Due to the fact that the classical and human relation approaches ignored the impact of social relations and of formal structure respectively, the behavioral perspective fused these approaches and added propositions drawn from psychology, sociology, political science, and economics. Such an approach differs from other behavioral sciences in its subject matter; worker behavior in formal organizations. The pioneer of the behavioral approach to management was Chester Bernard (1938) who emphasized the need for a systematic approach and conceptual scheme of administrative behavior.

Herbert Simon (1947) extended the work Of Bernard to talk about exchange theory in organizations. He viewed organizations as exchanging system where people exchange what they have for what they want, he also saw administration as rational decision-making which constitutes an important function of the administrator. Max Weber (1910) integrated his idea of bureaucracy in his inclination towards the scientific movement. Following the social science movement, a lot of administrative theories were advanced among which are; 1.

The Theory of Organizational Behavior This theory of organizational behavior seeks to describe, understand and redirect human behavior In an environment of formal organization. A social system consists of individual who act together and share a mutual relationship in the same physical condition or environment in an attempt to achieve an established common goal. The dynamic interaction of people with varying personalities within an organizational set up (as in the school system) is a domain of social process theory.

Rainier (1998) in Insensate and Undue went further to buttress that people within an organization have definite roles to perform, and many factors that interact help to determine precisely what kind of performance each role will receive. Each individual must interpret his role and this interpretation depends to some extent on what the individual brings to the role (which includes the individuals personality). Role performance is also affected by the expectations of the Chief Executive of the organization and others who have some powers to control the situation.

Individuals function in an organization in order to fulfill the needs of the organization and their own personal needs. There is therefore a relationship between the fulfillment of both the monotheistic and the ideographic needs. Owens (1981 ) viewed behavioral act as a result of interactions of the social system. That is to say, social behavior results as the individual attempts to cope with an environment. Needs of an individual and expectation Of the institutions may both be thought Of as motives for organizational behavior.

It should be noted that as long as a state of equilibrium exists between the monotheistic and the ideographic needs, the relationship will be satisfactory, enduring and relatively productive. To the contrary, conflicts, discontentment, low productivity manifest themselves. Turnaround 1 988 summarily stated that the school teacher comes to the school environment with professional skills to promote the achievement of school goals (monotheistic) and in return he is compensated for the services rendered and he interacts with the different individual (ideographic) involved in the organization.

The individual worker shapes his personal behavior to meet the ascribed behavior of the organization. A school leader who can motivate his subjects to achieve the goal of the institution is seen to be satisfying both monotheistic and ideographic dimensions of the school system. One of the greatest challenges facing school administrators is how to effectively motivate teachers towards improved productivity. According to Insensate (1998), understanding the motivational basis of people in organization are based on understanding the nature of the needs that motivate the behavior of people in those organizations.

Motivation is therefore seen as an intervening variable between human needs and behavior as shown in figure II; Human need D Motivation 0 Behavior 2. The Theory of Human Management in Organization This was postulated by Douglas McGregor. This theory is also referred to as Theory X and Y and the theory tries to identify two sets of assumptions about the nature of people. The theorist argued that the approach or the way an administrator deals with his subordinate depends on his own perception on the subordinates. Administrative behavior that is typical of theory X is based on the following assumptions 1.

That the average human being has an inherent dislike of work and will avoid it if he can. 2. That because of this inherent dislike for work, most people must be forced, controlled, directed and even threatened to do the work. 3. The average human being prefers to be directed as he avoids responsibility, has little ambition and wants security. Administrator that is based on theory X will be characterized by no nonsense, tryingly directive leadership, tight control and very tight close supervision. Conversely, theory Y embraces some very different assumption of human beings; 1.

Work is as natural as play if it is satisfying. 2. People will exercise self direction and self control towards an organizational goal if they are committed to those objectives. 3. Commitment of objectives is a function of the rewards associated with the achievement. 4. The average human beings learn under proper conditions not only to accept but to seek responsibility. 5. The capacity to exercise a relatively high degree of imagination, ingenuity and creativity in the solution Of organizational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the population. 6.

Under the conditions of modern industrial life, the intellectual potentialities of the average human being are only partially utilized. Theory’ Y is optimistic, dynamic and flexible with an emphasis on direction and the integration of individual needs with organizational demand.