Criticisms (Classical Theory)- Administrative Thinkers

Administrative Thinkers

Taylor

Taylor overlooked the fact that the principle of division and subdivision of work into the tiniest part each is  subjected to the law of diminishing returns.

Taylor confuses the principle of analysis with the principle of action. In Taylor’s theory, the emphasis has been on the fact that the managers were to decide and the subordinates were to follow. But, Planning cannot be done in isolation of the action and action cannot take place in isolation of planning. The planning and execution cannot be divorced from each other but Taylor said that the planning and execution are to be done separately. The workers will have no say in such a planning process.

Fayol

The 14 principles of Fayol have a great deal of overlapping.

Application of the principle of unity of command would overwhelm the chief executive with problems of co-ordination.

Elton Mayo

He has been criticized for being a Cow Sociologist because they emphasized that Mayo in terms of his analysis of the social aspect of the organization has been amateurish. He has explained individual behaviour only from one perspective whereas the individual behaviour is influenced by a number of factors which are external in nature.

Carey says that the conclusions of Mayo are different from his findings in the Hawthrone Experiment. Carey believes that the behaviour of an individual in an artificial condition cannot be considered as a Standard Behaviour.  Also, the samples which were considered were too small to be considered as representatives of the workers. If we consider the Hawthrone Experiment, the productivity decreased in the last experiment (Bank- Wiring Experiment was conducted in natural condition and not in artificial condition). According to Mayo, Social Strategies were the reason for the decline in productivity. But, Critics believe that social strategy was not the only reason. The group maintained a lower target because they believed that there economic interest (low payment) lies in maintaining the lower target. Thus, Mayo ignored the economic factors in this regard.

Mary Parker Follett

Her main problem was her idealism which was clearly visible in her theories. Follett’s theories carried some oxymoronic values such as centralization as well as decentralization, democracy as well as aristocracy, authoritarianism as well as participation, mechanistic nature as well as humanistic nature. Had these oxymoronic values operated in separate contexts, no problem would have existed in her theory. But, the fact that these values operated simultaneously made her theory to be too ideal to be perfect.

Irrespective of this, her ideas were indicative of certain ideas and those same ideas proved to be the basis for the theorization done by the future humanistic theorists. Her theory emphasized more on the psychological aspect and gave little heed to the social aspect.

Herbert Simon

His theory and its emphasis on Value Free Approach are problematic. The positivist underpinnings in his theory are tricky. It is impossible to understand the manner to achieve the preference by divorcing it from preference. The preference here signifies ‘goal’. Simon overemphasized on ‘fact’ and undermined ‘value’.

His theory has limited application for the government and public administration.

Though outwardly Simon emphasizes on politics- administration fusion, yet his emphasis on fact-value dichotomy has introduced politics- administration dichotomy through the backdoor. Simon believes that the study of the administration should only be concentrated on a part of the administration. Critics say that his study is intra- organizational and not inter-organizational because of which he has insulated the administration from politics.