Ozgur Onday (PhD) Global Journal of Human Resource Management Vol.4, No.1, pp.

83-94, February 2016_Published by

European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)

1. Introduction
The review critically reviewed the articles that are dealt with respect to the contribution of
neoclassical organizational theory to management which is written by Ozgur Onday(PhD).
Purposefully we prefer to review an article of neoclassical management theory, because,
neoclassical management theory introduced the behavioral sciences (interpersonal relations)
into management thought. Besides these, to compensate the neglect of human interaction in
the classical school, neoclassical approach also contributes the implementation of behavioral
science at work place and it has its own logically analyzed main propositions(considerations)
that are different from other management theories. From the listed main proposition of
neoclassical theory some of them are analyzed under this article analysis. The classical theory
laid emphasis on the physiological and mechanical variables and considered these as the
prime factors in determining the efficiency of the organization.

But, when the efficiency of the organization was actually checked, it was found out that,
despite the positive aspect of these variables the positive response in work behavior was not
evoked. Consequently, the author tried to identify the reasons for human behavior at work.
This led to the formation of a neoclassical theory which primarily focused on the human
beings in the organization. This approach is often referred to as “behavioral theory of
organization” or “human relations” approach in organizations.

The Neoclassical theory asserts that an individual is diversely motivated and wants to fulfill
certain needs. That is why we intentionally select and going to review articles written based
on neoclassical management theory. Therefore, questions like what motivates human, how
humans are fulfill their need, how communication is an important yardstick to measure the
efficiency of the information and why teamwork is the prerequisite for the sound functioning
of the organizations are detail discussed in this article review in the form of strength and
weakness that is presented in this article.

1
 Ozgur Onday (PhD) Global Journal of Human Resource Management Vol.4, No.1, pp.83-94, February 2016_Published by
European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)

2. Summery
Critics argued that classical management might look for standardized skills and method. It
could not expect perfectly standard emotionless behavior from its employees. (Bowditch,
buono and stewart.2008).The recognition that workers had social needs led to a new set of
assumptions about human nature. Rather than viewing people solely as rational, economic
creatures, social considerations were now seen as the prime motivator of behavior and work
performance. Since the increasing mechanization of work was stripping jobs of their intrinsic
value, people would seek out meaning in their work through social relationships on the job.
Management, it was argued, must therefore support people to satisfy these natural desires.
Although these arguments may appear to be somewhat moralistic, they were tied to
prescriptions for organizational effectiveness and efficiency. If managers did not answer to
these socially oriented needs with greater consideration and warmth, lagging work
performance and resistance to authority were viewed as likely outcomes. (Ibid.)
Neoclassical approach to management is a set of heterogeneous ideas on the management of
organizations that evolved in the mid-19th century. When factory production became in
escapable and large scale organizations raise, people have been looking for ways to motivate
employees and improve productivity. To do so, organization came up to schools of
neoclassical theory with a more human-oriented approach and emphasis on time needs,
drives, behaviors and attitudes of individuals. Two important groups, namely, human
relations school and behavioral schools emerged during 1920s and 1930s under the
neoclassical theory. Our article review is concerning on strength and weakness of
neoclassical management theory that is analyzed in detail below.

3. Analysis
We will critique the article which is written by OZUGUR ONDAY (DR). In this part we will
see what is strong and what is week? What did the author do well? And does the author meet
the audience.
3.1 Strength
The author of this article put’s some use full idea that strongly support neoclassical
management theory listed below
 The author used sufficient reference materials to support the idea of neo classical
organizational theory.
 This article convince as by sitting the idea of Frederic Winslow Taylor principles on the
bases of a <<mental revolution that would take place in the attitude of management and

2
 Ozgur Onday (PhD) Global Journal of Human Resource Management Vol.4, No.1, pp.83-94, February 2016_Published by
European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)

labor. Since management and labor are human, neoclassical management theory
reviewed under this article is consider human interaction (behavioral aspect of human)
that was neglected in the classical theory.
Before we start to talk about change, we have to first what we need to change? In any
organizational change, the first changed aspect is mental revolution of managers and workers
(humans). After change in mental is emerged in an organization the next step of change will
be almost all very simple and not sophisticated to run any activities in that organization.
 The writer of this article think that “workers exert a greater influence on work behavior
than the economic incentives offered by management” and he argued that “workers are
somewhat moralistic” in their nature. This means most of human beings are lovely,
consciously, and morally performing their daily duty without enforced by any external
factors.
 Philip Selznick the Founder of the Theory of Organization puts very interesting idea that
strongly convince us “Organizations exist to serve human needs (rather than the reverse).
Organizations and people need each other. (Organizations need ideas, energy, and talent;
people need careers, salaries, and work opportunities.) ”we appreciate this idea it is
logically analyzed in this article. We observe that existence of organization is nothing
without existence of people.
3.2 Weakness
 We are disagreeing with his professional background. We believe that to write on neo
classical organizational theory physiological discipline is more preferable than business
administration
 Chester Bernard the pioneer of management theories deals about the “economic of
incentive” in his theory of authority and incentive. He supports the idea that persuasion is
more important than economic incentives. Here, we strongly disagree with the idea of
“incentive and persuasion” setting comparatively in this market based life standards era.
economic incentives.
Whatever incentive is attract employees and subordinates toward the organization but,
persuasion is completely different from the idea of incentive. Because, economic incentive in
its character:-
 Even If employee enhanced by organizational persuasion unless motivated economic
incentives they are not balanced the market their behaviors start insecure.

3
 Ozgur Onday (PhD) Global Journal of Human Resource Management Vol.4, No.1, pp.83-94, February 2016_Published by
European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)

 An organization should motivate inclusively (economic incentives and persuasion)

otherwise one precede another is problem. because we cannot predict complex human
need
 The writer should arrange employee categorization (higher level, middle level and lower
level) their persuasion and economic incentive based on Abraham Maslow hierarchy of
needs in the organization.

If worker got better incentive they may withdraw from one organization and go to other
organization that provide better incentive for his employees but if they were persuaded very
well and they have purpose and morale to serve their organization they were still stay in their
organization even if they got better incentive from other organization. Therefore it indicates
us the identification of employees need always proceed then use persuasion and economic
incentives inclusively.
 One of contribution of neoclassical approach is the implementation of behavioral science
at work place. From the listed main proposition of neoclassical theory we disagree with
idea of “man’s behavior can be predicted in terms of social and psychological factor”

In our opinion “man’s behavior cannot be predicted” in any case. The main thing that we
have to always bear in mind is “human beings are highly flexible in nature”. Human
beings brain is not adjusted like machine and computer. Unlike machine and computer
human beings brain is highly flexible and changed within a second and minutes, because
of this we cannot predict behavior of human.
 Neoclassical theory introduced the behavioral sciences into management thought that is
centered on understanding interpersonal relations. Within this context, the neoclassical
school of thought can be viewed as an analysis of the classical doctrine.
From the listed analysis we disagree with the idea of “a manager’s span of control is a
function of human factors and cannot be decreased to a precise, universally applicable
ratio.” Because sophisticated span of control leads organization to employing many
managers who control and supervise each and every scattered span of management. In this
elongated span of management there will be existence of:-
 Surplus use of organizational resource
 It consumes much time to supervise each and every activity.
 It opens way for unnecessary bureaucratic way of doing

4
 Ozgur Onday (PhD) Global Journal of Human Resource Management Vol.4, No.1, pp.83-94, February 2016_Published by
European Centre for Research Training and Development UK (www.eajournals.org)

Therefore, uncompromisingly it is possible to minimize span of control so as to closely

supervise each and every activities performed in an organization efficiently and effectively.
The article couldn’t show and understand the audience; also its jargon words and non
stoppable large sentences are major barrier to communicate effectively. According to our
view the author or book might not be understand the readers to have certain background or
information. It’s some obscured words, way of expression, usage of phrasal verbs are the
least for cause which indicate the author couldn’t understand the readers background

4 Conclusion
This review has made an effort to critically investigate an article entitled neoclassical
organization theory which is written by Ozgur Onday(PhD student).Generally, from this
article, we have analyzed the weakness and strength of the article. On the side of strength
part of this analysis we have broadly discussed, the necessity of mental revolution of human
being is the primary step to overcome any type of problem that may be appeared in an
organization and it is necessary to step up change activities within the organization.
Accordingly, incentive is not the only factor that increase morality of an employee but also
loving one’s own profession is a core for maximizing profitability of an organization
efficiently and effectively. Besides this, existence of organization is meaningless without
existence of people i.e. organization exist to serve people but not the reverse.

We have also analyze the weakness of this article as summarized below, the article was
believed that, span of control cannot be decreased to a précised, universally applicable ratio.
But, this idea was wrong according to us because, the idea is not logical and reasonable for
us. Not only this, we were also disagree with idea of man’s behavior can be predicted in
terms of social and psychological factors. Since human beings character is highly flexible and
changeable it is difficult to accept predictability of human behavior. Additionally, we have
seen that, the idea of incentive is totally different from the idea of persuading according to
our logic. Finally the conclusions that we mentioned above were reached by our group,