The field of management is based on theories and principles. In order to get success it becomes imperative that organizations should follow certain theories of management. Sometimes some decisions are taken just on interpretations and instincts but they don’t survive often. Following are the two theories which are compared and contrasted.
During the course of an organizational life, various decisions take place according to the desires of the business and the management of that organization. The change and innovation theory states that changes are imperative in the structural context of an organization in order for it to stay put.
The most difficult part comes in devising the formula for change and the factors that are involved in it. Contingency theory states that when a manager makes a decision, it must be a pre calculated decision. By this it means the decision should take into account all the necessary requirements before its implementation. This includes taking into consideration of current factors that may hinder the future change or the rights of all those who may somehow affected by this decision.
It is because that the need of the decision was there on the current scenarios.
The leadership theory has states that the leaders are those who make certain decisions according to the situation. For example someone running the hospital have to be participative in his approach because it is like teamwork to handle the pressure and tension and giving out best as possible. Similarly, in other management scenarios it becomes obligation to carefully determine the situation and take decision effectively. Many theories such as Weber’s bureaucracy and Taylor’s scientific management failed only because that they were focusing other factors like the future and totally neglected the factors at hand which should be taken care of at first place. Contingency theory also relates to the structure of the organization other than the leadership contingency theory.
Chaos theory states that the things happening in the organizational structure and culture may seem to be happening at the consent of the manager, but in reality they are not controlled by anyone, as they are random and may change no matter what could be done right. The followers of chaos theory reject that the success can be guaranteed in any business. According to them, when various factors that are involved in business crash may be from some internal defect the whole operation crashes and all the theories of management and business fail at this point. We have many examples that state the truth about this theory’s implementation in the business management. Change management is the process that brings about a change in the structure and culture of an organization as required. As stated before, in order to be successful it is imperative to follow certain plans which are formalized on factors in hand in primary place. But we have to take a look at the situation why this change was needed at first place. If the business runs on the management theories before and every step that was taken according to the demands of the times then why those actions are fulfilled and they require a change now? This question states the functionality of all the major management theories to be limited to certain extent. When the management makes certain decisions about things or changes to happen, they merely describe their viewpoints or the desires what they want to see in their business. This is just like that. They formalize a plan, take action according to the plans just to find out that they are wrong in their approach, or even if they have succeeded, they are not sure how long they will be able to run their business on this theory. The randomization is the natural phenomena where the things change to become complex or become swift and easy from time to time. The controlling factor can affect on the current situation but will provide affects that will be long lasting. Thus the system may join with another system to provide more positive results or may split up to provide total crash to the business.
The chaos theory and contingency theories seem to be two important theories of general management of the business. Both seem to be more very reliable and durable when we see them separately. Contingency theory is highly appreciable in starting and running the business effectively over a course of time and at the same time chaos theory somehow rejects that theory by stating that these kinds of theories can never guarantee the success of any business. Contingency theory requires that every change and decision should follow a certain pattern in order to avoid later problems with the factors in hand and in contrast chaos theory states that taking into account the current factor may somehow change the stature of the organization and may provide benefits but due to natural phenomena it will collapse. Even in the real scenarios we have seen many organizations to stumble down to trash in days following their successful management theories including the contingency theory as well. These situations can be described as that these changes are kept implemented because they provide benefits to the organizations whether they are profitable for long terms or not. The recent crisis of economics can provide us a strict picture of the truth where for example Citigroup followed their plans to maximize their profits in lesser times and opted for the real estate investment. Though when we look at the contingency theory, we might feel that they were right because of the immediate profits that were gained by it, but on the other hand we have also seen the loss and crash of the markets just because of these issues. Here the Chaos theory states that the natural phenomenon causes things to shape up in tendon differently and the business flopped over a short course of time. Both these theories are highly implemented in the management principles. Contingency theory operates in the Change Management process and Chaos theory represents itself in the form of any mishap that occurs to the organization.
Lenskold, James D. (2003). The Path to Campaign, Customer, and Corporate Profitability. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional.
Peters, Tom. (1988). Thriving on Chaos: Handbook for a Management Revolution. New York: Harper Paperbacks.
Kast, Fremont E. & Rosenzweig, James E. (1985). Organization and Management: A Systems and Contingency Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Cite this Compare and Contrast any two Management Theories
Compare and Contrast any two Management Theories. (2016, Sep 09). Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/compare-and-contrast-any-two-management-theories/