The Principles of Scientific Management - Essay Example

Name : xxxxxxxxxxx Institution : xxxxxxxxxxx Course : xxxxxxxxxxx Title : Workplace Management Dynamics Tutor : xxxxxxxxxxx @2010 Workplace Management Dynamics Introduction Management has always been referred to as doing things through people. However Pearce and Robinson define it as a process through which human, financial as well as material contributions are optimized for achieving the goals of the organization. Theories on the dynamics between management and employees were first developed by founders in the middle of the 19th century due to the growth of industries, especially the textile industry. Modern organization began around mid 19th century due to rising factory system, mostly the textile industry, where mass production was the driving force behind productivity. Management thinking evolved at a slower pace in the century. Still people were trying to grasp what it was and its relevance to organizations. The civilization of management can be attributed to our predecessors. The thinking of modern management started in 19th century and flourished in the 20th century. Management theory has gone a lot of transition since the 20th century right from the classical theory up to the approach of Japanese management. The current theory of management is a product of the dedication as well as interdisciplinary effort from people. Two radical management theorists (Robert Owen and Charles Babbage) accepted the challenge to develop theories regarding management and hence ended up being termed pre-classicists (Ma, 2000). . There have been a lot of theories, concepts and models that try to link the workers with their work place. They have been formulated to maximize on the out put of workers as well as maximize on the production of the company. All these try to better the workers’ environment within the company as well as making the company operate most efficiently and competitively with positive growth. The theories, models and concepts that link the employees and the organizational objectives include: Pre-classicists During the 19th century, Robert Owen and Charles Babbage critically addressed the search for the clues towards better management. They formulated ideas related to management and called them management theories.owen was a businessman as well as social reformer while Babbage was a reputed mathematician who also had strong interests in management .the two management theorists have been credited for a lot of contribution in the field of management (Liao, & Hu, 2007). Robert Owen Robert Owen developed his ideas from the cotton mill he owned. He constantly fought against labour while advocating for better housing and improvements in living conditions of employees. Owen believed that character was a byproduct of the circumstances and also that education is crucial in early education and formation of good character. He has been credited for as the forerunner in the school of management dealing with human relations (Porter, 1999). Charles Babbage He is credited as the real idea behind modern computer since he researched for practical calculator. He developed interest in management due to his concerns especially on work specialization. This has been recognized as forerunner in research of contemporary operations. He also device the way profits could be shared including the bonus of employees. Even though they have contributed a great deal in the field of management, Babbage and Owen didn’t have central tenets basic in management theories (Kristandl, & Bontis, 2007). Classical school theories Bureaucratic management theory This was formulated by Max Weber .The power that was instituted and the authority in the modern world was the reason for his interest in management. He made the model of Rational-legal authority of the right bureaucracy. This model justified the legality of normative rules’ patterns, and the justification of those with delegated authorities in issuing commands which could also be termed as legal authority. Weber also formed the bureaucratic regulations for the protection of members from any future possibility of favouritism. His theory believes that if the hierarchy is well defined, all positions have a structure allowing the people with higher ranks to supervise the people with lower ranks. The theory also acknowledges the division of labour as well as specialization so employees could master a certain piece of work. Weber also emphasizes in his theory that the organizational activities be controlled until standard procedures for operations are reached. In order to avoid favouritism in the work place, Weber’s theory stresses the need for managers to avoid personal relationship between them and their employees, this will also be a of a very great help in handling issues in the work place without prejudice. Competence should also be used in determining all the decisions regarding hiring, promotions and job assignments. The theory of Weber has been criticized a lot due to the overwhelming emphasis in exercising of authority; this could lead to ineffectiveness due to the need to add authority (Sheldrake, 2003). Scientific management theory There were two main pioneers in the theory; they had different approaches with the scientific managers, for instance Taylor, achieving organizational efficiency by using the experiences they have personally for identification of the basic principles used in management. The theories were based on how the organization has been structured and the responsibilities of the managers in fulfilling their roles yet didn’t pay attention on motivation of people or the culture of the organization. Another group emerged; they were referred to as the social scientists .These scientists included Mc Gregory and Mayo. These scientists were concerned with the study of the behaviour of people in the work place .This was contrary to the concerns of the scientific managers, since it was mostly focusing on productivity of employees and relating that to the factors that affect their productivity. This approach stresses on empirical research to create management solution that is comprehensive, the managers have to apply these principles in a given way. Fredrick Winslow Taylor. He started learning about workers while at the steel mill. He experimented on various ways to produce better work force, hence also seeking to clearly divide labour in management as well as employees. His method of management is based on the belief that both the businessmen in his days were very superior and brilliant more than their employees and also that the entrepreneurs had the responsibility of controlling the employees, supervising them and also organizing their activities. He presented his findings to the American Society of American Engineers hence this was published as scientific management. His principles were four, the first being the development of the method for scientific management, managers to select employees, train them and develop them, cooperation between the managers and the employees is crucial during application of the method of scientific management and also that work of employees should be paramount while the management is also involved. Taylor was always referred to as the scientific management father. Management theory of general administration As opposed to the scientific management theory that bases its strength on employees, and their individual responsibilities, the theory of general administration drives its concern throughout the management organization in general(Pindur,rogers ,kim,1995).The bureaucracy theory of max Weber based itself on authority ,sets of regulations as well as hierarchy to control the efficiency of work done. He had the belief that for the organization to be in unity there had to be somebody with more authority and power than others ,with disregards as to whether the leader has the charisma or not. However, currently the theory of Weber seems to be unfitting due to the great changes in the culture within many organizations, since the current trend strives to use empowerment techniques to empower the employees too.Henri Fayol has expounded much on the topic. Henri Fayol He is one of the activists who supported the management theory of general administration. He believes that there are management principles that can bring success in the administration. He called them the fourteen principles. They include work division where he believes if people are given specific tasks according to their ability, they tend to perform better, and in so suggesting, he believes that specialization of labour produces quality work output coupled with increase in production. This aims at maximizing on the efforts of the employees. The second one is the responsibility and authority where he believes that authority is the ability to issue orders and the power to receive obedience, therefore the authority that the manager has from the office must be distinct from the one formed through experience and individual personality. Discipline and respect between the organization and the employees using fair as well as clear agreements is crucial. If violations are evident, it is required of the managers to put sanctions. Unity of command requires orders to be handed over from one superior since the employees cannot handle double orders. Direction unity indicates that organizations must be centrally planned and controlled. Individual interest subordination states that the goals as well as the interests of the organization are more important than individual or group interest. Remuneration of personnel which acknowledges salaries as the value for the work done therefore should be adequate to all. The eighth one is the centralization. Others include scalar chain, order, equity, stability, initiative and esprit de corps (Senge, 2000) Due to the ability of the scientific management theory and the theory of general administrative management to compliment each other, another scientist (Chester Barnard) came up with the view that merging the two theories could produce the much desired effect of management in the organization. He worked hard to blend scientific management with human relations, hence in so doing, introduced the theory that recommends accepting the authority on the basis of free will as well as the outside forces as a way of bringing obedience and competence. According to him, employees considered the sense in the superiors’ instructions and decided on whether it is fit for them to obey or not. Both scientific management theory and the theory of general administration have significant limitations since they concentrated more on the goal achievement in an organization by using employees as the tool, without considering the relationship existence between the environment and the organization operating in the environment (Rogers, 1995). The modern organizations are more complicated and too agressive.However they are applicable in organizations that are both uncomplicated and relatively stable. Japanese management The Japanese management style has received applauds because of its success in productivity.the reason why the Japanese management style has been associated with value is the great trust that the style employs on employees. With these freedom and trust, the employees can make their own decisions .This kind of management also stresses on the Importance of employees to improve their social status, using the concept of intimacy which is greatly valued, rewarded as well as respected, it is also incorporated in the organization. It is also in this kind of management that there is harmony in teamwork as well as individual efforts.Ouchi uses his book to illustrate the management forms. He claims that theory M describes the equilibrium between individual effort and team work in large Japanese companies (Frederick & Taylor, 2002) Behavioral management theory While the focus on the theory of scientific management was still going on, sociology as well as psychology were being put in to study by several contributors. Among them was Hugo Munsterberg, who is also recognized as the industrial psychology father. He recognized the link between the behaviour of people and scientific management. He aimed at maximizing on employees through studying of social conditions as well as how recruitment can be made to get suitable people for the suitable job. It has also been applied successfully on putting the objectives of management in view of the organization; the theory never attained the earlier ambition of giving the management the tools to handle the challenges within the organization. This theory omitted the important role of motivating employees (Swartz, 1994). Abraham H. Maslow formulated the levels of need, five-tiered hierarchy, due to his belief that certain needs motivate people. Fredrick Herzberg also formed a theory, termed as motivation-hygiene theory, which was an extension of Maslow’s needs, in consideration of the study on job. Satisfaction He strived not only to improve but also redesign the position of employees in order to increase their motivation as well as their involvement. While the management research was going on in the 20th century, questions came over interactions hence motivations of the employees. The limitations of the classical management during this period were that they were not helpful in handling many situations of management and still could not give an account of the individual he developed a motivation theory that is linked to human needs. According to Maslow, the theory has got three assumptions, that is, human needs can never be completely satisfied, that the behaviour displayed by people is full of purpose and is motivated by his desire to satisfy his needs, and that these needs can be given a hierarchical rankings from the least important to the most important. The five groups include physiological needs which are also important for the maintenance of an individual’s well being. If not satisfied they might become acute. The other category is the safety needs which include securical needs, protection and also stability. They mostly become primary motivators. The third ranking is the needs of belongingness and love, which Maslow explains as the needs that get satisfied only after satisfying both the safety and physical needs. It will only end up as a primary motivator after the two have been satisfied. The fourth category is the need for esteem, since a person must have self confidence.however, this stage, unlike others needs a lot of sacrifice, being very competitive and also adequate achievement of mastery skills. The last one is the self actualization where an individual must have attained all the other needs, but still the person will be unsettled and discontented, so the person is likely to stick to a particular lifestyle until he gets is new (Robbins, 2003). Integration method of conflict solution This method of solving conflicts within an organization was formed by Mary Parker Follet, she believed that people working in a group had the ability to solve problems inherently, hence she brings out the importance of sharing power to solve conflicts. She states that the right way to handle conflicts is to form creative resolution of the conflict such as working with other people cooperatively in order to invent fresh ideas which can provide great interpersonal profit. Douglas McGregor also raised his idea of attempt by managers to motivate their employees by theory X (negative theory) and theory Y (positive theory). According to theory X, managers looked at their employees as lazy and therefore the employees needed to be put under control or even threatened in order to bring motivation in them. Contrary to this ,is theory Y ,which bases its argument on the reasoning that according to managers, people not only have the ability to be more responsible, but also able to be mature. This concept was and has been reluctantly accepted and adopted by the managers since it is hard to predict the behaviour of people, hence implementing this idea becomes more elusive (Heizer & Render, 2006). The modern approaches to management There was a dire need to integrate all the theories in order to handle the different conditions as well as the different situations perfectly. This led to interventions from the modern management theories. The theories of modern management like the strategic management, systems approach, and contingency approach were all combined with classical management and behavioral management in order to create the framework for the movement of modern management. The contingency theory, which is also considered as an approach for solving problems, advises managers that in as much as theories, concepts, tools and techniques might work successfully in a particular organization, the case might actually be opposite in another organization. The probability that this is true is justified by the fact that the workplace decisions are affected by many variables. Just like the other theories, this theory has its limitations due to the lack of comprehensive methods as well as procedures. This theory doesn’t explain the contingency changes as well as how it takes place in an organization (Makadok, 2001). The theory of strategic management is also another approach aimed at problem solving. This not only monitors but also evaluates both external environmental opportunities and internal environmental opportunities as well as controls, while considering the strength of the organization and its weaknesses.Mission, success factors, goals, objectives, vision are all crucial in defining the strategy statement. Strategic management encompasses some basic components. They include the scanning of the environment, formulation of the strategy, implementation of the strategy and also evaluating and controlling of the strategy (Oliver, 1997). When all the models theories and concepts are compared, the theory of administrative management is capable of producing better results because of its applicability to all situations. This particular theory gives both the employers, employees and the whole organization at large responsibilities equal to their capacity as well as creating order within the organization. This particular theory favours workers in that it allows for specialization meaning workers can only do what they can handle best, this also helps the organization because workers produce their best in the area of of their specialization. The presence of authority helps the organization to operate in order and harmony as well as providing a channel by which the employees could present their grievances. This theory also has the advantage of high level of discipline because this is in form of agreement between the employer and the employees. Another interesting factor found in this theory is the unity of command meaning information of command is got from one source, not multiple. Therefore in view of all the above advantages, the administrative management offers more for the organizations, employers and employees (Koontz & Weihrich, 2006). Conclusion There is no doubt a great influx of ideas in management styles have provided a lot of solutions for both the management and human resource practice over the years and , just like it could be expected, every successive generation brings along with it changes in the theories on management styles. The concepts, theories and models governing management have always changed with the new discoveries. They have enhanced the understanding of how the organizations can maximize on returns using the available methods of management and also have improved the working condition of employees leading to more production. Bibliography Frederick W. Taylor, 2002, The Principles of Scientific Management, Harper Bros New York Heizer, J.& Render, B., 2006, Principles of operations management, Prentice-Hall.New Jersey. Koontz, H. ; weihrich, H., 2006, Management: a global perspective, McGraw-Hill, Sydney. Kristandl, G. & Bontis, N., 2007, Constructing a definition for intangibles using the resource based view of the firm. Management Decision, Vol. 45, No. 9, pp. 1510-1524. Liao, S.H. & Hu, T.C., 2007, Knowledge transfer and competitive advantage on Environmental uncertainty: An empirical study of the Taiwan semiconductor industry. Technovation, 27 (2007) 402-411. Porter, M. E., 1999, Competitive Advantage. Free Press: New York. Ma, H., 2000, Competitive advantage and firm performance. Competitiveness Review, 2000, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p16, 17p. Sheldrake, J., 2003, Management Theory, Second Edition. Thomson Learning, United Kingdom. Makadok, R., 2001, Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 387-401 (2001). Oliver, C., 1997, Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource based views. Strategic Management Journal, 18:9, pp. 697-713 (1997). Robbins, P., 2003, Greening the Corporation: Management strategy and the environmental challenge. London: Earthscan Publications, Senge, P., 2000, The Fifth Discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. Doubleday, New York. Swartz, James, 1994, The Hunters and the Hunted, Productivity Press, Portland. Read More