuses on the management process and principles of management. Fayol 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.

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. The theories advocate for formal organization that takes advantage of specialization and hierarchical functional criteria to increase efficiency in achievement of organizational objectives. Their differences were in the following areas:-

1. As the Scientific management focused its unit of analysis on the physical activities of work, the Administrative theory focused on practical men in action and is called Practicing Managers; their major orientation was the prescription of principles and other concepts of achieving formal Organizations while Bureaucracy took a comparatively detached and scholarly view that described them as normative model of organizations.

2. While Scientific management was concerned with the relationship of a worker to his Job in organization, with the objectives of improving performance of routine production task, the Administrative Theorists were telling how to accomplish an organization and the Bureaucratic theory said what an organization ought to be.

3. The Scientific management focused on production, Administrative theories laid emphasis on Management as a component of the organization and Bureaucracy focused on the organization as a whole.

4. Scientific management can be thought of as a bottom-up theory, while the Administrative and Bureaucratic theories in a comparative sense are top-down theories.

5. The prescriptions of Administrative and Bureaucratic theories were distilled from experience, while the prescriptions of scientific management were derived from specific studies in each case.

The study has been conducted by keeping in mind the above limitations of the classical approach and these limitations become constraints in analyzing the results.

The data obtained from the field were presented and analyzed with descriptive statistics to provide answers for the research questions while the corresponding hypotheses were tested with Pearson’s Correlation and Linear regression at 0.05 alpha levels. Arising of current wastages and labour turnover in today’s organization is the result of application of practice of classical management theories:-

Organizational wastages occur as a result of application of Classical theories, the data/study represented 140(89%) strongly agreed, 10(6%) indicated strongly disagreed while 8(5%) indicated undecided. In case of labour turnover arise as a result of application of classical theories, 152(96%) shows strongly agreed, 2(1%) indicated strongly disagreed, while 4(3%) shows undecided. According to table (1) based on aggregate response 292(92%) indicated strongly agree, 12(4%) indicated disagree while 12 (4%) indicated undecided. This implies that classical management thinking and application have been contributed to current level of waste and labour turnover in organizations. The study indicated strongly that majority of the respondents thought that classical management applications are the main reason for organizational wastages and labour turnover in the organization.

HO1: Classical Management Approaches contribute mainly to the level of wastages and labour Turnover

According to table (5) based on aggregate response, 172(54%) indicated strongly agree, 133(43) indicated disagree while 11 (3%) indicated undecided. This implies that Closure of some of the organizations’ unit was caused by the application of the tradition in management practices.

HO3: Application of classical management practices result into closure of organizational unit and low performance

Table No: 6 Chi-Square Tests on closure of Organizational Unit and Application of Classical Management practices.

	Value	Df	Asymp. Sig.(2-Sided)
Pearson chi-square	289.039(a)	8	.000
Likelihood Ratio	311.623	8	.000
Linear-by-Linear Association	114.154	1	.000
N of valid cases	316

Source: SPSS

This table shows the output of the computed Chi-Square values from the cross tabulation statistics of observed and expected frequencies with the response options of agree to disagree based on the responses of the research subjects from the manufacturing firms. Pearson’s Chi-Square computed value (X2 c= 289.039) is greater than the Chi –Square tabulated value (X2 t=15.51) with 8 degrees of freedom (df) at 0.05 level of alpha (X2 c =289.039, p,< .05) The decision rule is to accept the alternate hypothesis if the computed Chi- Square value is greater than tabulated Chi-Square value otherwise reject the alternate hypothesis. Since the Pearson Chi- Square computed X2 c= 289.039 is greater than Chi- Square table value X2 t =15.51, the null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted. Thus, the study concluded that the application of classical management practices have been resulted into the closure of organizations unit and low performance.

Findings and Conclusions/Recommendations:

The study have been observed that the classical management applications resulted into the wastages, labour turnover, layoff of workers, slow pace of growth and low productivity as indicated by the three manufacturing organizations studied. However, the scientific management applications showed a dramatic increase in productivity and higher pay to workers, but it placed undue pressure on workers to perform and this showed that managers/management have more autocratic in its functioning, which might lead to frustration and resentment of workers and increase the labour turnover. The study realized that the application of time and motion study to get efficiency at shop floor level have lost the sight of the general aspect of management, and this has been resulted into the problem of retaining the labour force and maintain the efficient and effective application of resources. The study observed the practices of administrative theory applications and found that administrative theory immensely applied in organization throughout at various levels on work/tasks, but not on people, and this has been resulted into the unsatisfied workers/low morale. The study recommends the proper applications of administrative theory at various levels. The study have also observed the bureaucratic framework of structure and tasks setting and bureaucratic leadership in organizations, which are more formal in nature and all this failed to recognize the need for informal organizations in a formal setting. The study recommends the recognition of informal structure within the formal setting.

The applications of Classical management theories are resulted into the current level of wastages and labour turnover in sample manufacturing organizations (X2 c= 193.493 > X2 t =15.51; p< 0.05). There was a reverse effect of classical management applications on workers layoff, slow pace growth and development (r value of 0.-614; t = -10.175; p< 0.05). The Closure of few organizations’ is as a result of the application of the management practices in the organizations and the application have been resulted in to low performance of organization (X2 c= 289.039 > X2 t =15.51;p<0.05).The study have found that the applications of classical management theories should be applied more cautiously and more analytically by finding the most suitable methods of application, and by observing all the factors existed in the organizations; so that the workers feel to be the part of organization and motivated, and these theories have been contributed to establish conducive environment.

The study have been recommended that these traditional theories are applied very cautiously for getting the best result and after a thought full analysis of all the factors existed in the organization. The study reached on conclusion that organization should find out the appropriate ways to reduce the labour turnover and to ease and motivate the workers at the workplace. The organization should conduct the feasible scientific study of works/tasks in the organizational settings and time to time assess the impact of scientific applicability on organizational workings. The study also suggested that proper space should be given the individual motivation, participation in decision making, freedom of working, leadership and informal groups, group dynamics and better working environment. The study also noticed that the environmental factors also influence the organizational working and settings, and suggested that while incorporating the traditional applications, these environmental challenges should be considered. This kind of approach facilitate to understanding the major components of the organization, its goal technology, structure and psychological relationships. Organization must analyze and putting up effort to maintain the proper balance on the working of various sub-systems to ensure the survival and growth of the organization. Organizational should resort to the new postulates of management along with traditional applications and putting effort to keep proper tune of organizational objectives with the individual objectives. The study has also observed that objectives should be clear and precise which define the contribution of each department and periodic reviews are conducted in order to provide the feedback and evaluate the progress towards the attainment of goals.

The study suggests that system should be adaptable to change and attempt should be made to achieve the fusion between organizational needs and individual needs. The study observed that it should be necessary to establish cordial environment, and this is possible only when work and the organizational structure should relate to the social needs of the employees, for in this way, by making the employees satisfied, the organization would obtain full cooperation and effort and thus increase its efficiency. The study recommends that the involvement of employees, fair treatment, motivation, group’s dynamics, leadership, communication, recognition and advancement will make an impact on the productivity of the firm and bring out the excellence in working. The study also suggests creating responsive environmental interface between various sub-systems of the organization to know how they respond to the external environmental forces. The periodic evaluation of rules and regulations, structure, working pattern, manuals, workforce and technology for ensuring the proper tuning with the business environment, necessary for modern organizations and facilitate the smooth functioning of the organizations. The study observed that organizations have to take the necessary steps to establish the conducive environment to reduce the negative effects on performance and inculcate the seeds of performance. The organizations should fine the ways in consultation with the employees to increase the productivity and meeting the objectives of the organizations. The study have seen specific trends in some organizations units where both the traditional approach as well the modern approach have been followed and implemented in a logical manner, and it’s the only way to meet the organizational objectives and for the smooth functioning of the organization.

REFERENCES:

1. Bennis, W. (1989), On Becoming Leader.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Management leadership

2. Barnard, C. I. 1968. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

3. Boulding, K. E. 1950. A Reconstruction of Economics. New York: Wiley.

4. Cameron, K. S., Whetten, D. A., and Kim, M. 1987. "Organizational Dysfunctions of Decline." Academy of Management Journal 30: 126-138.

5. Chandler, A. D., Jr. 1962. Strategy and Structure. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.

6. Child, J., and Kieser, A. 1981. "Development of organizations over time." In Handbook of Organizational Design. New York: Oxford University Press.

7. Cole, G. (2004). Management Theories and Practices, 6th ed. London, Thompson Publication.

8. Drucker, P.F. (1974). Management: Tasks, Responsibilities and Practices. New York: Harper

9. And Row

10. Drucker, P. F. 1974. Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices. New York: Harper and Row.

11. Fitch, G. H. 1976. "Achieving corporate social responsibility." Academy of Management Review. New York: Jeremy

12. Harrigan, K. R. 1980. Strategies for Declining Businesses. Lexington, MA: Heath. Harrigan, K. R. 1981. "Deterrents to divestiture." Academy of Management Journal. 24(2): 306-323.

13. Harrigan, K. R. 1982. "Exit decisions in mature industries." Academy of Management Journal. 24(4): 707-732.

14. George Jr, C.S., The History of Management Thought. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall Inc.1972.[11]

15. Griffin, R.W, Management, 8thed.Newyork, Houghton Mifflin Company, 2006.[15]

16. Gilbreth, F. B., Gilbreth, F.M.(1917). Applied Motion Study. New York: Sturgis Walton.\

17. Grey, C. (2005). A very Short Book about Studying Organization. London, Sage Publication.

18. Haber, S. (1964). Efficiency and Uplift: Scientific Management in the Progressive Era. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

19. Hannagan, T. (2005). Management Concepts and Practice (4th Ed.). England: FT Prentice Hall.

20. Hitt, Michael A, Middle mist, R Dennis and Mathis, Robert L. Effective Management: New York: West Publishing Company, 1979.[9]

21. Kast, F. E., and Rosenzweig, J. E. 1972. "General systems theory: Applications for organizations and management." Academy of Management Journal. 15(4): 451.

22. Koontz, H. (1980). The Management Theory. Academy of Management Review. April1980. www. analytictech. com /mb021 /foyal /html International Journal of Social Sciences and Education ISSN: 2223-4934 Volume: 2 Issue: 1 January 2012, 522, International Journal of Social Sciences

23. and Education ISSN: 2223-4934 Volume: 2 Issue: 1 January 2012.

24. Lawrence, P. R., and Lorsch, J. W. 1969. Organization and Environment. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.

25. Meyer, M. W. 1977. Theory of Organizational Structure. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

26. Marris, R. L., and Wood, A. 1971. The Corporate Economy. London: Macmillan.

27. Mayo, E. 1933. The Human Problems of Industrial Civilization. New York: Macmillan.

28. Mooney, J.D., and Reiley, A. C. (1931). Onward Industry. New York: Harper and Row.

29. Murray, A. (2011). What is Difference between Management and Leadership? Harper Business.

30. Olum, Y. (2004). Modern Management Theories and Practices. Uganda: Makerere University.

31. Onkar, M. (2009). Henry Fayol’s 14 Principles of Management. www.linkedin.com/in/manajonker www.bizcovering.com/management/the concept of classical Management

32. Nystrom, P. C., and Starbuck, W. H. 1984. "To avoid organizational crisis, unlearn." Organizational Dynamics Spring: 53-65.

33. Pascale, R. T. 1990. Managing on the Edge. New York: Simon and Schuster.

34. Peck, M. S. 1987. The Different Drum New York: Simon and Schuster

35. Perrow, C. 1979. Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman. Pfeffer, J., and Salancik, G. R. 1978. The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper and Row.

36. Porter, M. 1980. "Competitive strategy in declining industries." In Competitive Strategy. Porter, M. (ed.) p. 254-274. New York: Free Press.

37. Pindur, W., Rogers, S., and Kim, P. (1995). The History of Management: A Global Perspective. Volume 1, Number 1 pp 59-77. Journal of Management History.

38. Shake, S.H. (2008). Management Theories History and Practice.

39. Shied, M. (2010). The Definition of Management: Examining the Great Leader. www. Leadership 501.com

40. Stoner, J. A. F., Freeman, R. E, and Danial, R. (2003). Management 6th Ed. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India

41. Scott, W. R. 1981. Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

42. Simon, H. A. 1945. Administrative Behavior. New York: Free Press.

43. Singh, A. 1971. Take-over. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

44. Smith, A. 1937. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. (1776) Cannan, E. (ed.) New York: Random House. p. 423.

45. Starbuck, W. H. 1976. "Organizations and their environments." In Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Dunnette, M. D. (ed.) p. 1069-1123. Chicago: Rand McNally.

46. Taylor, F. W. (1917). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper Uris, Warwick, D. P. (1975). A Theory of Public Bureaucracy. Cambridge M.A: Harvard University Press

47. Weber, Max. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons. London: Collier Macmillan Publishers, 1947.

48. Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. Henderson, A.M. and Parson, T. (translation). New York: Oxford University Press.

49. Weihrich, H. and Koontz, H. (1993). Management A Global Perspective 10th Ed. New Delhi, Tata McGraw www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Management_styles

50. Wren, D.A. The Evolution of Management Thought, 4th ed., New York,

51. Wiley, 1994.[6] Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. Management of Organizational Behavior 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall., 1977. [7]

52. Warwick, D. P. 1975. A Theory of Public Bureaucracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

53. Weber, M. 1947. The Theory of Social and Economic Organizations. Henderson, A. M., and Parsons, T. (trans.) New York: Oxford University Press.

54. Whetten, D. A. 1987. "Organizational growth and decline processes." In Readings in Organizational Decline. Cameron, K. S., Sutton, R. I., and Whetten, D. A. (eds.) 1988. p. 27-44. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

55. Wilson, E. 1980. Sociobiology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

56. Zammuto, R. F., and Cameron, K. S. 1985. Environmental decline and organizational response." In Research in Organizational Behavior. Straw, B. M., and Cummings, L. L. (eds.) p. 223-262. Greenwich, CN: JAI.

Received on 20.04.2017 Modified on 25.05.2017

Asian J. Management; 2017; 8(3):834-840.

DOI: 10.5958/2321-5763.2017.00131.7

Questionnaire Items	Strongly Agreed/Agreed		Disagreed/Strongly Disagreed		Undecided		Total
	Frequency	%	Frequency	%	Frequency	%	Freq.
Organizational wastages as a result of application of Classical theories	140	89	10	6	8	5	158
Labour turnover arise as a result of application of classical theories	152	96	2	1	4	3	158
Total	292		12		12		316

Questionnaire Items	Strongly Agreed/Agreed		Disagreed/Strongly Disagreed		Undecided		Total
	Frequency	%	Frequency	%	Frequency	%	Freq.
Classical theories cause lay off workers in organization	130	82	20	12	8	5	158
Slow pace of growth are effect of classical management in organization.	150	94	4	3	4	3	158
Total	280		24		12		316

Details	R	R2	Adj.R2	DDW	Standard Coefficients Beta	Standard Coefficients T-Value	F	Sig.
Firms	-0.638	.407	1.003387	0.253	-0.638	-10.339	-106.89	0.000

Questionnaire Items	Strongly Agreed/Agreed		Disagreed/Strongly Disagreed		Undecided		Total
	Frequency	%	Frequency	%	Frequency	%	Freq.
Closure of some of some of the organizations were caused by the application of the theories in management practice organization	152	82	3	12	3	5	158
Closure of some of some of the organizations were not caused by the application of the theories in management practice organization	20	94	130	3	8	3	158
Total	172		133		11		316