why is it said that management principles are universal
Answers
Ans. Universality of management suggests that the manager uses the same managerial skills ·and principles in each managerial position held in various organizations. The universality of management has two connotations as follows-
Management principles an be successfully applied to different types of organizations. In other words, they are applicable to business enterprises, clubs, hospitals, educational institutions, religious and political organizations.
(ii) Management principles are applicable in different economic systems of the world. They have utility in America, England, India and every other country where inputs are to be converted into outputs.
Various management thinkers have conflicting views .on the universal application of management concepts and principles. Authors like Fayol, Taylor, James: Lundy, Louis A. Allen, Dalton E. McFarland and Koontz and 0′ Donnell advocate that management is universal. But, there are several management experts who do not subscribe to the concept of universality of management. They include Ernest Dale, Drucker, W. Oberg, Joan Woodward and others. The arguments offered by both these groups
Arguments for Universality – (i) Classical writers like Fayol, Orwick and others believed that there are certain principles in management which are universally applicable. Such principles as one man one boss, division of work to improve speed and efficiency, limiting the number of persons to be supervised so that managers can concentrate on exceptional problems, the principles governing motivation theory have certainly proved to be useful and have been translated into practice successfully all kinds of organizations. These principles have found universal expression irrespective of the nature and level of management in organizations.
(ii) The very fact that managers regularly move from public to private sector organizations bears ample testimony to the fact that management concepts are universal across organizational types. As example, D.D. Eisenhower went from a general in the US army to President of Columbia University to President of the United States. Shri P.L. Tandon, the former chairman of Hindustan Lever Ltd., has managed the ‘Punjab National Bank, State Trading Corporation and National Council of Applied Economic Research successfully. The basic concepts of management propagated by American writers have found expression even in communist countries. In the words of Drucker, ” the rapid development of Brazil, the rapid development of noncommunist countries, that is, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan, the rapid development of so poor and backward a peasant country as Iran; are all traceable to the impact of management.”
Arguments for Universality – (i) Classical writers like Fayol, Orwick and others believed that there are certain principles in management which are universally applicable. Such principles as one man one boss, division of work to improve speed and efficiency, limiting the number of persons to be supervised so that managers can concentrate on exceptional problems, the principles governing motivation theory have certainly proved to be useful and have been translated into practice successfully all kinds of organizations. These principles have found universal expression irrespective of the nature and level of management in organizations.
(ii) The very fact that managers regularly move from public to private sector organizations bears ample testimony to the fact that management concepts are universal across organizational types. As example, D.D. Eisenhower went from a general in the US army to President of Columbia University to President of the United States. Shri P.L. Tandon, the former chairman of Hindustan Lever Ltd., has managed the ‘Punjab National Bank, State Trading Corporation and National Council of Applied Economic Research successfully. The basic concepts of management propagated by American writers have found expression even in communist countries. In the words of Drucker, ” the rapid development of Brazil, the rapid development of noncommunist countries, that is, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan, the rapid development of so poor and backward a peasant country as Iran; are all traceable to the impact of management.”