In their emphasis on organizational formal relationships, classical approaches tend to ignore informal relationships that are characterized by social exchanges between employees, the appearance of team leaders apart from the formal organization, etc. So their center is understandably narrow.
Ignoring the Informal Organization
It was not common for employees to think about what "career" they would be pursuing. Their basic assumption is that workers are primarily motivated by money and that they only earn more money. First, the workforce was not highly trained or qualified to do most of the work there. Indeed, for many writers, technology is the driving force behind organizational and social change. For example, classical approaches seem to look at the employee's life at the beginning and end of the plant door. These assumptions do not recognize that workers need their non-work-related needs and needs or just look at their evil needs. For example, Taylor and Fayol's work originated from the experiences of large corporations working in big stabilization environments. Maybe we can do much more if the rules are not so clear.
The unprovided hypotheses
Most of the hypotheses put forward by classical writers were based not on scientific studies but on valuations that expressed styles, moral codes, and attitudes to success.
Classical theories gives the impression that the body machine and the workers are simply parts that can be inserted into the machine to work effectively. Reliance on Experience
Many writers working in classical management have designed their ideas as leaders or consultants with only certain types of organizations based on their experiences. Finally, very little has been done about establishing a coherent and useful governance theory. Rather, for many people, safe work and the ability to earn wages to secure their families, all they have been required of working conditions. Classical theories and the principles derived from these are still popular with some modifications today. For example, serious emphasis on rules and regulations suggests that people leave the rules blindly without remembering their original intent. Thus, a number of principles are first influenced by the effective functioning of the organization, assuming that workers are fit for the work environment if financial incentives are acceptable
The classic approaches aim at achieving high productivity, predictable behaviors and to achieve fairness between workers and managers and workers; yet they do not recognize that a number of accidental consequences may occur in practice. We are discussing a number of big questions here. It may be wise to think of such situations to others – especially to young, high technology companies living up to today who face the changing products of their competitors every day. It is also assumed that productivity is the best measure of how well a company performs. So they focused on increasing efficiency. Since many criticisms of the classical school are tough, many points must be made to protect writers during this period. Often, because the rules determine the minimum performance level of employees, the minimum level is all that is achieved.
Organizations are influenced by external circumstances that often fluctuate over time, but classical management is an organization that does not develop with external influences. It was assumed that all humankind was able to adapt to rapidly changing circumstances. Secondly, most of the writing took place when the technology was undergoing rapid transformation, especially in the field of manufacturing. If we do not take such things into account, it is likely that satisfaction and performance will not be revealed or tried by many important factors such as employee involvement in decision-making and task planning. Many of the classical theorists wrote from scratch, largely relying on their own experiences and observations.
Source by sbobet