The ideas of the classical theorists, particularly those of bureaucracy and scientific management, are generally considered as rather old-fashioned and out of date, and of little relevance to work and organisation today.
Is this really the case? Consider the above statement through a critical examination of practices which can be identified in work today. In your analysis, you should draw upon appropriate academic material, and also other sources which can help in identifying current practices. These can include your own experiences from work, those of family relatives and friends, weblogs, working life diaries, newspaper articles and other media reports.
Understanding Work and Organization
Introduction
Trends in doing work in different organisations have been changed with time. Technology and new ideas have played a vital role in changing the nature of work. The management of the company has to make a significant shift to integrate with modern workplace or business trends. Firms have to emerge as strong competitive forces in the global business market and sustain the business for the long run.
Thesis Statement
“The ideas of the classical theorists, particularly those of bureaucracy and scientific management, are generally considered as rather old-fashioned and out of date and little relevance to work and organisation today.”
Yes, it seems to be the case because bureaucracy and scientific management have been replaced in many organisations. These classical theories cannot be integrated with the modern business or workplace requirements. The critical examination of the current work practice in today’s business era can help to obtain several insights.
Rhetorical Analysis
· Fordist to Post-Fordist Era
In this modern business era, organisations have moved from Fordist to Post-Fordist era. The mass production has been combined with mass consumption. The scientific management supported mass production in the current work as well. The industrial paradigm is in the limelight due to mass production of standardised products and services. The scientific management supported or rationalised the dedicated machinery to justify the mass production and consumption in the competitive markets. The national accumulation or growth regime has created hype in the economy. Businesses are regulated due to the implementation of scientific management approaches. Now, to gain long-term business benefits, Fordism has enabled the mass media, transportation, and politics. However, critically, due to changing demands and trends, this approach seems traditional and outdated. Post-Fordism is emerging because the management has to initiate the role of technological transformation. The current or traditional workplace does not embrace the communication technologies to contribute to the flexible or well networked global economy. The mass industrial production is outdated because production d people’s needs are not the same all the time. The mass production is to be replaced by the post-industrial output to be relevant in the modern workplace or business era. Classical theorists, particularly bureaucracy and scientific management contain crises in the business life cycle. From strategy failure to product failure, still, organisations are struggling to regain growth and sustainability. Scientific administration is triggered by the Fordist approaches but does not propose solutions to resolve crisis tendencies. Without implementing some advanced forms of corporate governance, it seems tough to be relevant in the global business environment and get the edge. If an organisation uses the scientific management approach it cannot develop new profitable processes in the contemporary business era. The statement is a case due to the negative impact of traditional management approaches. Flexible production is a new business idea, which is possible by adopting the Post Fordism. Interestingly, as far as the labour of the company is concerned, it seems backwards with these traditional management approaches. Now, Post Fordism focuses on flexible production, which increases the chances of employee or labour growth, and Post Fordism is an advanced approach to be used (Economist, 2000).
· Mass Production to Customization
Synchronising operations in the modern organisation are essential to bring productivity, efficiency and a better economy of scale. Applying science to management and engineering processes has emerged as an excellent approach to meet the purpose. It is different from scientific theory and mass production because it emphasises different people’s demands. Mass production is outdated because today’s work has to control the unit cost in the manufacturing process. Mass customisation is a new approach to reduce the value of production and many other business processes. Mass customisation depicts collaboration as a critical phase (GilmoreB & Pine, 1997). The old business or organisation must be replaced with the collaborative aspect of customisation. The administration has to work with individual customers to articulate their needs and demands and make customised products. Providing the standard product, but customizable product to the customer is workable for organisations to meet needs and build a sustainable relationship. By using cosmetic customisation without informing customers about customised products, the organisation can supply products to create value. Thus, these ideas are not visible in classical theories (Rungtusanatham & Salvador, 2008)
· Manufacturing to Services
Countries like the United States and many other have become service economy from the manufacturing economy. The classical theory of management presents mass production, which creates employment opportunities on a big scale. However, today’s era shows a different picture. Outsourcing has become a modern trend, which is wrapping up the manufacturing process, especially in the United States. The manufacturing industry contained 18 million jobs in the 90s. Now, it has plummeted to only 12 million. Manufacturing companies have moved to developing economies to reduce the production cost and provide immense employment opportunities. It contradicts the classical theories and mass production regarding employment opportunities. Health care and social assistance industries are emerging in today’s era. It changed the picture, and the United States is quite prominent in this regard (Wilson, 2014).
· Scientific Management to Lean manufacturing
Scientific management has been replaced with lean manufacturing. Scientific management focuses on the process-centred approach to enable mass production. It limits the scope of technology in companies. Classical theory is baseless because it may lead towards irreverent creation. Mass production due to high initial cost and lack of ability to respond cannot be accepted in the competitive market (Brennan, 2011). Now, lean manufacturing models have been adopted by many organisations. Toyota is in the limelight due to its lean manufacturing approaches. Toyota and other companies have made the data a critical driver of the business process. These firms are streamlining different data insights to shape the working model and derive outputs. Instead of blind production, firms are moving towards holistic approaches to the world. For Instance, Toyota Production System always taps the worker for improvement. It refers to making changes with time to improve both employee force and work processes to come up with high quality and differentiated products in the automobile market. The current workplace, which is triggered by classical theory like scientific management, does not depict the culture of delegation. Managers may have limited planning and cognitive capabilities. They plan on the desk alone, limit the scope of production and planning, and the firm remains backwards in the market. Toyota has gained a sustainable competitive advantage in the automobile industries due to lean ideas. It is the best time to delegate the decision-making process. Employees have to think for themselves and contribute to the success of the organisation effectively (Rymaszewska, 2017).
· Bureaucratic To Post-Bureaucratic Era
Organisational bureaucracy is also a classical organisation theory, which depicts controlled organisation. An organisation in the contemporary era is based on hierarchy. In large organisations, operations are controlled by the management structure. It is a fact that still many organisations are making decisions at the top level to manage the bottom line of the company. It does not provide freedom to employees to streamline ideas and make decisions in the best interest of the company. Moving towards the post-bureaucratic structure is the right idea to simplify people’s effort, especially at the bottom-line of the company (Höpfl, 2006). The democratic management approach can be executed in the post-bureaucratic structure because the leadership team is always open to new ideas. Employees with different cultural values, skills, and experiences may think differently about their work organisation. Thus, if the management wants to implement the total quality management and cultural management, it has to build a consensus through the post-Bureaucratic structure (Josserand et al., 2006).
· Instrumental to Substantive Rationality
Instead of emphasising on the instrumental approach, firms are getting a competitive advantage through focusing on short and long-term ethical considerations. Substantive reality enables firms to give values to different moral norms. Classical approaches or theories do not streamline moral consideration in the business and its impact on both internal and external stakeholders. Ethical business with a rationale decision-making process is a crucial driver for getting sustainable competitive advantage in an intense rivalry (De Andrade et al., 2012).
Organisations are demonstrating the substantive rationality. Technical orientation to means and ends is necessary for organisations, but it is replaced with the substantive rationality. For Instance, companies are assessing the performance of employees by setting ethical responsibility measures. Organisations shape the new vision and communicate the purpose to all key stakeholders of streamlining the ethical appeal. Now, organisations are adopting the substantive rationale to be moral and relevant. Starbuck, a prominent coffee chain in the global coffee market, has considered many green business initiatives. It justifies the scope of the substantive rationality as the firm has gained an edge over rivals in the market (De Andrade et al., 2012).
Reality
Interestingly, mass production still exists in many industries, including the automobile industry. Eliminating mass production can be sturdy for the management of the companies, as it can hit the financial capability of the company hard. If the firm develops the new product, which is customised and standardised according to the customer’s demand, mass production can be sustained or initiated. However, chances of flexible procedures are still less in the mass production. Automobile companies such as Ford Motor are triggered by mass production. It is also integrated with customised and standardised products (Corporate Ford, 2017). It has been revealed that modern production is different due to advanced production techniques. Kanban and just in time inventory are advanced techniques, which have been used by companies in the production process. Toyota, being an automotive leader, has adopted these advanced techniques in the mass production process to bring efficiency, reduce waste, conation work improvements, sustain the quality, and reduce the cost. Now, with the time, mass production has been replaced by the customisation to meet the needs of global customers.
McDonaldization is emerging in American society, as people want to adopt the fast-food restaurant principles to bring the change in lives. It justifies the remarkable production of McDonald from many years. Efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control are new production techniques, which can be implemented by replacing mass production. Classical production methods, which are linked to traditional theories, do not predict the level of production quality and create the space to inject the technology to take over human control on work (Crossman, 2018).
Technology and digital Taylorism are linked with each other. By adopting the digital Taylorism, it seems simple to standardise and routinise different techniques or equipment to get the job tasks done effectively. The organisation needs to identify the need to change and restructure the business process, as it is critical to implement digital Taylorism. We are living in the post-bureaucratic era. In both societies and organisations, we depend on consensus when making critical decisions. The democratic management approach is an alternative to the bureaucratic structure of the company. Considering people’s ideas, efforts, thoughts, opinions, and reservations at the bottom-line of the company can help to create urgency and derive remarkable outputs effectively (McSweeney, 2006).
Conclusion
In the end, it is to conclude that classical management theories such as scientific management and bureaucracy are outdated and not relevant to the modern workplace. The most important thing is to make the business process more flexible to adopt the change or embrace the new business trends. Instead of considering these classical theories in different industries, it is essential to identify advanced work approaches to make the difference. Companies have taken benefits from these traditional approaches. Now, in the digital world, it is the best time to move on.
References
Brennan, L.L., 2011. The Scientific Management of Information Overload. Journal of Business and Management, 17(1), pp.121-34.
Corporate Ford, 2017. 100 Years of the Moving Assembly Line. [Online].
Crossman, A., 2018. McDonaldization Defined. [Online].
De Andrade, S.P.C., Tolfo, S.d.R. & Dellagnelo, E.H.L., 2012. Workplace and Substantive Rationalities: Interfaces between Management and Psychology / Interfaces between Management and Psychology. Journal of Contemporary Management, 16(2), pp.200-16.
Economist, 2000. Post-Fordism. [Online].
GilmoreB, J.H. & Pine, J., 1997. The Four Faces of Mass Customization. Operation Management, 75(1), pp.91-101.
Höpfl, H.M., 2006. Post-bureaucracy and Weber’s “modern” bureaucrat. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19(1), pp.8-21.
Josserand, E., Teo, S. & Clegg, S., 2006. From bureaucratic to post-bureaucratic: the difficulties of transition. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19(1), pp.54-64.
McSweeney, B., 2006. We are living in the post bureaucratic era. Journal of organizational change management, 19(1), pp.22-37.
Rungtusanatham, M.J. & Salvador, F., 2008. From Mass Production to Mass Customization: Hindrance Factors, Structural Inertia, and Transition Hazard. Production and Operations Management, 17(3), pp.385-96.
Rymaszewska, A., 2017. Lean implementation and a process approach – an exploratory study. Benchmarking, 24(5), pp.1122-37.
Wilson, R., 2014. Watch the U.S. transition from a manufacturing economy to a service economy, in one gif. [Online].
+447462439809