Dating back to the eighteenth century, classical management was the approach of choice for most businesses. What comes to mind to best illustrate this concept is Henry Ford’s assembly line. Although this method was adopted in the 1900s, there was still an overarching theme that if processes were established, productivity would increase. In this example, Ford’s Model T could take almost half a day to assemble! With the introduction of dividing labor, and training groups of employees to build specific parts of the car. This way, employees’ focus could remain on their one assigned contribution for each car manufactured. After Ford applied this approach, the time to assemble a Model T was down to just a couple hours!
Classic management does have some benefits with the most apparent being efficiency; however, the approach does not allow for creativity and engagement from employees who are not at a high-up management level. I believe that there must be a back and forth between employees and their leaders to implement some of the most innovative protocols. Who else knows the ins and outs of a process better than the employees who are performing the major tasks daily? Why not give them a chance to voice their opinions on what’s working, and what’s not?
This classic model of management can be seen today in companies that have call centers, such as BlueCross BlueShield. The big-wigs make all of the decisions regarding insurance policies. Their rules are trickled down into these call centers, and employees answering the phones must do what they are being told by upper management. There is a division of labor in that different departments of the call center answer calls from specific callers: members who have insurance through their employers, employers, providers, etc. They are all trained separately on the types of questions that would come in for their specific focus. In this setting, there is no real room for employees to step up and suggest their ideas for improvement. They are stuck doing mindless work (not completely mindless, as insurance is very complex, but in a routine sense).
While I do agree that a division of labor is necessary in terms of various skills and experience, I think that employees should feel empowered to offer input on company strategies and goals. Internal collaboration is a major key for companies to be successful, and retain employees. If individuals feel replaceable, like anyone can be trained to do their job, they will go elsewhere to find a position/organization that is more fulfilling and allow them to contribute in an innovative manner.
Tierra Thomas 
Hi T,
As I read in your post about every employee feeling empowered to offer their input (paragraph 4), I was reminded of Pixar, the film company. Whenever they have a pitch meeting to come up with new movie ideas, everyone who works at the company – from executives to animators to janitors – can offer a pitch if they want to. With the understanding that a good idea can come from anywhere, they set themselves up so that everyone is empowered to offer their ideas.
That made me think a little more about how Classical Management and Scientific Management are alive and well, even at Pixar. Although the department heads are probably animators, or have an animation or art background, the day-to-day assembly of the product are done by animators. It’s interesting to think of a Scientific Management approach being brought to bear on, well, art!
You’re right about Taylor’s and Fayol’s management approaches being utilized by call centers. At a prior workplace our we had a sister-department call center that was very Scientific Management-y. Calls were handled non-stop over a period of hours. Supervisors would ping agents if they saw too much down time. I never knew how the agents handled it – I certainly couldn’t have done it.
Jack
LikeLike