What Is Fordism - Coursework Example

TAYLORISM, FORDISM AND POST- FORDISM al Affiliation Taylorism, Fordism and Post- Fordism Introduction Thesis ment The aim of the essay is to illustrate that most organizations and companies now apply the post- fordism theory in production and management. It is preferred by most organizations due to its flexibility, market- orientation and other features. Definitions Taylorism: it is a system of managing production that focuses on scientific solutions in dealing with the workload to ensure that work is done in the most efficient and effective way. Fordism: it is a system of managing work where unskilled employees work in groups in assembly lines under the supervision of a skilled employee to assemble different parts in the creation of a product. As a result, the process of production is swift facilitating mass production. Post- fordism: it is the system of production management that followed fordism. It is flexible, market oriented, and employees focus more on other aspects of business apart from production. Background The principles of management in production have developed over a long time. The 20th century consisted of the most significant change in management theory. Taylorism developed in the early 20th century followed by fordism in the 1920’s and 1930’s (AMIN, 2011). The two theories of management were largely applied by manufactures in the 20th century. Nonetheless, since the 1970’s the use of the theories in production have been abandoned (Savall, 2010). Taylorism Taylorism is also commonly referred to as scientific management. It is one of the founding management theories in early management theory. Fredrick Taylor Winslow developed the scientific management movement in the belief that efficient and effective production was not based on making employees work as hard as possible but by inventing a way to optimize the operation. In his 1909 publication, The Principles of Scientific Management, he proposed that the optimization and simplification of jobs would increase productivity (Edgell, 2011). His proposal was correct based on its contribution to the success of industrialization in the 20th century. Furthermore, during this time, factory managers maintained little or no contact with the employees. There was no interaction or cooperation. Employees were left to complete their tasks unsupervised. There was a lack of motivation to complete tasks swiftly, effectively and efficiently. Most employees were motivated by continued employment. Taylor believed that workers’ motivation would increase if each worker was paid based on the amount of work he completed. He also conducted some experiments to discover ways to streamline production by making work easier, organized and equitable. In the end, he created the following principles of taylorism or scientific management (Cobley, 2009) Determining the most sufficient way to accomplish specific tasks should rely on the scientific study of the work as opposed to common sense, the rule of thumb or habit. Workers should be assigned to roles based on their motivation and capability. Additionally, they should be trained to accomplish the task efficiently instead of leaving them to learn by themselves. Active involvement in the workers performance through monitoring, supervision, providing instructions, and ensuring that they apply the most efficient methods of working. Division of labor between workers and managers where workers spend their time planning and training while the workers complete the allocated tasks. Taylorism success and Decline Taylorism largely contributed to the development of management and the industrial revolution. It principles were applied widely in Europe and Japan for many years. The cooperation that resulted between managers and workers teamwork which is much popularized today. Factories that used the principles increased their productivity and efficiency. However, taylorism consisted of some weaknesses that made organizations gradually abandon it. Scientific management was more of a mechanical process than a mental process. It failed to value the human side of working. It was based on a notion that money is the only motivation for workers. It also resulted in unscrupulous practices such as wage reduction. It made organizations become rigid and rule driven by implying that there was only one correct manner of accomplishing production tasks. How did it affect Fordism? Henry Ford used the principles before turning to Fordism. Taylorism used scientific measures to find solutions for work division and efficient production. However, this did not work in the case of mass production. Fordism Fordism, named after Henry Ford, indicates the mass production system and the mass consumption in the 1940s and 1960s by the developed countries (Savall, 2010). It was named after him due to the management measures he put in place in his factories during the 1930’s and 1920’s. Fordism was characterized by the following elements It consisted of established compromise in manufacturing companies between organized labor and management where employees followed the prerogatives of management in exchange for increased pay. It consisted of monopolistic competition among the big companies based on advertising and product pricing strategy. Consumption at the time was characterized by credit, centralized financial capital, as well as, deficit finance. The entrenchment of the national economies into an economic order that was global and liberal. The changes that resulted from Fordism required a change in the management and production in order to maintain the large market. Fordism linked the labor force and tangled it into an organic whole represented by a collective laborer (Ritzer, 2015). In this system, the contribution of every individual employee and every group was reliant on the others’ contribution in the production system. This was as a result of a rigorous breakdown of duties which included the separation of tasks that required skills and those that did not. The process paved way for an extreme differentiation of the labor force. The existence of a dual labor market necessitated and reinforced this differentiation. The labor market consisted of a few individuals that were either skilled or a mass of unskilled immigrants (Edgell, 2011). The move from craft to industrial production also created the need for change in labor organization. The employees in the unskilled group were further divided into small groups with a skilled supervisor. They worked on a moving assembly line to assemble goods in a fast and effective way to support mass production. Taylorism Criticism As previously indicated, Fordism and Taylorism were applied by manufacturing companies across the globe for a long time. Fordism focused on the mass production, which made products cheaper and led to mass consumption. However, it only produced products that were cheap to produce. The governments focused on wealth accumulation and the improvement of infrastructure to facilitate Fordism. Taylorism also worked as a method of production and management. However, the two systems were characterized by a dead- end monotonous life of mass production (Hughes, 2004). Organizations and countries realized that they required new approaches to motivate employees and maintain efficiency in production. European manufacturing companies received similar grievances from the employees on the assembly lines. Eventually, they had to develop production strategies that promoted job enrichment and were technology oriented. For instance, In Germany, the employees were represented in the board of different organization (Savall, 2010). As a result of this modifications and improvements, taylorism and fordism gradually disappeared as ruling paradigms of work and employment in capitalist societies. Post- fordism Post- fordism essentially indicates the new era after fordism; it started in the 1970s as fordism started declining (Beynon & Nichols, 2006). It is engrossed in globalization and post industrialism. As a result, many aspects in regard to the nature of work and firms have changed. Currently, the way in which corporations think and treat their employees is governed by the new market. The monotonous and rigid nature of fordism and taylorism has been replaced by a system of flexibility. Key Features of Post Fordism The following are distinct characteristics of Post- fordism A decrease in the interest for mass products and an increase in interest of customized products Consumers have no worries paying higher price for high quality and easily identifiable products Production runs are shorter and flexible Management is flexible and the employees are more capable and possess greater autonomy, differentiation in the workplace and society as well as, greater responsibility Evaluation and Criticism of Post Fordism The production processes in post- fordism are mechanized and automated. As a result, the employees are more involved in activities such as designing, maintain and operation of the machines. The division of labor is more pronounced due to the increase in activities such as research, marketing, and distribution. Production is decentralized in a way that manufacturing centers are located in different parts of the world. It has also evolved because the economy is not production oriented but rather consumer oriented. Most corporations have abandoned the traditional corporate model of the Taylor and ford era. Making large profits in post fordism involves extreme flexibility in many aspects (AMIN, 2011). Organizations diversify their investments and production as opposed to attaching all their investments to one type of business. An electronic company not only produces bulbs but a wide range of electronic products like iron boxes, mobile phones, refrigerators and other products. The company may also invest in transport or information technology. Furthermore, prosperity relies on branding and marketing of products, as opposed to the quantity or process of production. The post fordist economy demands employees with social and technical skills. It is all inclusive with an increase of women and minority group employees. So far, Post fordism has been a success due to its existence in a global community, increased demand of high quality and customized products, as well as, its flexibility (AMIN, 2011). Mcdonaldization Mcdonaldization is one of the concepts dominating post- fordism. Mcdonaldization is the continuous tendency for principles used in the fast food sector to be applied in other production sectors (Ritzer, 2011). Mcdonaldization involves the complete breakdown of tasks into small tasks that are assigned to different employees. The main principles of Mcdonaldization include efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control. An example of Mcdonaldization is automated teller machines. Mcdonaldization often makes the consumer perform tasks that the company previously performed. For instance, the fast food restaurants introduced self-service where the customer has to pay for the food and carry it to a table; a task previously conducted by waiters and waitresses (Ritzer, 2011). Similarly, Banks have adapted self-service whereby the customer applies for an ATM card and withdraws money from the bank for himself. The principles of Mcdonaldization such as division of labor and efficiency have their origins in taylorism and fordism (Ritzer, 2011). However, they have been modified to streamline the production process in the post- fordism era. JLP and Fordism After the Second World War, Eiji Toyoda and Taiichi Ohno in Japan developed the Toyota Production System. They modified the fordism because they felt it was a monotonous process that did not engage employees. The system worked toward improving employee satisfaction, commitment, knowledge and experience. It entailed the constant training of employees and promoting them to seniority based on performance. It is currently referred to as the lean production process and adapted by many other companies. This was different from fordism in that it was interested in improving the lives of the employees. Conclusion Evidently, taylorism and fordism have gradually been phased out by post fordism. Each of the systems has its advantages and disadvantages. Although fordism and taylorism are no longer applied, their principles are the basis of the post fordist era (Ritzer, 2011). As a result, the post fordist era is better than the previous era. Most organizations around the globe have moved to the post fordist era. Reference List AMIN, A., 2011, Post-Fordism A Reader, New York, NY, John Wiley & Sons. BEYNON, H., & NICHOLS, T., 2006, The Fordism of Ford and modern management: Fordism and post-Fordism, Cheltenham, Elgar. COBLEY, E, 2009, Modernism and the culture of efficiency: ideology and fiction, Toronto, University of Toronto Press. EDGELL, S., 2011, The sociology of work: continuity and change in paid and unpaid work, London, SAGE. HUGHES, T. P., 2004, American genesis: a century of invention and technological enthusiasm, 1870-1970, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. RITZER, G., 2011, The McDonaldization of society 6, Los Angeles, Pine Forge. RITZER, G., 2015, Globalization: a basic text, Chichester, West Sussex ; Malden, MA : John Wiley & Sons. SAVALL, H., 2010, Work and people: an economic evaluation of job-enrichment, Charlotte, N.C., Information Age Pub. Read More