Hawthorne Studies Experiments - Coursework Example

Despite their fame, the Hawthorne Studies experiments were too poorly designed to demonstrate anything but the need for careful controls in scientific research" Introduction: Change from routine or innovation in working atmosphere always bring enthusiasm, a new vigor and zest to life. Human beings always thrive for a new discovery which can revolutionize the entire world and provide a new paradigm to life and evolution. This revolution could be related with any part of life, medicine, environment, technology, agriculture or food. It is a rare phenomenon when any modernization in one field could bring revolution in almost every aspect. A highly motivated and enthusiastic person can bring significant rewards for the organization like a good and efficient captain can navigate the ship to its destination. Dejected and demotivated employees on the other hand make the working atmosphere ominous and gloomy. Employer or owner of any organization always aims at getting maximum profit. They work for stability and sustainability in the market. In order to capture and get a hold on the market they put efforts to maximize their production to the highest echelon. It is evident that in this competitive era, Charles Darwin’s theory of survival of fittest is applicable in every facet of life. It becomes imperative for the employer to maintain a congenial and co-operative working atmosphere in the organization and avoiding any kind of conflict between the employees. A friendly and affable environment is always progressive. Freedom to express and acceptance of innovative thoughts and implementation of novel work bring rewards in terms of enhanced productivity. Keeping this in focus and to foster maximum hold on market and gain maximum profit, research in all traits is going on. One such study, served as a pioneer in this attribute was conducted; it laid the paradigm for motivation of employees, to enhance production. The study encompasses a progression of experiments, performed on the workers at “Western Electric Hawthorne Works” in Chicago between 1927 and 1932 to enhance the productivity ("The Hawthorne Works" from Assembly Magazine). The Hawthorne Experiments: A. Illumination Experiment: Productivity or output was boosted by varying the illumination conditions. B. Relay Assembly Experiments (RATR): The main aim of these experiments was to get a methodology to enhance productivity. In relay assembly experiments a group of 6 women workers were selected and provided a separate room to assemble telephone relays. Out was calculated mechanically by counting the finished relays, went down to shaft. This continued for five years. The room was set well with a supervisor to provide guidance, suggestions and open discussions. Apart from these, other parameters incorporated were: a. Group was given importance and group production was considered to be significant, not the individual production. b. Relaxation in terms of 5-minute breaks was introduced; when the number of breaks was less, production increased drastically; but by increasing the number of breaks the output was diminished. c. Food, the source of energy was given during breaks. d. The schedule was decreased by 30 minutes; output showed a rise but further decrease in the working hours, there was a marked decline in overall output. The conditions were maintained when production hit the highest point. e. Supervisor was a constant source of motivation and guidance so the efficiency increased. The practice was helpful to get the feedback from the employees. Thus one-to-one correlation was established. C. Bank wiring room experiments: This is based on the raise in productivity when payments or incentives are given, but unfortunately no effect was observed. This was in contradiction with the Hawthorne effect which states that when special care and attention is given then productivity improves. The research was carried out between 1931 and 1932 by Mayo and W. Lloyd Warner. They took a group of 14 men involved in telephone switching equipment. The study concluded that although the incentives were given on the basis of individual productivity but no rise in the production was perceived. The study further says that the employees were scared of the reduction in base rate. These experiments are the hardships done by two eminent psychologists associated with research at Harvard University, Elton Mayo (e.g. 1933, 1945) and Fritz Roethlisberger (e.g. 1941). Their findings were based on the changing involvement and association between management and employees. Mayo laid emphasis on the effect of exhaustion and tedium and sorted out the ways to control them by adopting various parameters viz. breaks, reducing working hours and also motivation of employees. The recognition and initial success of Hawthorne experiments was due to the team and sense of responsibility and belongingness. Each member of the team acted as a unit and participated in the work enthusiastically. The experiments proved over the years that if pressure is removed and employees are given individualism to perform their tasks, the productivity goes up. The team members had a common understanding and freedom to express their potentials. Team was not bossed by anyone. The dedication for work came from within and this was the most crucial and imperative part for the success of the Hawthorne Experiments. (Human Relations Contributors) These experiments have given birth to the “Hawthorne Effects” and “human relations movements” in industrial world. A spark of revolution was ignited in the fields of organizational behavior, ergonomics and industrial and organizational psychology and Hawthorne Studies came in existence (Bramel, D and Friend, R). Despite initial accomplishments Hawthorne Studies on social influences in the workplace have weathered decades of scholarly attack. Numerous critics and interpretations were made for Hawthorne experiments they are: 1. Experiments give the direction and not the reason. It is due to the theoretical motivation and effect of the participants’ awareness that they are being studied. 2. It is always true that people respond to any alteration in the working environment or schedule or incentives or recognition in a positive manner. Thus, it holds the conditions true even without experiments. 3. It is evident that variables mentioned in the experiments could not be the only reason that brought changes in the productivity. 4. In 1955, Landsberger reconstrued the experimental outcome and called this study as “Hawthorne effect” and stated that attention and warm regards does not put much emphasis on the enhanced productivity. 5. Marxist had a belief that capitalist dealings for enhanced production are manipulative and create confrontation and self-organization among workers (Bramel, D and Friend, R). 6. Mayo’s group members were charged of be deficient in practicality about unions and human relations and hence Mayo’s glamour had gone astray in 1950s and 1960s. 7. Bramel, D and Friend, R, brought a notion that “Hawthorne Experiments” were biased, “human relations” that worked at “Hawthorne” were made by befooling employees. 8. Illumination experiment does not gain any scientific basis and could not acquire methodical and logical associations between the variables. Bramel, D and Friend, R have given various evidence where the workers developed resistance in “Hawthorne Experiments” and workers failed to provide their wholehearted co-operation as per the expectations of the investigators, this resulted in the low output and gross insubordination. Mayo presented the story in a different manner stating that the workers were allowed to “drop out” and were “permitted to withdraw”. A study by Bramel and Friend reveals that Mayo and Roethlisberger suppressed fundamental opposition by employees and concealed these facts with the management. There were many drop outs that are not stated. It is apparent that conflict between employees and management is because of something other than vital aggression of wellbeing and production but due to medical situations that produces “fearful preoccupations” Workers distrust and aggression was also found in the Mica splitting room experiment (the Bank wire room experiment). It was very hard on the researchers part to volunteers. Numerous literature are available depicting trust on the “Hawthorne Experiments” or “Hawthorne Effects” by saying that it prevents 1. Delinquency in workers: the combination of goals and feedback produced “Hawthorne Effect”. By adopting the experimental results in schools the goals of the students can be accomplished. 2. Correctional Workers: according to the National Research Council Report (Sechrest, White and Brown, 1979) which is based on the effectiveness of the rehabilitation program for offenders, only few depictions were available favoring the Hawthorne effect. All these studies hold well under various set of defined conditions. It is imperative to know that the same set of conditions cannot hold true in every situation. There is certain level of discrepancies and conflicts in almost every organization as conflicts are the inevitable part of life and true for organizations also. Conclusion: The “Hawthorne Studies” and “Hawthorne Experiments” were conducted in 1920s and early 1930s. The technology has changed in leaps and bounces in every aspect of life. It is almost 80 years now when the experiment was conducted. The awareness of employees is far ahead to restrict them to the experimental conditions. With the advent of industrial revolution and globalization information is transmitted within seconds to any part of the world. Today we are living in chip age where nanotechnology is capturing the brains of people. Every study is carried out with logic and reasoning and we cannot implement age-old established facts in the present scenario. Science has taken the world in an entirely different location where accessibility to things is much faster and easier. People are facing cut-throat completion. Employers themselves are struggling to establish themselves in the market. Innovative thoughts are not always given a warm welcome, people are not maintain congenial relation they are becoming highly professional, under these circumstances it is very difficult to make people work under one set of conditions. Congenial, co-operative and friendly atmosphere is mainstay of the organization but it the worker is maintaining only this and not providing results then situation turns unfavorable for him. In the present circumstances professional rivalry is creeping and haste to prove oneself is becoming the chief outcome of every organization. Market is facing recession phase, it is evident that under these circumstances employer are not able to provide even incentives to deserving candidates. A decade back when there was a boom of software now it has taken a different turn; people are being fired from their jobs by their employers, where can we think of maintaining a good employer-employee relationship. Thus, despite the fact that “Hawthorne Experiments” gained fame and popularity the “Hawthorne Studies” were too poorly designed to demonstrate anything in the today’s world. It shows various lacunae and is not acceptable by the human beings of this epoch. Research studies have taken a steep rise and what we are getting today is resultant of the research performed over the years. If we think of motivating the people with incentives only then also the aggression is there, the recession in the market is clear to everyone. The employees now-a-days are very aware of each and every fact of the company, they very well know the position of their organization in the market and also the level of production, inventory and stock. The technology has grown so fast over the years, when experiments were performed, now everything is available on the internet and it has the accessibility from any corner of the world. The wired system cannot be implemented as well, they were not acceptable in those days and now they are equally unfit. People are learned and think logically, they confirm the facts from the experts, before joining any organization they enquire everything about the organization and they have little will to be experimental models. The “Hawthorne Experiments” are performed with the female employees who are not rigid in temperament and are much honest and work oriented but had the study been performed with the male employees then such results could never have been achieved. Thus the experiments contain lots of loops and holes to accept the fact that they hold true even in the present conditions. Under the situation of change and motivation employees are now send for trainings. It is important for the organization and also for the employees; they get to learn new techniques and can implement them in a better ways for the welfare of the organization. The employees are filled with enthusiasm and vigor which itself is encouraging from the point of view of employees. Various meetings and workshops are conducted by the organizations which help the employees in their appraisal and learning. It is becoming mandatory for the employees to attend them for their inspirational motifs. Meetings, seminars and workshop motivate the employees to work as a team and this induces the team spirit in them. It is not fake to say that dedication in the employees comes from within and no organization can induce this in the employee. The friendly and congenial atmosphere plays a crucial role to inculcate this spirit. Human nature varies throughout the world. In the field of research procuring results is a slow but steady process; it requires patience and thorough knowledge. People joining the field of research are only handful as it demands endurance, tolerance and persistence. Failures out number success. It is therefore, we cannot correlate the field of science and research with the “Hawthorne Experiments” as there is nothing in terms of production it is the patience and endurance that pays. Not all the scientists gain success in their field it demands not only intelligence but also the great presence of mind to put things at the right place and at the right time. Lot of preparations are essential to carry out one experiment. Thus as far as “Hawthorne” system is concerned it could be true under some set of conditions but cannot be implemented under all circumstances. Keeping this view the policy makers of the organizations especially medical have implemented the experimental results but not with much success. For small organization it is possible for the supervisors to have one-to-one relations as in the past but not in the present situation where we are in the era of globalization and organizations are running globally. Total word count 2319 References: 1. Gillespie, Richard (1991) Manufacturing knowledge : a history of the Hawthorne experiments (Cambridge : Cambridge University Press) 2. Franke, RH, The Hawthorne Experiments: Re-View", 1979 ,American Sociological Review, Volume. 44, Issue 5 (Oct.1979), pp. 861-867. 3. Franke, RH and Kaul, JD. "The Hawthorne Experiments: First Statistical Interpretation" 1978, American Sociological Review, Volume. 43, Issue 5 ( Oct. , 1978), pp. 623-643. 4. Friend, R, Bramel, D "Hawthorne the myth of the docile Worker, Class Bias in Psychology", American Psychologist, Volume 36, Issue 8, pp. 867-878. 5. "The Hawthorne Works" from Assembly Magazine 6. Human relations contributions http://accel-team.com/motivation/hawthorne_02.html 7. Landsberger, Henry A. (1958) Hawthorne Revisited, (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University) 8 Sonnenfeld, JA, "Shedding Light on the Hawthorne Studies" 1985, Journal of Occupational Behavior. Volume 6, Issue. 2, pp. 111-130. 9. Stephen R. G. Jones Was There a Hawthorne Effect?, The American Journal of Sociology. 98(3) (Nov., 1992), pp. 451-468, from the abstract "the main conclusion is that these data show slender to no evidence of the Hawthorne Effect" 10. http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Hawthorne+studies Read More