History of managerial thought: a brief overview

The history of management is typically broken down into schools of thought and resultant theories. Rather than serving as a comprehensive review, this chapter is intended to provide you with a general overview of some of the theory which has emerged. While not all aspects of the various schools and theories are equally applicable to managing in the library environment, each perspective can help layer one's understanding of given situations and problems.

Frederick Winslow Taylor and scientific management

Almost to a fault, books on management and organizational behavior begin with a discussion of the work of Frederick Winslow Taylor and his seminal book originally published in 1911, The Principles of Scientific Management. According to Taylor, the 'best management is a true science' (Taylor, [1911] 1947: 7). He went on to outline his principles, which he referred to as scientific management. While his studies focused primarily on industrial labor, such as workers in the Midvale and Bethlehem Steel companies, he actually intended his principles to apply to all environments, even non-profits. Taylor's idea was to focus on creating ever-greater efficiencies by carefully studying the work that needed to be done and finding a way to maximize the labor of workers. In his somewhat tortured prose:

The enormous saving of time and therefore increase in output which it is possible to effect through eliminating unnecessary motions and substituting fast for slow and inefficient motions for the men working in our trades can be fully realized only after one has personally seen the improvement which rests from a thorough motion and time study. (Ibid.: 24)

There is a slightly disturbing level of paternalism embedded in his book, as he refers to a common worker lacking education as being 'so stupid that the word "percentage" has no meaning to him, and he must consequently be trained by a more intelligent man than himself' (ibid.: 59). Still, his work stands as a foundational piece on modern management, especially due to the fact that his approach achieved measurable results.

Later in his career, at a bicycle ball factory, he was able to move the plant in the direction of much greater efficiencies by applying his principles. Just how much greater was production due to his efforts? By the time he was done, 35 women were doing the work of 120 and making twice the wages. It should be noted on this latter point that he felt greater efficiencies should lead to better pay for the workers (although he gave very little by way of advice on how the workers would be able to protect these higher wages in the long run). Also, in creating the efficiencies it was ultimately discovered that the women were more productive working an 8.5-hour as opposed to a 10.5-hour shift and if they were actually required to take breaks at specific intervals.

For most librarians, the concept of library work as something that can be made brutally efficient is probably not just foreign but repugnant. Indeed, when one thinks of Taylor's work, there seem to be some warnings there as well. Taylor said at the outset of his book that 'In the past the man has been first, in the future the system must be first' (ibid.: 7). Hardly any of us would agree on this overly brash statement, which would seem to regard library staff as cogs in a machine. That said, as we push into the twenty-first century a number of changes have occurred that oblige us to pay greater attention to efficiencies. The most obvious, of course, is the ubiquitous nature of the internet and electronic resources. To some extent this has created competition for the provision of information resources and services which hadn't existed before. More significantly, since the financial crisis beginning in 2008 libraries have almost universally had budgets slashed. One need not adhere exclusively to Taylor's approach to and emphasis on efficiency to recognize benefits towards applying it on a limited basis to collections management, staffing and other areas.

For example, initial budget cuts in 2009 forced the library staff at Johnson & Wales University's Charlotte campus to consider the possibility of future cuts as well. One line item explored was the periodicals collection. Many of the print periodicals by this time were getting very little use. By compiling a list of titles that were available electronically through databases, it was possible to narrow down potential titles with overlap. Since the titles were available to students and faculty in electronic format, the physical subscriptions could be cut. This approach would need to be discussed with the faculty and wouldn't be without its negative consequences, not least of which would be the lack of ability to browse the titles or periodicals themselves physically. With all of these concerns acknowledged, however, when faced with a choice between cutting overlapped print titles and losing staff positions or other collection development funds, a focus on efficiency in one area can lead to benefits in others. Numerous other examples of efficiencies could be presented here but, on a last note, it should almost go without saying that new technologies frequently offer the opportunity for not just greater efficiencies but also enhanced services in the modern library.

Max Weber and bureaucratic management

In addition to the concept of brutal efficiencies, another 'nasty word' for librarians and most people in general is bureaucracy. As we move into the twenty-first century, a bureaucratic approach to management has all sorts of negative connotations. We have a tendency to conjure up some huge pile of paperwork that we need to fill out for a simple request or think of waiting in a long line at the Department of Motor Vehicles. Credited largely to its description by Max Weber in the early twentieth century, the idea of a bureaucracy was a leap forward at the time. Weber's belief in a highly structured and rational approach has been said to have grown out of his experience in the German army (Bennis, 1961). He described his concept of a bureaucracy, among other places, in his book Economy and Society. According to Weber, 'Experience tends universally to show that the purely bureaucratic type of organization. is, from a purely technical point of view, capable of attaining the highest degree of efficiency and is in this sense formally the most rational known means of exercising authority over human beings.' He expands upon his idea by discussing the need for 'rational administration by trained specialized officials' (Weber, [1922] 1978: 997). Clearly, there are advantages to his view, which sought to encourage organizations to consider very carefully their needs and how they were constructed to meet those needs. His overwhelming emphasis is on structure and specialization. Perhaps its greatest weakness is the fact that this view neglects the somewhat irrational or psychological aspects of organizations, which, as they are made up of individuals, are a factor in need of consideration when running any enterprise.

As residents of the twenty-first century and once again making reference to the complicated mix of entanglements which led to the economic downturn in 2008 and 2009, structures are important. Understanding how things fit together, whether they are real estate companies or banks, departments within a given organization or reporting lines within a department, is critical. What Weber did was to codify the need for assigning responsibilities and accountability in a highly logical manner. There is clear relevance here for libraries. While organizational culture will be discussed in detail in a later chapter, it should be noted here that the culture of an organization or library determines its effectiveness, and this, in turn, is significantly affected by its associated reporting lines, policies and procedures. This is not a bad thing. It just means that managers need to be cognizant not only of the bureaucracy as it exists, but also in considering how effective it is in furthering the mission of the organization. Again, it is appropriate to relate the accountability aspect of this theory to the mission of libraries in the educational environment being more and more focused on specific outcomes, specifically learning outcomes. Thus systems, policies and structure need to be aligned to produce the expected results. Lastly, while there is often much overlap, a significant amount of library work requires specialization - in the areas of cataloging and systems, for example.

A couple of my experiences might help relate this issue further as to how, in particular, this might apply especially in growing organizations. Shortly after opening a new campus library for Johnson & Wales University, I discussed with the vice president my plans to communicate with the various academic departments through assigned library liaisons. He suggested that we consider creating a very formal library committee, since, in his words, 'We will someday be bigger and your less formal structure and approach may prove less effective.' I decided to do just that, creating a committee that had functional representation from all library areas as well as all faculty departments. It later also grew to include student, ITS and career development representatives. It has been an effective committee which has met...