Scientific Management and Other Management Theories - Essay Example

Scientific Management and Other Management Theories Name Tutor Course Institution Date Organizations’ Scientific Management Introduction Fredrick Winslow Taylor’s scientific management theory states that there is only one best way to get a job done and that way is scientific methods. Taylor came up with the theory through observations and experiences that he had gone through while working as a mechanical engineer. During this time he realized that the environment that he was working in did not have work standards, had in efficient workers and jobs were given to employees without matching the employees’ knowledge, skill or ability. He also noticed that these problems led to many conflicts between the managers and the workers (Caldari, 2007). The scientific management theory is “the development of a science to replace the rule-of-thumb knowledge of the workmen” and this is seen in the analysis of the financial statement in the form of labor costs, which includes employees’ salaries, training, loans and benefits. This essay will give an overview of scientific management, the challenges it faces other management theories like bureaucratic, administrative and “Theory Y” and “Theory X” and lastly the essay will discuss the contributions of these theories in different organizations in Australia. Scientific management theory Scientific management is based on objectives which are viewed as guidelines in applying its system of working. The objectives are; development of a spirit of hearty and loyal cooperation between the management and workers for the assuarity that work related responsibilities should be done according to the scientifically devised procedures, development of a scientific explanation of every element of a man’s work to replace the old rule-of-thumb methods, he recommended that the division of work between workers and management should be in almost equal shares (Caldari, 2007). In this he said, each group should take over work of which it is best fitted rather than the former mode of working where responsibilities was largely left to the workers. The last objective was that there should be a scientific selection, training and development of workers instead of letting them choose their own tasks and train themselves. Taylor with his scientific management theory suggested a system responsible for breaking down each function into component parts and deciding the most efficient way of accomplishing each task. The daily production rate was to be established using stop watches and workers trained to act in a manner desirable to the management (Schwartz, 2007). Scientific management is the main theory behind various payment systems which are being introduced in the modern days’ organizations. The payments can be in based on commission-only, sales remuneration, piece-work and incentives based on work that is measured. Scientific management is resulted into the ‘economic man model’ that was very common a century ago. There is an assumption that working people come up with rational economic calculations and are encouraged by the objective of earning the most pay possible (Bowey, 2005). This promoted managers to come up with financial incentives schemes founded on work measurement; it was assumed that providing extra money for every increment of work leads to maximization of output. Hartshorne’s studies carried out in 1930s aimed at identifying the best environment for maximization of work performance. It was established that productivity increased throughout a series of changes at conditions of working, whether they were being made better or being made incrementally worse, and this occasioned the recognition that interrelationships at work could possess a big influence on productivity and morale. Since that time, scientific management was discredited but is impact on the rewards systems is still very much present (Bowey, 2005). Criticism of scientific management Scientific management has been very efficient and effective over time but it also faces challenges which have made its full implementation in organizations difficult. Most of the managers in organizations only implemented the increased output side of Taylor’s plan. The managers did not allow workers to share in the increased output and profits. The specialized jobs that they were trained for eventually became boring and this led the workers to lose trust on the scientific management. Some of the workers purposely underperformed because of reasons such as working for many hours without any rest. This underperformance in turn led to the managers increasing the use of managers which led to loss of jobs. When the organizations increased the use of machines, many workers lost their jobs because they became irrelevant. The machines took their place (Caldari, 2007). To enhance the adoption of scientific management, each employee was to be paid using piece-rate reward system that favored an individual with the greatest output. When the worker output when beyond the required standard, a higher compensation rate was to be paid. The omission of human factor in Taylor’s theory was very conspicuous and characterized mere impersonality and coldness. Workers worked for many hours without rest and this negatively affected their social needs, emotions and psychological feelings. Bureaucratic and Administrative management theories It was established by Max Weber in 1800. Bureaucratic management is a formal system of organization that is based on clearly and stipulated hierarchical levels. The levels dictate different roles and responsibilities which are created in order to maintain and increase efficiency and effectiveness in the organizations. Weber embellished the scientific management with the bureaucratic management theory which mainly focuses on dividing job roles and responsibilities in organizations into hierarchies which leads to the establishment of strong lines of control and authority (Cole, 2004). He recommended that organizations should consider developing comprehensive and detailed standard operating procedures for all tasks. According to Weber, bureaucracy is a particular type of administrative structure developed through rational-legal authority. Bureaucratic management structures evolved from traditional management structures. The changes that were adapted to bureaucratic management as the main principles were development of written rules, fair evaluation and rewards, system of task relationships, hierarchy of authority and fair evaluation and reward (Cole, 2004). The key points that bureaucracy advocates for are; authority which is the power of holding people accountable for their actions. The second one is performance which dictates that people should be employed and positions held based on merit and performance. Duties of different position should clearly be identified and defined so that the person responsible should be able to know what is expected of them. Lines of authority should clearly be identified and defined so that the employees know specifically who reports to whom. Rules and standard operating procedures should be used to determine the firms operations. The Max Weber theory has almost the same principles and objectives as the administrative theory which was formulated by Henry Fayol. They are both keen on making the management of organizations work. Fayol’s theory mainly concentrates on managers. His five principles were categorized into roles which were to plan, organize, so-ordinate, command and control. Fayol believed that personal effort and team work would make ideal organization. Fayol’s principles are still practiced in modern management today. Unfortunately, Fayol’s principles of unity of command and unity of direction are frequently violated by managers with the introduction of matrix management which is the preferred choice of management for many modern companies today (Cole, 2004). The main challenge that both the Max Weber and Henry Fayol’s theories faced is that they concentrated more on the managers than the employees themselves. The human relation element lacks in the principle objectives of their theories and management systems. Recent development in management theory The system management theory has had a great impact on management science and understanding organizations. A system is a collection of different parts that is unified so as to accomplish a general goal. The system theory works in a way that if one system fails or is removed then the whole nature of the system at large will be affected. A system is composed of inputs such as resources like raw materials, technology, people and money. Process are like motivating, planning, controlling and organizing are also part of a system not forgetting outcomes like productivity, enhanced quality of life and productivity of clients. System theory has not been used for many years but in recent times, managers through training and guidance from educators and business consultants have they decided to use the new way of looking at issues (Cole, 2004). The effect of system management is that it helps managers at the organization more broadly. It has also helped managers in interpreting patterns and events in the work place through enabling managers recognize the various parts of the organization and more specifically the interrelations of the parts. Situational or contingency theory dictates that when managers make decisions, they must consider all aspects of the current situation and act on those aspects that are important on the situation at hand. Douglas McGregor is the man behind “Theory X” and “Theory Y”. He was using human behavior research where he noted that the way an organization works depends on the beliefs held by its managers. “Theory X” highlights a negative view of human behavior and it assumes that most people are basically immature, need direction and control and are incapable of taking responsibility. The workers are viewed as lazy, need a mixture of financial inducements and threat of loss of work to make them work. “Theory Y” argues that people want to fulfill themselves by looking for self-development, self-respect and self-development at work and life in general. Management as a practice in Australia Many organizations globally, Australia included have different management practices. Most of the organizations apply a combination of different types of management theories. In Australia, scientific management theory is used in many organizations in determining performance level of workers and how appraisals can be measured according to the performance. Although most of the financial institutes and insurance companies have basic salaries or retainer’s fee for their sales and marketing employees, they are also paid depending on commissions and sales remunerations (Boud, Cressey & Docherty, 2005). This way, the employees are challenged on aiming at getting more commission and increasing the sales volume and this in turn increase the number of customers that he or she brings to the company. This increases the profits of the company and its client base. In other organizations like for example in the mining or agricultural industries, scientific management is applied. The workers are paid through the number of hours that they have worked. The workers are given job positions according to their skills and ability. Line managers and supervisors use the scientific method of management in determining who has worked for how long, when and where/which zone. Bureaucratic management also employed in that hierarchal structures are used in identifying and defining who is on top and who makes what decisions. Workers are aware of who they are supposed to report to. There is no specific organization in Australia that uses one management theory. All mangers in organizations work better when they use an organized knowledge about management. This knowledge is what constitutes science and the science of management is usually in exact and so managers need a combination of all. This is very clear because the variables that mangers work with are very complex (Boud, Cressey & Docherty, 2005). All managers must develop and posses three sets of skills and abilities which are conceptual, technical and human. The development of a good relationship between the managers and the employees is very important and many organizations in Australia have also adopted the human relation management theory. Through understanding that employees are human beings who have needs, emotions and psychological feelings, managers will be able to maintain a good relationship with the employees. These needs and emotions should be positively controlled and maintained for the good of the organization in general; motivation of employees and these becomes an important factor in increasing productivity (Bowey, 2005). Conclusion Scientific management if applied alone without the use of other management theories will not yield good results. Organizations need to borrow lessons from other management theories. Managing is an important and essential activity to all organizational level and the managerial skills required in different levels vary. A manger who is able to employ any kind of management theory when faced with a problem is a good and skilled manager (Cole, 2004). Every manger in every organization desires to achieve their main goal which is to create a surplus and to be productive through achieving a favorable ration in the output-input within a specific period. Productivity includes effectiveness and efficiency and management is all about these. Management is there to ensure that the organization increases its profits and the employees are happy and satisfied with their jobs. It is the main role of mangers to make this happen. List of References Boud, D, Cressey, P, Docherty, P, 2005, Productive Reflection at Work: Learning for Changing Organizations, London: Routledge Bowey, A, 2005, ‘Motivation: the art of putting theory into practice’, European Business Forum, issue 20, winter, pp 17-20 Caldari, K 2007, ‘Alfred Marshall’s critical analysis of scientific management’, The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 14:1, March, pp 55-78 Cole, G, A, 2004, Management Theory and Practice, London: Cengage Learning EMEA Schwartz, M, 2007, ‘The “business ethics” of management theory’, Journal of Management History, vol. 13, no. 1, pp 43-54. Read More