The Concept of Taylorism - Essay Example

Name Tutor Course Date Taylorism Introduction Scientific management also Taylorism is a technique that suggests that effectiveness and efficiency in production is achievable by breaking down each action, work and tasks into smaller and simpler divisions which can be assessed and taught to employees as highlighted by (Taylor, 1911). Scientific management gained prominence in the 1800s following attempts to apply science to organizing work processes and management in the manufacturing industry. The concept was founded by Fredrick Winslow Taylor and was meant to evaluate flow of labor, synthesis the same and to promote productivity of the workforce. According to (Taylor, 1911), effectiveness and efficiency in productivity and performance among the labor forces can be achieved by improving their morale through motivation and instilling accountability among workers by the management. Scientific management intended to obtain maximum job segmentation to reduce skill requirements and the time used learning a job, it separated work planning from how work is executed, it distinguished direct from indirect labor and more significantly it replaced the rule of thumb of using productivity estimates to utilization of precise measurements (Lawrence, 2010). Despite many criticisms and a wealth of newer theories on the topic of managing people, Taylorism also referred to as Scientific Management is alive and well in 21st century management practice. This informs the basis of this report which seeks to analyze the existence of Taylorism in modern world. Taylorism in the 21st century Taylorism developed the aspect of time and motion with the view of optimizing performance of work, cutting costs and designing a work station and advanced the notion of tying payment to result in determining the wage of a worker. In Taylorism, there is only one best way of doing a task or job and the management is responsible in establishing the organization’s one best way and rules which will ensure that the one best way performs always (Taylor, 1911). Although Taylorism ensured increased productivity as witnessed in the USA, many sought to reject it out rightly owing to the monotony in work and the lack of core work dimensions of variety of skills, task identification, task significance, autonomy of workers and feedback on performance and more focus on output than on the employee as supported by (Peci, 2009). Be it as it may, present fascination for efficient work processes among managers has seen scientific management thrive in the 21st century. Since the 1900s, scientific management has not yet died off but instead, it has continually advanced although in a different form and it has entered into new industries. To identify the application of Taylorism in modern world, one need to check out for certain patterns and routines in modern work processes that are similar or align perfectly to the principles of scientific management. The principles of scientific management include development of science for each part of tasks where the rules of thumbs are eliminated, scientific selection, training and development of employees, the mutual relationship and harmony between the employee and the management, division of labor and development of suitable working environment to enhance productivity and ensure maximum efficiency of workers as noted by (Taylor, 2008). A real world example is the application of scientific management in fast food industry which has resulted in the concept of McDonaldization associated with the work processes, management approach and operational efficiency exercised in the global fast food restaurant, McDonalds (Ritzer, 2010). Just as proposed by scientific management where the best way should be applied by all employees in order to make the process standard throughout, McDonalds has identified the one best way of preparing its wide menu, of cleaning, of promoting employees and of lock up during closing which has ensured that its menu and services are standard in whatever location of the world McDonalds is being served as highlighted by (Ritzer, 2010). This has helped propel the restaurant to be the global leader in the fast food industry. Taylorism advocates for breakdown of tasks into smaller segments where the management specifies what needs to be done and how it should be done at the precise time permitted for doing it which McDonalds has adopted effectively where cooks have exact cooking times for all food products and there are temperature settings for all machineries as indicated by Ritzer, (2000, p.38). According to the author, operators are told to cut their French flies nine-thirty seconds thick while those working on the grill are supposed to lay the hamburgers down moving from left to right, making six rows of six pies each. The main goal advanced by Taylor was developing the best man for the job and thus the division of labor where every worker was specialized in what they did which is evidenced at McDonalds, in which the way a hamburger is prepared can be considered division of labor where a task is divided into small parts (Ritzer, 2010). The success of McDonalds globally indicate that scientific management is still successful and acceptable in the 21st century and probably if McDonalds did not apply this philosophy of segmenting tasks, specializing in tasks among employees and eliminating unproductive motions, it could not dominate the fast food market. Be it as it may, the application of scientific management in modern world generates new challenges. (Ritzer, 2010) notes that labor forces who have more skills and knowledge are limited to work which is highly simplified, which means their skills and knowledge are not exploited fully hence their potential is not fully exploited. In addition, employees are denied the opportunity to show their skills which limits their ability and freedom to grow both personally and professionally. The repetitiveness of tasks which characterize tasks designed based on scientific management is both monotonous and boring which do not motivate employees to offer their best or better become more innovative and creative as echoed by (Parker, 2002). An important note to mention is that although scientific management was mostly applied in the manufacturing industry in the 1800s, presently, it is much evident in modern service industries such as supermarkets, call centers and banks. In supermarkets, the principle of deskilling is evident where there are different workers carrying out different tasks such as stacking shelves, scanning products, handling inquiries and packing the products. Supermarkets have tendencies of assigning cashier roles to employees with proficiency in service delivery and computing who are able to cash in as many products as possible within the shortest time possible hence serving greater number of customers (Bain, et al., 2002). These cashiers are usually trained in customer service and in product offerings where they not only work at the till but also, offer additional services such pitching for the organization’s products such as smart cards among other services. In banks, bank tellers are now taught on various ways of carrying out tasks especially in serving the highest number of customers within an assigned time limit while offering additional services such as pitching for banking products during the few minutes interaction with the customer, using certain greetings for customers and in other cases selecting for the customers what measure they can obtain their cash withdrawals. There are banks that instruct bank tellers to ask customers if they would want the limits to their credit cards increased while others eliminate asking customers for second signature for cash withdrawals all with the view of eliminating wasteful motions and saving on time hence greater worker efficiency. Among such banks is the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. The cuttings on unnecessary motions, firing unproductive employees and delivering standard products are elements suggested by scientific management. In relation to call centers, personnel within this establishment are not only supervised to ensure they adhere to the established best way of the call center such as language use but also supervised to establish their effectiveness in service delivery (Bain, et al., 2002). This is evidenced by the recording of conversations between personnel at the call center and customers which aligns to replacement of the rule of thumbs in scientific management (Bain, et al., 2002). According to the author, the use of piece rate system used in majority of call centers are used to motivate employees is based on the aspect of tying payment to result as proposed by scientific management. According to Taylor, the method of payment he proposed was where output was equal to input and therefore an employee obtains a higher return if they offer more and produce more (Taylor, 1911). In case of call centers, the employees are offered a basic salary and are supposed to obtain their extra money from commissions accrued from every sale they make and further increased by the employee’s ability to meet daily, weekly, monthly and annual sale targets. Those who are able to meet these targets are able to receive special incentives such as job promotions and financial bonuses. This primarily is the direct application of the payment technique suggested by Taylor and it is functioning effectively in the 21st century. Scientific management was primarily applied in manufacturing of vehicles in the 19th century which is still applicable in car manufacturing in modern times despite the advancement in technology. Car producing companies such as Toyota is using robots to produce their products and as an alternative to one piece of machinery, it has used an assembly line where every step is segmented (Cowley, et al., 2010). As earlier indicated, although scientific management has produced success and effectiveness in service and quality delivery in modern society, it contains elements that make it impractical in the 21st century as indicated by (Cowley, et al., 2010). Modern organizations need to be flexible to changes in order to effectively meet the changing needs, expectations and preferences of the modern consumer and efficiently counter competition (Parker, 2002). Nevertheless, applying scientific management can lead to workers becoming specialized in one area and getting used to it which may generate stagnation in growth as they will more likely resist change and therefore are inefficient in meeting the rising demand for change from the external environment. Modern businesses are reluctant in applying the basic concepts of scientific management saved for few organizations, owing to the challenge of lack of employee motivation. In modern society and business world, the human resources are the most valuable and reliable resource to an organization and obtaining their loyalty, commitment and accountability required to achieve organizational goals and strategic objectives requires constantly motivating them (Parker, 2002). From research on what motivates employees, it is clear that money is not the only motivation for workers which makes Taylor’s concept of motivation inapplicable since it does not address the element of social status and the sense of achievement, which easily motivate them (Lawrence, 2010). According to (Pardeep, 2010), motivational theories such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Herzberg theory, motivating an employee requires meeting not only their physiological needs but also their intrinsic and social needs which contradicts Taylor’s view that an employee’s focus is always financial. Deskilling which is suggested by scientific management heavily de-motivate workers which may prove costly for organizations (Ritzer, 2010). Although Taylorism ensures job specialization among workers, which makes carrying out tasks relatively easy, it fails to address the important aspect of a task which is job satisfaction derived by employees from it. Application of scientific management in the 21st century is easier said than done considering that modern human resources are more aware of their rights to develop as individuals. Modern employees are more productive in an organization where they feel valued and are presented with opportunities to enhance their knowledge and skills and are allowed to apply them. This is impossible to do under Taylorism, which ignores the skills of employees and are instead are subjected to simplified and repetitive job that devalues their skills and eventually their output as supported by (Lawrence, 2010). Conclusion Scientific management which is also known as Taylorism is a philosophy that was founded and applied in the 1800s and was founded on the principles of splitting tasks into smaller units, division of labor, scientifically selecting training and developing of employees, the mutual relationship and harmony between the employee and the management and development of suitable working environment to enhance productivity and ensure maximum efficiency of workers. Despite outright rejection of Taylorism in modern world, the concept has successfully been applied in varied organizations in both service and manufacturing industries. However, the concept does not easily align to modern needs for flexibility to accommodate changes and more importantly, it fails to address the motivational needs of the human resource, which are considered the most reliable and valuable resource to an organization. Modern organizations that fail to be flexible to changes and those that ignore the motivational needs of its employees are doomed to fail making Taylorism, inapplicable in modern times saved for a few cases. Works Cited Bain, P., Watson, A., Mulvey, G., Taylor, P. and Gall, G. 2002. Taylorism, targets and the pursuit of quantity and quality by call centre management. New Technology, Work and Employment, 17:170-185.doi: 10.1111/1468-005X.00103 Cowley, M., Tope, D., Chamberlain, L.J., &Hodson, R. 2010. Neo-Taylorism at work: occupational change in the post-Fordist era. Social Problems, Vol 57, No.3, pp 421-447 Lawrence, P. R. 2010. The key job design problem is still Taylorism. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31: 412–421. Doi: 10.1002/job.638 Pardeep, S. 2010. Administrative theory. New Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Parker, M. 2002. Against Management: organization in the age of managerialism. Cambridge: Polity. Peci, A. 2009. Taylorism in the Socialism that Really Existed. Organization, vol. 16 no. 2289-301, doi: 10.1177/1350508408100479 Ritzer, G. 2010. The McDonaldisation of Society, 6th Edition. London: Sage. Taylor, F.W. 2008. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Digireads.com Publishing. Taylor, F. W. 1911. Scientific Management. New York: Harper and Row. Read More