Classical and human relations – differences

Human relations theory focuses on the value, needs and contribution of the employee;
classical theory's emphasis is the good of the organisation and the work.

The classical management approach was developed during the Industrial Revolution in order
to cope with the problems that arose in the factories. The classical approach attempted to find
the best way form performing and managing tasks. It consisted of classical scientific school
and the classical administrative school. This approach suggested the development of standard
methods for doing jobs and the people were trained and they worked more like machines.
Every person has his own specialized work and he had to do it. This approach emphasized on
the work element and did not see the workers as human beings but machines.

The Human Relations school of management started focusing on the humans working on the
tasks. This aimed at increasing the work productivity through collaboration and it saw work as
a group activity. This approach also used the most popular Maslow’s hierarchy of needs which
stated that every human being has some needs which affects his performance and motivation.
These needs in the order from the most basic are Physiological needs, Safety needs, Social
needs, Esteem needs and Self-actualization needs. Mayo
Elton Mayo (1880 – 1949) believed that workers are not just concerned with money but could
be better motivated by having their social needs met whilst at work (something that Taylor
ignored). He introduced the Human Relation School of thought, which focused on managers
taking more of an interest in the workers, treating them as people who have worthwhile
opinions and realising that workers enjoy interacting together.
Mayo conducted a series of experiments at the Hawthorne factory of the Western Electric
Company in Chicago
He isolated two groups of women workers and studied the effect on their productivity levels
of changing factors such as lighting and working conditions.
He expected to see productivity levels decline as lighting or other conditions became
progressively worse
What he actually discovered surprised him: whatever the change in lighting or working
conditions, the productivity levels of the workers improved or remained the same.
From this Mayo concluded that workers are best motivated by:
Better communication between managers and workers ( Hawthorne workers were consulted
over the experiments and also had the opportunity to give feedback)
Greater manager involvement in employees working lives ( Hawthorne workers responded
to the increased level of attention they were receiving)
Working in groups or teams. ( Hawthorne workers did not previously regularly work in
teams)
In practice therefore businesses should re-organise production to encourage greater use of
team working and introduce personnel departments to encourage greater manager
involvement in looking after employees’ interests. His theory most closely fits in with a
paternalistic style of management.
Comparing the classical and human relations school

Dimensions Human Relations Model Classical Management Theory

Social-cultural
milieu Emerged in an era of social Arose in an era when the need
to reap efficiencies of large-scale
production had to be fulfilled in
the presence of an immigrant work
force of low education
ethic, government involvement
and economic environment of
depression

Assumptions about
human beings Social man Economic man

Assumption about
environment Stable environment Stable environment
(implicit assumptions) (mostly implicit assumptions)

Central problem of Buliding cooperative systems Control for efficiency

management for efficiency

Managerial Manipulate workers by building Job and organization design

Solutions informal relations
(e.g.: giving attention)
Approach to
management solutions Universal solutions are feasible Universal solutions are
feasible