Importance of Historical Perspectives Essay

The organised use of labour or Management as we now call it, is as old as time. However it was only in the 19th century that management and the idea of management thought emerged as an important element of political, economic and social development. I believe that historical perspectives have been critically important to the development of management thought through the centuries. Management ideas have been developed out of social and cultural circumstances, over time the social and cultural circumstances have radically changed and developed but the principle of management and management thought has been slow in keeping up with these developments. From my reading, I would argue that there have been three main phases that have fundamentally shaped management thought since ancient times. These phases are; the early autocratic management approach, the change in management thought following the reformation and thirdly, the new work practices required to support the industrial revolution. From my research, it is evident that major historical events have also had an important role to play in the development of different management styles and structures. In ancient times, management of people was purely autocratic. Many of the work force in these times were slaves. This early practise of management seen in ancient Egypt, continued through to feudal times. It was very effective in supporting some of the great construction projects which ancient Egypt is famous for, such as the building of the pyramids, the irrigation of the Nile and the building of the tombs in the Valley of the Kings. Similarly in ancient China, the building of the Great Wall of China. These great works provide us with evidence of a very organised and autocratic approach to the use of labour and also project management skills . This early autocratic period of management was heavily dominated by cultural values such as; fear of punishment, fear of god, where people had no sense of individual achievement and they could only look forward to a better life after death. This form of management continued through the middle ages and in these non-industrialised circumstances there was no â€Å"no need to develop a formal body of management thought†(Wren & Bedeian, 2011: 37) As long as society was dominated by fear and oppression this form of management was sustained. As long as Christianity and the divine right of kings maintained their hold on society, management thought could not evolve and develop. However, these feudal times where religion was invincible and demanded total subservience ere coming to an end. The crusades were a major catalyst for change in these times and by weakening the strength of the catholic church they were the beginning of a cultural rebirth which led to the protestant reformation. With the reformation came the protestant work ethic which I would argue has transcended the history of management and has fundamentally changed work practises opening the door to completely different and new management styles and structures. Prior to this commerce was viewed as an evil that corrupted peoples’ minds and the idea of trade could undermine the obedience demanded by the catholic church. Max Weber in â€Å"the protestant ethic and spirit of capitalism† urges strongly that the spirit of capitalism grew out of Protestantism and the protestant work ethic. (Wren & Bedeian, 2011: 26) It is clear that the transformation in attitudes in society due to the reformation brought with it the need for new management structures which would support creativity and competitiveness. These changes did not happen quickly, but they were pivotal in the fundamental shift to the organisation of labour being managed by many people and many different types of people rather than the autocratic few. These new managers began to think about personal gain and had to consider the best ways to achieve these gains. The shift to personal gain was accompanied by the strengthening of national economies in Europe and further afield as new countries and colonies were being discovered and established. The scene was being set for the industrial revolution. Historical perspectives were changing and along with them, new principles in management thought were emerging. Adam Smith was one of the evangelists of management thought during the early stages of the industrial revolution. One of Smith’s new thoughts on management was that the market economy would be se self regulating, that is to say that the market would be ruled by the â€Å"invisible hand†(Wren & Bedeian, 2011: 34). His other contribution were his thoughts on the division of labour culminating in the substantial productivity that the use of technology brought to replace human man power. Smith’s principles are fundamental to modern management thought. The industrial revolution brought with it the move from agrarian life to urban living. Production became large scale and the increasing number of factories coming into production demanded more managers who would have to be capable of successfully organising and managing all aspects of these new work places. There is no doubt that historical perspectives have been mportant in bringing about great changes for the better in management thought as evidenced by the evolution of the three phased covered herein. However I would conclude, that despite the advantages of having historical perspectives, society and the management of society does not really learn from these perspectives. I think this is well summarised in Will Durant’s quote in â⠂¬Å"the story of civilization part 1† where he states that â€Å" a nation is born stoic and dies epicurean†(Durant, 1935: 259). There is no clearer example of this than in Ireland today. We have spent centuries struggling against the autocratic management of Irish society both by the catholic church and by British rule. The adversity of these times was eventually replaced by the development of new management structures bringing with them creativity and competiveness. However, as with many developing societies and civilisations, with this development came affluence and opportunism which in turn undermined the integrity of these management structures. Like the Epicureans, poor thought was given to how this would impact tomorrow. So as in Greece and Rome, the lack of long term prudent management and the lack of learning from the historical perspectives on management thought have meant that we have not escaped the Epicurean death blow that has been rendered to Ireland.