A thesis submitted to mba program of azerbaijan state oil and industry university by adila bahmani

CHAPTER I. METHODOLOGİCAL BASİC PRİNCİPLES OF MANAGEMENT İN NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANİZATİON

1.1. Theoretical bases of management structure in non-governmental organizations

Paradigm - The basic meaning is explained as a universally accepted scientific achievement that provides a model for a certain period within the science (Biggs, S. and Neame, A.; 1995).

According to Kuhna, the paradigm is the first example of the idea that is ready to be accepted. Long experience and evidence. In other words, it is a reflection of an opinion as a general acceptance of an idea (which is generally accepted), which provides the answers to many questions. In this explanation, the paradigm is the experience of presenting a phenomenon in scientific work or by explaining it in advance with the phenomenon.

Herodotus, Plato, Aristotle have used the term before Thomas Samuel Juhn. However, Kuhn gained a sense of what we know and his undisputed position in the field of science. The meaning of the term is a broad thinking environment. In his book, The Poetry of Scientific Conversions, it has been used in 21 different meanings. It basically means a dominant model for a certain period in science. Any theory that has to be paradigm must bring such a novelty that if both competitors have to be amazed and surprised, let them go beyond the period and open the door to future thoughts. When ordinary paradigm issues cannot be answered after a certain period, there is a crisis and will begin to look for innovations that relate to the paradigm shift. In this sense, Kuhn said that the development of scientific information had revolutionized innovations in science. When a certain dominant paradigm begins to lose its credibility, it does not give rise to a new paradigm, but rather begins to stage periods that are revolutionary. Paradigm shifts cause greater displacement than before. The reliability of a certain paradigm at a given time is related to the general acceptance of the paradigm mentioned (Biggs, S. and Neame, A.; 1995).

So, theories and paradigm concepts differ according to their nature and content. The principles that describe a few cases in the form of a theoretical system are a set of laws (in the Turkish vocabulary dictionary). Systematic, self-confident meetings organized in a form that involves nature, society and humanity, or some sections of these areas, are marked as a set of laws and methods. The paradigm reflects the integrity of beliefs, values, and methods shared by members of a particular scientific community. Here, the scientific community is understood as the unity of scientists who have the same results as the results of accepted (definite) results, which have the same education, the same education as the one who looks at the established positions. The main difference between the theory and the paradigm is that the theory is more objective and appears as a product of a common thought system, not a union of scientists. Since the 1960s, the word paradigm has been expressed as a basis for any form of intellectual or epistemological thought. In 1900, the term Meriam-Webster was used to describe parables or stories in technical use or rhetoric, but also to describe the model or theoretically. Being new and original to the idea of ​​the idea as a Paradigm, the novelty should be in a form that can be a source for future studies. The theory cannot solve everything, ignores unanswered questions, and when these problems arise, "search for new solutions" begins. As a result, the search for an extraordinary paradigm begins. In order for a theory to be a paradigm, it must bring a novelty that surprises both competitors (admired), admire, and open their doors to ideas and views beyond their own time. On the other hand, the hypothesis is that, as we have already noted, it is a thought-proven and thought-provoking idea in the scientific management process to link things between events and to coordinate their outcome. Hypotheses are based primarily on past observations and the findings from scientific theories.

We need to explore the historical development of management thinking for understanding the concepts of modern management. Many of today's managerial practices are based on managing processes. Understanding the development of administrative thinking is crucial to determining where we are in the past, where we are now, and where we want to achieve in the future.

 Human beings alone cannot achieve much. They have to live with others to achieve and meet their needs. Although goals are social, political, educational, or economic, they need to be together and group-oriented. Therefore, it is inevitable that the work is inevitable. Group efforts require effective cooperation and coordination. In this sense, leadership is extending to the old as the history of human cooperation. In this case, the manuscripts about leadership are thought to be ancient until the early years of human history. Management as a separate science is a product of the last century. It can be regarded as the beginning of the administration of Ura and Babbage in the 1830s (Billis, D.; 1993).

Simultaneously with the concept of Scientific Management, based on individual and business compliance, the Administrative Management School is the Classical Organization Theory. The purpose of this school is to offer an effective organization structure. Administrative Management School is broader and more comprehensive than the School of Science because it involves research related to the application of scientific management principles to the top managers of the organization. F. W. Taylor, H. Fayt, Urwick, Gulick and Mooney are representatives of this school.

Taylor's Management consists of 4 main Principles (Carroll, T. F.; 1992):

• 
  Scientific Analysis of the Work: By monitoring, gathering information and carefully observing, the management determines the "best way" to accomplish every task.
  
• 
  Worker Selection: After a scientific study, the employee is selected, taught and developed.
  
• 
  Managers' joint activity: Managers should cooperate with employees to ensure that all jobs are functional in accordance with established scientific principles.
  
• 
  Functional Control: When managers deal with planning, organizing and decision-making activities, employees should only perform the work of managers.
  

The purpose of these principles is to increase the productivity of employees (staff).

Although Taylor wanted to propose that he would be the head of the appointed master, it would not affect the hierarchy, but the managers did not admit that decision.

Taylorism has tried to answer two questions:

• 
  How can productivity (efficiency) be increased?
  
• 
  How can you encourage businessmen?
  

Taylor's employees were thinking of stimulating the growth of salaries and rewards. This is called "promotional payment system".

The disadvantages of Taylor’s Scientific Management Theory are below:

• 
  Taylor did not take into account the needs of the employees, taking into consideration the "time and action" of the case.
  
• 
  Taylor looked at the work as a mechanic and looked like a machine. High profits and benefits are considered to be the size of good management. It has reduced the motivation of the farmers (social and psychological factors are ignored).
  
• 
  It was analyzed as an isolated entity around Individuals.
  
• 
  If it is suitable for the manager, the worker has been deemed appropriate. It was thought that a high yield would generate profit, which would lead to higher wages. Human beings seem to be working for fear of starvation and working for profit (the simplest thing is that the workers were deceived by money).
  
• 
  It does not mean that there is a conflict between managing and managing such a management approach (it does not seem to lead to a long-term "feeling of resilience").
  

When analyzing the theory of management, known as Taylor's "Scientific Management," it is mainly based on human resources (Carroll, T. F.;1992):

• 
  The division of labour and specialization is essential in the organization.
  
• 
  Employee selection has been given importance.
  
• 
  Education has been given great importance.
  
• 
  The scope of responsibility and responsibility should be determined in advance and the workers should operate in this context.
  
• 
  Needs hierarchical organization for discipline in the organization.
  

It should be noted that in the philosophy of Taylorism after the system and equipment were provided to the organization, it was thought that man would act in the intended direction.

Part of Taylor's Scientific Managerial Principles, which is now a part of its history, is remarkable. Some of Taylor's approaches and principles have already lost their relevance. Taylor's particular approach to personalization and, thus, effectiveness, has been severely criticized. Instead, the importance of teamwork is being discussed in management. It is also criticized that the organization's relationship with the Department is strictly limited and that each unit is specialized in its own business.

In the following years, due to innovations brought by many theorists; has contributed to the management and organization's understanding of the establishment and use of authority, management activities, management principles, and focus on organizational structure goals and objectives. Ulgen (1989, pp. 19-20) has identified that the most important innovation that this approach has on the development of organizational and management thinking is to show that individual principles and laws of management are a separate, observable and scientifically investigated process.

Henry Fayol is undoubtedly Europe's most felt in the field of management theory. He emphasized that Fayol management system is thought and learned. He opened the door of the management school and clarified the work of the people at the top management level. Even though Fayol was preparing to publish his thoughts on the general theory of theories in 1914, it was published in a magazine in 1916, for the war began. It was published in 1925 as a book. The delay in publishing was a big misfortune for Fayol, and his thoughts led to the shadow of Taylor's thoughts published simultaneously. While Taylor talked about the organization's top line managers 'planning, organization, and direction, Fayol approached the issue with top-line managers' approach. She has been interested in organizing and planning predictions, developing organizational and control systems, and coordinating initiatives at every level. Time was the basis of Fyodor's research and his theories succeeded in both industry and other areas.

Urwick analyzed the functions that shaped the management process from the relationship between the cause and the result. So, he analyzed the cause-and-effect relationships of the management functions and explained the eight relationships that were created by the chain of contacts he identified. The principles of Urwick's management are as follows (Dichter, T. W.; 1989):

1. Labour division and the principle of specialization

2. The principle of a common goal

3. Principle of competence and responsibility

4. The principle of dicharism

5. Principle of a management area

6. Principle of privatization

7. Principle of coordination

8. Explanation, description principle

According to Urwick, clear explanation of the authority and responsibility from top managers to the sub-manager within the organization is essential. It should be taken into consideration that the competence and responsibility are consistent with each other. Empowerment and responsibility should be communicated to each other in clearly defined positions. Urwick also noted that the inspection area (the number of employees to which the general manager could direct and control) had not been more than five in the field of audit and that in the case of compulsory circumstances, there were at least six. According to Urwick, the manager has to examine not only the business but also the relationships between individuals. Therefore, as the number of individuals in the field of control increases, it will be difficult to examine them.

He has always taken into account the number of people reporting directly to the manager in the field of control. Well, it's important to have a couple. Because managing a lot of human beings is financially beneficial, but it is important for a small person to have good communication and control. When this topic, which was examined in the 1920s, appeared in some scientific debate, managers shared their experiences in real life. Indeed, in the 1922s, General Electric's owner pointed out that there were 8 to 9 people reporting to it, and that it was 4-5 people. In 1933, Graicunas, the Lithuanian genius, made a fraudulent formula for the number of low-line managers reporting to senior managers.