Taylorism and Fordism are at the Foundation of Organization Theory - Case Study Example

Taylorism and Fordism are at the foundation of Organization Theory Introduction “Organizations are social entities that are goal-oriented; are designed as deliberately structured and coordinated activity systems, and are linked to the external environment” (Daft, 2004). Building an organization involves understanding the basic elements that form its concrete structure. The popular study involved in learning about those elements is called as Organizational Studies. An organization is basically about a group of people. And hence, Organization Studies also deals with the systematic understanding of their behavior in such a closed environment. There are several theories that associate with organizational studies. These theories when applied help in resolving problems and in decision making, specifically on a strategic basis. In addition to that, Organizational Theories provide with the knowledge of practical experience, practiced and tested by several successful organizations. This helps the new organizations to learn from mistakes. Another key issue that bears fruit with these theories is the knowledge obtained on managing resources. Hence, considering all these, Organization Theory can be defined as “It is the application of scientific knowledge in engineering and other forms of technology that has brought such spectacular changes in the material context of our lives over the past century” (Kast&Rosenzweig 1970). Being a concept that was given birth only a few years back, or say, being analyzed only on a macroscopic level, it is very difficult to draw a boundary for Organization Theory either from a socialist, behaviorist or even on a rational perspective. In a complex and intertwined world, to pin a definite answer on any concept would not go well with one faction or other. So, given these existential conditions, and keeping them as constraints, a discussion on principles that grounded the concept of Organization Theory can be undertaken. And it should not come as a surprise to many from Organizational Studies background that, those principles actually date back to the late 19th century, when Frederick Winslow Taylor introduced the Principles of Management - a system eventually came to be called as Taylorism by the later generations. Though Fordism also plays a part, it actually has its base on Taylorism. The rest of the paragraphs detail the strong and weak points in considering the two systems Taylorism and Fordism as forming the foundations of organization theory. (Weick 1979) Taylorism Taylor’s main focus was always on getting the better out of an organization through cognitive, arduous but smart management. Taylor believed that factors like productivity rate, reduction of wastages and management of a healthy relationship between the labor and management forms the basic strength of an organization. And as Organization Theory stands, all these factors basically form a part of it too. So, Taylor’s thoughts about an organization have been undeniably absorbed in Organization Theory. On further analysis done on Taylor and his thoughts, Taylor’s principles of management were all concentrated on the studies conducted on the aspects of time and motion. Taylor primarily focused on finding out the one primitive method and to make it the method for achieving the best process in determining training of employees as well as in promoting or compensating them. Taylor looked at the ‘traditional management’, which was the method followed in organizations of that time, to be marred with problems. In an organization, people were made to work on a particular section and as years progressed, they master the work and begun to defy the norms ruled out by the management. Such a situation resulted in four big problems, according to Taylor. First, mismanagement crept in with top level people deciding on what work needs to be done on a day. Secondly, employees took the easy way of doing things as they had more knowledge in the field then the management. As a third problem, employees began to bargain for money and started pointing their finger towards the management, thanks to the self-centered nature of the traditional management. Finally, unions began to form; reducing the efficiency of the best of the workers and making them progress towards a communist way. In order to provide a solution to all these problems, Taylor came up with an idea called as the Principles of Management, which later on became the foundation of Organization Theory. He based these principles on a hypothesis, that he constructed - “rabble hypothesis”. (Reshef 2000) According to which , the society of humans is an unorganized, self-centered and always keep self to be of prime importance in any adverse conditions, irrespective of being part of an organization. In addition to this, man in this society, more often than not, tend to neglect the state of an organization, although he may be in the same economic turmoil. And, finally on thinking in the lines of the economic situation, Taylor believed, that man thinks in his best logical way only when it is for achieving a good economic status and hence he believed that money is the single motivation factor for any progressive growth to happen in an organization. So considering all this, Taylor suggested a scientific approach to management instead of a hot handed dealing. He favored cooperation in doing work instead of individualism, thereby cancelling out the effects of self-centered approach. Next, he advised harmonizing the working of the employees with the rules of the management rather than running against it. Finally, he suggested in increasing an individual’s ability and using his potential to absoluteness. (Hatch 2006) These principles and scientific management when followed, help in a great way to capture the full extent of employees’ potential in an organization – a basic criterion for Organization Theory. Taylor also believed that the principles in standing alone would make no sense unless there is a strong work culture is forced by the organization. That is, the philosophy about maintaining quality in the organization should involve more thought process. It involves changes not only in the economic front of the employees but also from mental, habitual and attitude basis. The attitude towards work should be set right among the employees. While coming to the economic benefits, Taylor believed in order to get the best out of workers, an appropriate incentive is required. (Boyer 1977) The principles allow for such an incentive based management program, fostering the fecundity rate of an organization. Taylorism as a whole is completely based on Science. According to Taylor, it forms the basis of gaining capital advantage, managing labors as well as increasing the output of the organization in an effective way. Science, to him paves the way for holding all these three assets in a single path of control and thereby providing stability expected out of an organization in a long run. (Sisman 1944) Another major aspect of Taylorism is that cooperation in an organization is about cooperation as a whole and hence individual factions are not entertained. If still such teams get formed, the management has to take appropriate decisions to make sure those kinds are dissolved as early as possible, probably within a week of its formation. Thus, Taylorism, on its initial entrance into the corporate world, went through a sea of changes in both social as well as cultural perspective. But, it stood firm and thus proving itself laying out strong principles that still fortify new principles and practices in Organizational Studies. Fordism Fordism came into existence based on the foundations laid by Taylorism. Hence, much of its implication when implemented in an organization fell on the lines of what Taylorism actually meant to do. But, Fordism differs largely in the aspect of employee management and depends doubly on Science and automation of work. Basically, Fordism is about employing large number of people with the ability to operate specialized machines that could work on the products thereby nulling out the skill quotient required of the employees- a major difference to Taylorism! (Doray 1988) Fordism, initially came into existences through Henry Ford, who applied the concepts to manufacture automobiles, but then, the principles went on to be so successful, that they became to be generalized and has been termed to be applied to any kind of an organization. Fordism basically helped in the decomposition of work into minor modules thereby creating larger employment as well as larger specialization tools. There was more order in manufacturing and quality became a consistent factor. Although it created job opportunities for unskilled employees, it also reduced the man power required in large product based organizations. Managements following Fordism system, had no qualms with employees and the dependability on skilled employees was reduced by a great deal thereby allowing them to work more on an authoritative way reducing on the incentive way. Thus Fordism provided order and principles necessary to maintain an organization. Conclusion The core concepts of Taylorism and Fordism are primarily focused in stabilizing an organization and provide an effective way to handle the management of an organization. Both the systems deal with the problems and provide solutions on the basis of knowledge obtained through Science. Organization Theory, as explained in the introduction, is aimed at providing best possible opportunities for an organization for capital as well as employee management through scientific knowledge. So, the systems of Taylorism and Fordism prove to be the strongest representatives, motivating the foundation of this theory. References Kast, E. F., & Rosenzweig, E. J. 1970. Organization and management: a systems approach. London: McGraw-Hill Reshef, Y, 2000. Taylor’s Scientific Management. [Online]. Available at: http://apps.business.ualberta.ca/yreshef/orga417/taylor.htm [Accessed 9 Jan. 2011] Daft, L. R., 2004. Organization Theory and Design. Boston: Cengage Learning Hatch, M.J., 2006. Organization Theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. UK: Oxford University Press. Weick, E. 1979. The Social Psychology of Organizing. London: McGraw Hill Boyer, J. 1977. A.J.P. Taylor and the Art of Modern History. Journal of Modern History, 49(1), pp. 40–72. Sisman, A., 1994. A. J. P. Taylor: A Biography London: Sinclair-Stevenson Doray, B., 1988. From Taylorism to Fordism: A Rational Madness. Brooklyn: Free Association Read More