Early management Writers

Chapter- 4 Compared with the two preceding centuries, the 1800s brought forth a veritable wealth of literature on management. Economists perceived of and wrote about managerial concepts, the functions of management, and the applications of management theory. Samuel P Newman wrote in 1835, needed to constitute a good undertaker, a combination of qualities, rarely found united in the same individual. He should possess an unusual share of foresight and calculation, that his plans may be well laid. He must also exhibit perseverance and consistency of purpose in carrying his plans into execution. This is assuredly an impressive set of qualifications to add to Adam Smiths simple list of order, economy, and attention. J.S. Mill adds two important qualifications to the list: Fidelity and zeal. Moving into the concepts of management, many of the economists of this period distinguished between the functions of a manager and the functions of the organizations. Most of the writers write about functions of a manager. Turgot was concerned with direction and control, Bowker felt that organizing and directing were a managers chief functions. Of all these writers, Neman alone appeared to have the sharpest focus when he wrote that a managers functions are planning, arranging, and conducting the different processes of production. Actually time and motion study was researched by Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations. The economists of this period were apparently split on the subject of whether ownership and management could successfully be separated. Adam Smith assures us that it was common in his day. Managerial Functions and Principles: of the five generally recognized functions of management several economists seem to consider planning the most important, Marshall among them, Laughlin gives the reasoning behind this when he says: he who controls a large capital actively engaged in production can never remain at a standstill; he must be full of new ideas; he must have power to initiate new schemes for the extension of his market; he must have judgment to adopt dew inventions, and yet not be deceived as to their values and efficiency. The only portion of the staffing function to which the economists paid any attention was training. Marshalls comment on its profitability was that whoever may incur the expense of investing capital in developing the abilities of the workman; these abilities will be the property of the workman himself. Along this same line, de Laveleye joined other nineteenth century economists in a plea for food business education, noting that the first care of a government should be to create institutions that will serve as training school for good industrial managers. The organizing functions was conceived very broadly by these men, with one of the most interesting concepts of organizations given by Van Buren Denslow: it is though the subservience of employer to the public, followed up by the subservience of each employee his or her own employer, that the entire force of employees may be held to the work of satisfying a public want. This is organization in industry.

The span of control concept was barely mentioned by Walker and Denslow; the unity of command principle received more attention from Bowen and Bowker, with Bowen throwing especially sharp bares at committees; committees of management are proverbially negligent or meddle-some, inharmonious and unsuccessful: one executive head and a very able one is an essential prerequisite of success in any large undertaking. Marshall noted that even at the bottom level of an organization, spilt responsibility was unwise, pointing out that a machine is not so well cared for when two men share the responsibility of keeping it in order, as when one man has the whole management of it. If there is one topic on which all the early economists agree, it is the principle of specialization or division of labor. Wage Payment: On motivation and incentives the good Reverend Malthus, inter alia, felt that a days work was a days work; any laborer was interchangeable with any other. De Laveleye disagreed. He insisted that the following descending scale of efficiency held true: 1. Those who keep for themselves all they produce. 2. Those who have a share in the profits. 3. Those paid according to the work done. 4. Those paid according to the time they are supposed to be working. 5. Slaves, the producer of whose labors belongs to their masters. Automation: in the 1830s it was feared that man might be superseded by machines. Even Aristotle had noted over three hundred years before Christ. Samuel Newman had his doubts that automation could ever become complete. Economist Contributions: The importance of these and similar writings by economists is perhaps obvious to the student of management thought. The importance of their writings is threefold. First, they established the concept that management was a separate entity. Second, the very fact that they wrote about management indicated its new elevation and importance to the firm and the economy. Finally, their writings about management spurred further thinking and writing on the subject among scholars and managers where the capacity for each was greatest. Carl von Clausewitz: is a Prussian general who wrote extensively on war and the management of large armies in war. He considered his concepts applicable to the management of any large organization, starting that business was simply a form of human competition greatly resembling war. He prescribed careful planning as a necessity in managing a large organization, with the first requisite being to define ones objectives. His major contribution to management was that managers should accept uncertainty and should act on the basis of thorough analysis and planning designed to minimize this uncertainty. Dupin advocated integrity in management- specifically, the prompt payment of debts and honoring engagements and agreements. Though these ideas do not seem novel today, Dupins consideration of integrity and honor in 1820 represents one of the first enunciations of the concept as a factor in effective leadership and management.

Charles Babbage is currently best known for his pioneering work in the development of the first digital computer. His best known work, on the economy on machinery and manufactures, first appeared in 1832. Charles Babbage contributed to development of scientific approach to the management study. Babbage also emphasized the importance of balance in processes and the principle of optimum size of the manufacturing unit for each class of product. There are not many areas that Babbage did not touch upon, as the following proposals by him indicate; 1. Analyze manufacturing processes and cost. 2. Use time study techniques 3. Use printed standard forms for investigation 4. Use the comparative method of studying business practices. 5. Study the effects of various tints of paper and colors of ink to determine which is least fatiguing to the eye 6. Determine how best to frame questions 7. Determine demand from statistics based on income 8. Centralize the production processes for economy 9. Inaugurate research and development 10. Study factory location relative or the proximity of raw materials considering whether the raw Material gained weight or lost weight relative to the finished product. 11. Use a beneficial suggestion system. W. S Jevons worked briefly at assaying and meteorology but gave there up to obtain a more diversified education. He bought into the development of English economic thought more of the spirit and discipline of pure science than any predecessor. Taylor was also concerned with the science of shoveling, and it is interesting to note that these concepts about work-study were in print shortly before Taylor started his experiments.