Skip to content

CSEET · Business Laws and Management · Principles of Management and Modern Approaches

At Kaveri Textiles, the owner finds that output rose when a researcher showed interest in workers, even after lighting and rest breaks were changed in either direction. He concludes that attention, group belonging and social needs influenced productivity more than physical conditions. Which school of thought does this finding best support, and why is the classical view insufficient?

The finding supports the human relations approach. Like the Hawthorne studies, it shows that attention, group belonging and social needs drive productivity, which classical approaches focused on tasks, structure and pay had largely ignored. Physical conditions alone clearly did not explain the change in output.

  1. AScientific management, because physical conditions alone fix productivity
  2. BHuman relations approach, because classical thought ignored social and psychological factorsCorrect
  3. CBureaucratic approach, because rules and hierarchy drove the rise
  4. DContingency approach, because no single method suits every situation

Explanation

The observations mirror the Hawthorne experiments by Elton Mayo, which showed that social and psychological factors affect output. Classical approaches focused on structure, tasks and economic incentives. Scientific management is wrong because the output rose despite physical changes in either direction.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Principles of Management and Modern Approaches shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Principles of Management and Modern ApproachesFree diagnostic mock

More Principles of Management and Modern Approaches questions