Dear Colleagues! This is Asrar Qureshi’s Blog Post #914 for Pharma Veterans. Pharma Veterans aims to share knowledge and wisdom from Veterans for the benefit of Community at large. Pharma Veterans Blog is published by Asrar Qureshi on WordPress, the top blog site. Please email to asrar@asrarqureshi.com for publishing your contributions here.
The evolution of management thinking and practices is a dynamic journey that spans centuries, reflecting the ever-changing nature of organizational structures, societal needs, and economic landscapes. From the rudimentary forms of organization in ancient civilizations to the sophisticated management theories of the modern era, the discipline has undergone many profound transformations. Throughout this evolutionary process, a multitude of thinkers, influencers, and practitioners have left an indelible mark on the landscape of management, shaping the principles and practices that guide organizations today.
This series of individual, though interconnected posts, shall explore the major influencers and their influences.
In the ancient world, management principles were implicitly embedded in the structures of early civilizations. The Code of Hammurabi in Mesopotamia and the administrative systems of ancient Egypt provide glimpses into early organizational hierarchies and the need for structured governance. The military strategies of Sun Tzu in ancient China, as outlined in “The Art of War,” also hold relevance to early management thought, emphasizing strategic planning and leadership. Kings, priests, officials, and other rulers held managerial positions besides religious or symbolic presence. Their authority was derived from ownership (like kings) and/or appointment (priests, officials etc.). Armies always had a rather formal chain-of-command system as they could not work without it. Trade started as soon as people gathered into early forms of societies, and with that certain rules also emerged. Also, the rulers and kings needed to keep their kingdoms under control.
In the ancient Egypt, Pharaohs oversaw large construction projects which employed complex systems of labor management and resource allocation. In the Mesopotamian city-states, scribes documented economic transactions and kept records for taxation and trade. In the empire of Inca, a sophisticated system of roads and storehouses was managed by administrators, which facilitated efficient distribute of goods across a large territory.
The management practices of early civilization were marked by rigid and hierarchical structures which gave limited autonomy to the workers and officials. They relied heavily on tradition and authority. Knowledge of Trades we passed on orally between and across families. These limitations prevailed over the centuries, and while management has evolved greatly, similar limitations can be seen even today.
Confucius in China and Plato in Greece explored themes of leadership, justice, and social order, offering early glimpses into management principles. As the industrial revolution started, many more prominent figures contributed to the management philosophy, some of whom we shall see in greater detail.
Adam Smith (1723-1790)
Adam Smith holds a prominent position in economic history, often referred to as the “Father of Modern Economics.” His magnum opus, “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations,” published in 1776, revolutionized economic thought and continues to influence modern theories even today. Some of his most influential contributions include division of labor, gross domestic product (GDP), and the theory of invisible hand.
Main Points
- Division of Labor: Smith believed that specialization and increased efficiency due to the division of labor were key drivers of economic growth. The famous pin factory example showcased how specialization could boost productivity significantly. He asserted that ten workers could produce 48,000 pins per day if each of the eighteen specialized tasks was assigned to particular workers. This example also signfies the concept of ‘economies of scale’.
- Invisible Hand: This central concept suggests that individuals pursuing their own self-interest, guided by the “invisible hand” of the market, would ultimately benefit society as a whole. Competition in the market would drive efficiency and allocate resources optimally. He wrote,”It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity, but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities, but of their advantage”.
- Laissez-faire: Smith advocated for limited government intervention in the economy, believing the market was largely self-regulating and could achieve equilibrium through competition and individual choices. The metaphor of invisible hand is also used as a support for free economy.
- Mercantilism Critique: He challenged the prevailing mercantilist policies of accumulating wealth through exports and restricting imports, arguing for free trade and open markets for long-term economic prosperity.
- Natural Law and Economic Growth: Smith saw economic principles as akin to natural laws, operating with inherent logic and driving wealth creation. However, he acknowledged the need for some government intervention in areas like public infrastructure and education.
For Management discussion, division of labor is most relevant.
Division of labor eliminated the need for factory workers to switch tasks throughout their workday. Moreover, this led workers to become experts at their tasks. The result was more efficient production. In turn, this led to the progression of industrialization, which gave rise to a multitude of different technological advancements. Additionally, it was yet another step towards a capitalist society.
Although he stated that division of labor was an effective way to increase productivity, Smith was foresighted enough to have concerns over its effects on workers. Specifically, he was worried about the harsh working conditions, and the effect the monotony of performing the same task repeatedly, all day long, would have on them. This was a remarkably progressive stance on his part. He suggested that factory owners offer education to their workers, in hope that it would mitigate the negative effects of their working conditions.5 Unfortunately, his suggestions were ignored and factory conditions remained abhorrent throughout the many waves of the Industrial Revolution.
Concluded.
Disclaimer: Pictures in these blogs are taken from free resources at Pexels, Pixabay, and Google. Credit is given where available. If a copyright claim is lodged, we shall remove the picture with appropriate regrets.
Reference:
