Classical Management Thought Paper Management theories can be largely categorized into two parts: Beginnings of modern management thought and contemporary organization and management thought. Beginnings of modern management thought can be categorized as classical theorist, human relations school, and early modernists (Chow, LRDS 302, Fall). Classical management theory based on Fayol and Urwick’s writings is “a set of [m]anagement [t]heories that focus on the increasing the efficiency of the organization as a whole” (Chow). On the other hand, human relations theory of Follett and Likert explains that “work is accomplished through people”, so cooperation, participation, satisfaction, and interpersonal skills are required (Chow). This paper will discuss 1) the similarities and the differences between these two broad theories, 2) relationship between Taylor’s scientific management and these two theories, 3) my ideas on these theories, and 4) my preference. First, classical management and human relations management have some differences and similarities. Classical management focuses on efficiency. Fayol who was a “father of modern management” categorized management as forecasting and planning which are predicting the future and making plans, organizing which is building up the material and human structure, commanding which is maintaining activities of workers, coordinating which is working together, and controlling which is ruling and instructing (discovering management). He made fourteen principles base on these five elements to improve efficiency. Workers are divided multiple levels to improve productivity and are expected to fulfill their tasks according to specific procedures designed to maximize productivity. However, the major limitation of this theory is that employees are treated as parts of machines without humanity (Chow). On the other hand, human