Lecture The evolution of management thought (6th edition) - Chapter 14: The search for organization integration

Mary Parker Follett and Chester Barnard bridged two eras. Both operated on a philosophical plane. Both sought to create a spirit of cooperation and collaboration. Both were concerned with the individual in group effort. Both examined concepts of authority and moral leadership.

THE EVOLUTION OF MANAGEMENT

THOUGHT, 6TH

EDITION

Electronic Resource by:

Regina Greenwood and Julia Teahen

The Search for Organizational Integration

Chapter Fourteen

Mary Parker Follett

Chester Barnard

Search for Organizational Integration

http://www.bigfoto.com/themes/railw

ay

Mary Parker Follett 1868-1933 The Political Philosopher

Mary Parker Follett

 Basis of her philosophy

 Johann Fichte

(1762-1814): each ego is a

social one, bound to a

wider world of egos.

 From this Follett

concluded that

individuals can

discover their true

nature and gain

freedom through the

group.

 Georg Hegel

(1770-1831)

 She espoused the

Gestalt notion that a

person’s “true self is

the group self.”

Follett and Conflict

Resolution

 Submission if in a conflict situation.

 With struggle, someone wins and someone loses.

 Compromise was a solution she did not like, especially as it appeared in labor- management

collective bargaining.

Follett and Conflict Resolution

 Integration was the

Follett and Authority &

Follett and Leadership

 Follett’s notion of the role of the

leader/manager was an extension of her

ideas of integration and authority

 Control could not be achieved without

integrated efforts, that is, when interests were not reconciled

 Control was based on facts, not people; and

“correlated,” not imposed from above

 Coordination facilitated control

 Leadership, then, involved defining the

purpose of the organization and skills in

coordinating and evoking the law of the

situation

Follett and Leadership

Creative Experience (1924)

The New State (1918)

Follett’s Books

Many feel that Follett’s ideas are out of touch in a tough world where decisions have to be made without time to implement her

techniques However, can we make better decisions when people are involved and co-acting to achieve a common purpose?

Follett is often dismissed as being too idealistic

Chester Barnard influenced human relations thinking and continues to influence our understanding of

organizations and management

Chester Barnard-The Erudite Executive

Barnard and Cooperative Systems

 Formal organizations as the kind of

cooperation that is “conscious, deliberate, and purposeful.”

 Formal organizations helped:

 Maintain an internal equilibrium.

 Examine external forces to see if

adjustments must be made An “open

systems” viewpoint.

 Analyze the functions of executives.

 Organizations needed to be cooperative systems because people had choices and they could choose to contribute or not to contribute

 The executive functions could modify

actions and motives through influence and control

Barnard and Cooperative

Systems

 Effective-Efficient: individual and

organizational goals might differ and

Barnard expressed this as:

 Effective – meet the goals of the

organization

 Efficient – meet individual motives and

only the individual could determine

whether or not this was occurring

 The only measure for efficiency

according to Barnard was the

organization’s capacity to survive That

is, to provide adequate inducements to satisfy individual motives to secure their cooperation.

Barnard and Formal Organizations

 Chester Barnard defined

 The late Lyndall Urwick

felt this definition was

too broad, and quipped:

“under Barnard’s

definition, a boy kissing

a girl is also a formal

organization.”

Elements of a Formal

Organization

 Willingness to cooperate, and this was

to be facilitated by the offerings of

objective and subjective incentives This notion meant:

 “self-abnegation”

 “surrender of control of personal conduct”

 “depersonalization of personal actions”

 Purpose or objectives of the

organization Although individual and

organizational motives were different, individuals could achieve their motives

by working toward organizational

purposes.

Elements of a Formal Organization

 Maintenance of feelings of personal

integrity and self-respect

Barnard’s Acceptance Theory

of Authority

 Barnard’s definition

of authority included the notion that a

communication must be

“accepted” by the organizational

member

 Authority did not reside in persons of authority, but in a member’s

acceptance of authority

From The Functions of the Executive by Chester I

Barnard Harvard University Press, 1938.

Barnard’s Acceptance Theory

of Authority

 Individuals would consent to authority if four conditions were met:

 They understood the communicated order.

 They believed the order was consistent with the

organization’s purpose.

 The order was

“compatible with their personal interests as

a whole.”

 They were physically and mentally able to comply with the

order.

From The Functions of the Executive by Chester I

Barnard Harvard University Press, 1938.

Barnard’s “Zone of

Indifference”

 “Zone of Indifference” – Barnard’s

phrase for explaining how an

organization could function since

members could accept or reject

authority on almost any occasion.

 Individuals could be very “indifferent,” leading to a wider possibility of

acceptance, or less indifferent.

 This depended on the individuals

weighing the “inducements,” burdens, and sacrifices.

“Authority of Leadership”

 This was Barnard’s way of expressing the “potentiality of assent” created when people had respect for and

confidence in their leaders.

 Authority still existed in the

organizational hierarchy, in formal

authority, but authority in the final analysis still rested with the

organizational member.

Functions of the Executive, 1938 and 1968Chester I Barnard

Barnard – Functions of the

Executive

 The functions of the executive:

 Provide a system of communication

 Promote securing personal efforts

 Formulate and define organizational

purpose

 These reflect to a large extent the

elements of organization.

integrating the organization as a whole, internally and the external environment.

Moral leadership for Barnard involved executives having a high moral code, demonstrating it as an example, and seeking to create this morality in others How would Barnard feel about the executives at Enron?

Moral Leadership

 Mary Parker Follett and Chester Barnard

bridged two eras

 Follett introduced a group view with Gestalt psychology.

 Barnard focused on the formal and informal organization.

 Both operated on a philosophical plane

 Both sought to create a spirit of cooperation and collaboration

 Both were concerned with the individual in group effort

 Both examined concepts of authority and moral leadership