Analysis of the Theoretical Concepts of Scientific Management - Assignment Example

2.1. Introduction This chapter of the dissertation analyses the theoretical concepts related to the topic of Scientific Management. The chapter summarises how the concept of Scientific Management emerged in the history and how important the concept is even in today’s world. This chapter analyses the positive as well as the negative aspects of the theory and then the implications of the theory. 2.2. Introduction to Scientific Management At the time of the ending of the 19th century and the dawn of the 20th century, most of the thoughts of management practitioner were devoted to the improvement of the efficiency of workers who were part of the Industrial Revolution. Scientific Management came to be known after the work of Frederick Winslow Taylor (1911), an engineer by profession. In his book The Principles of Scientific Management, he proposed the fundamental model along which assembly-lines of large-scale manufacturing factories should be made. His model focuses on the standardization of work through emphasis on division of labour, time, motion studies, work measurement and piece-rate wages (Drury, 1915). Scientific management, or Taylorism, is a management theory aimed streamlining workflow. The fundamental objectives of this theory were to harness the true potential of economic efficiency and labour productivity. 2.3. Assumptions and Principles of the Theory Since early 1700s people have been working on formal management principles, but the most significant development in this endeavour came with the work of Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856 – 1915). He along with his associates merged the fields of science and business (work). They set out with observing workers productivity in work setting. Taylor believed in the optimization of work rather than forcing people to work harder or extra. In his book he proposed the simplification of work in order to enhance or improve workers’ productivity. He proposed a closer association between managers and employees whereas earlier this was least of anyone’s concerns. Managers used to keep a wide distance between their workers and themselves. Due to lack of standardized work, workers found no real motivation towards their work (Head, 2005). Above all, job security in all cases also added to the workers disengagement from work. Consequently, in order to raise the bar of motivation Taylor proposed the linking of pay with performance. He considered money as a primary motivator and used it to raise the level of productivity. He proposed paying workers in accordance with the number of units they produced (Hartness, 1912). He designed experimental workplaces to understand the efficiency and optimal performance levels. He experimented to come up with a shovel design that would allow workers to shovel for long hours. He made an efficient model to lay bricks based on motion. He was of the opinion that by calculating the time for all the activities involved in a task, one can come up with the most efficient way to complete a task. Some time and motion studies revealed that some people can work more quickly than their counterparts, thus, leading to conclusion that this cohort of workers should be hired by employers. Hence, in this manner he proposed selective hiring practices. Through his various experiments he developed four principles of scientific management, which are as follows: 1. Put method is place for doing a type of work. Rather than rule of thumb, a systematic way of going about with work should be developed. This method should contain procedures for carrying out the work in the most efficient manner. 2. Jobs should be matched with workers capabilities and motivational level. Training should be given to enhance work efficiency. 3. Workers should be supervised, monitored and instructed, to perform their job in the most efficient manner. 4. Work should be distributed between managers and workers. The prior category should be made responsible for planning while the later should be made to do their task in the most efficient manner (Drury, 1915). 2.4. Negative Aspects of the Theory This theory, proposed by Taylor, deals with one right way of getting the job done, meaning work standardization. Therefore, it is against the latest management theories like Management by Objective (MBO), Continuous Improvement initiative, Business Process Reengineering, etc. (Dawson, 2005). These earlier mentioned theories entail setting goals through mutual consensus between manager and worker giving feed back to workers allowing them to participate in decision making and making them responsible for their own work. Thus, these theories effectively pass the decision making down the chain of command to people who would be directly engaged with the task (Aitken, 1985). By giving autonomy to workers to take decision regarding their own work makes them to engage in their work and look for continuous improvement. These theories also relate to the dynamic environment faced by workers and by giving them autonomy they remain motivated. Taylorism stands in opposition to the current practice of team work which tends to take a 360 degree view of the task, whereas the above mentioned theory divides task into activities and assigns a specialized person to each activity. Thus, Taylorism is not in favour of providing a motivating and satisfying work environment. Also Taylor’s theory separates the analytical and logical work, mostly for manager, from physical work, going to the workers. This form management, as suggested by Taylor, leads to the dehumanizing of the factories. This has an assumption that considers men as machines. 2.5. Additional Features of the Theory Taylor was of the opinion that there was an urgent need for management commitment, workers’ education and implementation of working procedures (Beissinger, 1988). He wanted a complete revolution in the attitudes, habits, and work commitment of all those engaged in the work, weather he be a manger or a worker. Taylor considered that only one method existed for a job that would lead to optimal efficiency and productivity. And in order to find this one method, it is of utmost importance to apply scientific methods and procedures to study and analyze a job. Thus, resulting in a switch from simple rule of thumb to scientific ways of looking at work altogether (Nelson, 1974). Scientific management requires a careful analysis and investigation of the work in hand. All the possible ways by which work can be done should be analyzed and studied through time and motion and the speed with which each method accomplishes the task should be registered. Than all the prime features of the methods of doing the work should be amalgamated to form a single unified strict standard of doing work. This should enable workers to do their jobs faster, with ease and comfort (Jones, 2000). At the time when this theory was proposed, the world was engaged in a war. The factories were comprised mostly of immigrants who were not proficient in English and were not well educated. Thus, Taylor, understanding the difficulty of planning work, realized that it was impossible for these immigrants and less qualified workers to take control of their jobs. Therefore, Taylor suggested the separation of planning from execution. He created a planning department having qualified engineers in it who were made responsible to plan how the work under consideration was going to be done. He wanted his managers to work on the following parameters: Develop and implement scientific methodology of working Develop compensation system based on goal accomplishment Establish a system of reward Give training to workers in the methods of doing work and how to employ the most efficient method to accomplish their work goal (Kanigel, 1997). One concept that emerged out of Taylors theory was task allocation. This concept deals with breaking down of task into smaller units and this procedure produces the most efficient way of doing the job at hand. This reductionist approach became the main criticism for Taylor’s theory as it was felt that this lead to the dehumanizing of work. The proposition of this theory not only specifies what has to be done, but what actually should be done in a certain period of time. This proposal created an environment that put a full stop on workers’ thinking and the urge to excel or achieve new standards in one’s work. Monotony in one’s work was traded off for improved productivity and efficiency of the industry. Job dimension like the following found no use for them in this form of scientific management: Skill Variety: a job making use of multiple skills of the worker in order to be completed. Task Identity: deals with doing a complete (from beginning to end) a definite and identifiable piece of work. Task Significance: the importance carried by an identifiable piece of work for an organization. Autonomy: the freedom with which an individual is allowed to design his working procedures Feedback: the practice of communicating the performance of a worker, with regards to his job (Mullins, 2004). 2.6. Implications of the Theory When analyzing scientific management in more detail, one finds out that it is callous to the inherent individual differences. For instance, the most efficient way of doing a work might not be the same for two workers. It also ignores the fact that the interest of workers and management cannot be the same. Workers would in all cases would resent the training and procedures of doing work and, therefore, will try to interrupt the process. Both these problems are ignored by managers who are mostly interested in improved productivity. Taylor was of the opinion that for his theory to work it needed to provide some incentive for the workers as well. So the management by equipping the workers with the most productive way of doing work should also give them an opportunity to earn more by tying their wage with the number of units they were able to produce. Although, Taylor did not considered workers as machines, but his theory ignores workers’ feelings of isolation, interpersonal difficulties and, most importantly, their needs. The emphasis on higher productivity did not allowed workers to take some time off and relax. Thus, workers started to get annoyed with the working environment and felt less satisfied. Such an environment provided a fertile ground for the development of workers unions (Beissinger, 1988). The rise of the Labour Union and the resulting problems to the owners is also providing a fertile ground for automation. This concept is also being provided the impetus by the development of automation technologies, computers and the Internet. This shift to machines was one of the goals of Taylor and if this happens this would mark a success of his theory (Jones, 2000). His theory is finding its application in corporate reengineering and the development of workplace. The reason behind this is to eliminate the industry’s need for unskilled labours and cutting the number of skilled labours. This process has been termed as commodification, and no profession, even medicine, has been saved from the changes that came under this concept. 2.7. Conclusion Taylor is the pioneer of scientific management for his theory was based on the prevailing circumstances of that era. Although, the critics have come up with valid objections, but looking at that era’s workforce and industries, it must be said that Taylor proposed a very enlightening theory. His work is still finding its application in some industries like restaurants and McDonalds’ heavily uses this theory in its operations. Even the basic principle behind automation is built around Taylor’s theory. List of References Aitken, H., 1985. Scientific Management in Action: Taylorism at Watertown Arsenal, 1908-1915 NJ: Princeton. Beissinger, R., 1988. Scientific Management, Socialist Discipline, and Soviet Power. London: I.B. Tauris & Co Ltd. Dawson, M., 2005. The Consumer Trap: Big Business Marketing in American Life. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Drury, B., 1915. Scientific management: a history and criticism. New York: Columbia University. Hartness, J., 1912. The human factor in works management. New York: McGraw-Hill. Head, S., 2005. The New Ruthless Economy: Work and Power in the Digital Age. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jones, O., 2000. Scientific Management, Culture and Control: A First-Hand Account of Taylorism in Practice. Human Relations, Vol. 53 (5), pp. 631-653. Kanigel, R., 1997. The One Best Way: Frederick Winslow Taylor and the Enigma of Efficiency. New York: Penguin-Viking. Mullins, J., 2004. Management and Organisational Behaviour (7th ed.). NJ: Prentice-Hall. Nelson, D., 1974. Scientific Management, Systematic Management, and Labor, 1880-1915. The Business History Review, Vol. 48 (4), pp. 479-500. Taylor, F., 1911. The Principles of Scientific Management. London: Harper & Brothers. Read More