Theories and Styles of Management

Management is a special kind of labour that makes business decisions. Managers decide such matters as what and how much to produce, which markets to serve, how much to advertise, and what prices to charge. (Encyclopaedia, p. 258). It is difficult to know where to begin. Claude George traces management back over 5,000 years. (Schoderbek, 1998, p. 39). Management, important element in Slovak economy, went through theories and styles in history, was explained with scientists of management, and was developing in Slovak economy, and is still in progress as whole Slovak economy.
The developement of management theory has created four schools of managerial thought. Each of these perspectives is based on differing assumptions about the nature of management. The Management Process School reflects classical management theory, in which principles of management were developed to aid in the practice of managerial functions. By contrast, instead of thinking of functions performed, the Behavioral School views management as influnced by human behavior. According to this behavioral approach, effective management results from an understanding of human needs and recognizes the importance of the informal aspects of organization. Clearly, psychology and sociology are important in the behavioral approach to management. A third school of management thought employs a quantitative approach. The Quantitative School views management as a system of processes. Underlying this approach is the belief that if decision making is a rational process, then models can be constructed to duplicate this process. Finally, Systems School is a contingency approach to management, which suggests that the application of certain managerial concepts depends on the situation – the environment, the technology, the people in the organization, and the task to be accomplished. (Schoderbek, 1998, p. 38). The development of management is not connected only with theories of management but there are also some well-known names of people who have dedicated their time and energy to science of management.
A. Smith, F.W. Taylor, H. Fayol, and M. Weber, the most famous management scientists, explained the main things and ideas of management. In The Wealth of Nations (1776), Adam Smith applied the principle of specialization to manufacturing workers. Smith specially discussed the benefits of a “division of labour” in organization.

Instead of each worker performing all the steps necessary to produce a product, several workers could be assigned “subsets” of the overall production process. Around 1900, Frederick W. Taylor incorporated Smith´s idea of specialization into a comprehensive set of management principles called scientific management. Taylor intended his views to reflect a philosophy of management. He wanted to encourage cooperation between managers and workers. Henri Fayol attributed his success to a system of management. When he retired in 1918, Fayol had turned a floundering mining company into a financial success. Fayol was the first person to identify the five components of managerial activity. These five functions still define the job of the manager: planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling. Richard A. Cosier (1998) wrote in his publication, “To improve the functioning of these organizations, Max Weber proposed the ideal bureaucracy, which had five features : a well-defined hierarchy of authority, a comprehensive system of rules and procedures, a clear division of labour based on functional duties, impersonal employer-employee relationship, and promotions and selections based on technical competence.” (pp. 41-42). Besides the theories there are also the styles of management in the world´s history which exist up to this day.
American management is connected with the name Henry Ford and his “Fordism” and on the other hand Japan management is famous with “Toyotaism” and its own principles. In the American style of management the decision making is individual process as well as responsibility. The operation procedure is fast and flexible, the relations in the workplace are formal, and the length of employment is short. The influence of the government is minimal but the scientific experience is extended. The main difference between American and Japan management is the main goal of “Fordizmus”: the quantity, not the quality. “Toyotaism” accentuates: the quantity equals the quality. Japan companies are very social, loyal, and collective. The employee is human being, not a tool for producing. The employment is lifelong but employees are willing to stay in the work until the boss does not leave home. The decision making and also the responsibility are collective. And there exists big influence of the government in Japan companies. (The lecture of Prof. Ing. Július Alexy, CSc., 2000, October 16, University of Trenčín).

The American style of management was developing in the American area, the Japan one in the Japan area, and in the Slovak area was also developing own, not well-known and famous one.
The development of Slovak management was connected with the development of country´s political system and historical evolution. Tomáš Baťa, the businessman who has influenced the Slovak business, made the biggest step in the development of Slovak management. He made great progress in management, e.g.: paying out money, nutrition in the company, autonomy of manufactories, building of company´s apartments, offering education for his employees, organisation of employees´s free time. (The lecture of Prof. Ing. Július Alexy, CSc., 2000, October 16, University of Trenčín). Another important point was the transformation of society´s system to communism. Communism sayed that everything is for everybody and it also reflexed in development management. There were no unemployed, no extensive differencies between social groups, no problems in marketing and demand of goods, but also the absence of goods, especially qualitative and luxury, and finally the supply was miserable too.(Trend, 2001, March 14) The last break in development of management was the year 1989, the change of political system, and from that time the style of management tries to recover the economy of European Union.
History and evolution of management is very important for all countries. Slovak Republic will have to develop own style of management fitting our society, culture, and also the progress in history. Our style will be mixed of American and Japan one. The responsibility, flexibility, and fast decision making will come from American style and social, loyal, and collective relations from Japan one. The main goal in our companies will be: great quantity, but also great quality.