Comparing Management Approaches

Overview

Students examine how classical, behavioural and contingency approaches influence management decisions, organisational structures and leadership styles. They apply the approaches to a contemporary business scenario, building on prior understanding of management roles and organisational decision-making.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• explain the key features of classical, behavioural and contingency approaches
• distinguish between hierarchical, team-based and adaptable organisational structures
• compare autocratic and participative leadership styles
• apply management approaches to a changing business situation
• communicate a justified recommendation using business terminology

Success criteria

• I can accurately describe all three management approaches.
• I can link each approach to an organisational structure and leadership style.
• I can explain how changing circumstances may require a contingency response.
• I can recommend an approach and justify it with evidence from a case study.

Curriculum links

• Business management: management approaches, organisational structures and leadership styles.
• Business management: applying management theory to business situations and decision-making.
• Economic communication: communicating ideas and information in a form appropriate to purpose and audience.
• Government sector concepts: recognising that management decisions operate within wider organisational and economic environments.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Hook and retrieval. Open with the opening comparison and mystery business scenario showing a business facing falling sales, staff conflict and a sudden change in customer demand. Students individually answer: “Should one manager decide the response, should the team decide, or should the business adapt as events unfold?” They then compare responses with a partner. Informal assessment: listen for students who already connect leadership style, staff participation and changing circumstances; use responses to form balanced working groups.

2. 5–15 min · Explicit teaching. Use the three-approach teaching sequence to introduce:

• classical: management as planning, organising and controlling; hierarchical structure; autocratic leadership
• behavioural: management as leading, motivating and communicating; teams; participative or democratic leadership
• contingency: management decisions adapted to changing circumstances Students complete a three-column summary on the management approaches comparison worksheet. Pause after each approach for a brief “turn and explain” check. Differentiation: provide a partially completed table and a word bank for students needing literacy support; confident students add a strength and limitation for each approach.

3. 15–22 min · Check for understanding. Display the approach-matching questions in the rapid classification check. Students hold up or record C, B or T for short examples, such as “The supervisor makes every decision”, “Staff teams contribute to a new roster”, and “The business changes its strategy after a competitor enters the market.” Students justify one answer using the sentence frame: “This is ___ because ___.” Teacher response: reteach misconceptions immediately, particularly the difference between behavioural management and contingency management.

4. 22–40 min · Case study application. Organise students into five groups of five and distribute the business case study and analysis questions. Students act as a management advisory team for “Harbour Brew”, a growing café experiencing staff turnover, inconsistent service and a new competitor nearby. Groups identify which approach best addresses each problem, select an appropriate leadership style and explain whether the business should use one consistent approach or adapt its response. Roles are allocated as facilitator, reader, evidence finder, recorder and spokesperson. Students complete the comparison and recommendation sections independently before combining ideas. Differentiation: provide highlighted evidence and sentence starters for students requiring support; allow oral recording or dot-point responses where extended writing is a barrier. Students ready for greater challenge must evaluate a blended response and identify a possible drawback.

5. 40–52 min · Recommendations and peer critique. Each group presents a 60-second recommendation using the presentation success criteria. The audience records one strength and one question on the worksheet. Presenters must name the approach, identify the leadership style and use two case-study details as evidence. Informal assessment: use questioning to check whether students are explaining relationships rather than merely naming approaches. Note whether the supports are enabling independent reasoning; remove sentence starters for students who no longer need them.

6. 52–60 min · Individual assessment and exit ticket. Students complete the final response on the individual recommendation and reflection section: “Recommend the most suitable management approach for Harbour Brew. Explain how its structure and leadership style would address one current problem, and explain when a contingency response may still be needed.” Students finish with the exam command words reference mat available as a reference for “recommend” and “explain”. Teacher collects responses and asks students to self-rate confidence from 1–5. Use the quality of the explanation, evidence and terminology—not confidence alone—to identify students requiring consolidation or extension in the next lesson.

Resources

• the management approaches teaching deck
• the management approaches comparison worksheet
• the exam command words reference mat
• Whiteboard and markers
• Student devices or exercise books
• Timer
• Group role display or board instructions

Assessment

• Questioning, turn-and-explain responses and classification answers provide continuous checks of conceptual understanding.
• Group recommendations assess students’ ability to apply management approaches, structures and leadership styles to a realistic business context.
• The individual exit response assesses accurate terminology, evidence-based reasoning and communication for purpose and audience.
• Differentiation is monitored through comparison of supported and independent responses, teacher observation of participation, and confidence ratings. If students can name but not explain approaches, the next lesson begins with a worked paragraph; if they justify blended or adaptive responses, they receive a more complex case.

Differentiation

• Support: use the partially completed comparison table, concise definitions, vocabulary bank and sentence starters such as “The classical approach is suitable because…”. Pair students strategically and read the case study aloud where required.
• Literacy and EAL support: pre-teach hierarchical, autocratic, participative, motivate, adapt and contingency; use icons and colour-coded headings consistently across the slides and worksheet. Permit oral rehearsal before writing.
• Confidence and readiness: assign structured group roles, allow students to rehearse with a partner, and accept dot points before requiring a polished individual response. Teacher conferencing provides low-risk feedback before presentations.
• Extension: require students to evaluate the limitations of their chosen approach and recommend how a manager could combine behavioural and contingency strategies without losing accountability.
• These strategies reflect responsive scaffolding and gradual release: students first receive explicit modelling, then practise collaboratively, and finally demonstrate individual understanding. Ongoing questioning and work samples determine whether scaffolds are retained, reduced or increased.