More handpicked essays just for you.
Theories and approaches to industrial relations
Theories and approaches to industrial relations
Scientific management in modern organizations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Background of Frederick W. Taylor
Frederick W Taylor was an American inventor and engineer, considered the father of "scientific management". Although born to a wealthy family, Taylor began his work life when he signed on as an apprentice at a small Philadelphia pump works. Four years later, at a plant in Midvale, he developed the basic elements of what later came to be known as "scientific management" - the breakdown of work tasks into constituent elements, the timing of each element based on repeated stopwatch studies, the fixing of piece rate compensation based on those studies, the standardization of work tasks on detailed instruction cards and generally the systematic consolidation of the shop floor's brain work in a "planning department."
His influential theory enabled industry to move away from "rule of thumb" management and be more efficient and prosperous. The modern systems of manufacturing and management would not be the examples of efficiency that they are today, without his work. Frederick Taylor was instrumental in bringing industry out of the dark ages by beginning to revolutionize the way work was approached. Taylor was able to increase wages, productivity and reduce per piece costs at the same time. His work was eventually adopted in a wide array of applications. Taylor's ideas had a significant influence on the industrial life of all modernized countries. His work was an extension of human work and technology. His principles of scientific management were conceived to be free of value judgment.
Frederick Taylor's Four Main Principles
Taylor's initial experiments were aimed at determining, how much work a "first-class man" could perform. It was Taylor's goal to collect raw data about the jobs in the workp...
... middle of paper ...
... quality of service.
By the constantly changing dynamics of the 21st century business world, it is clear that it would be highly unproductive for managers to employ what is in actual fact a restrictive, controlling theory of management. As a results of globalisation of the economy, intensification of international competition, pervasive influence of the social market economy, increasing participation of women in the labour force and ecological consciousness, scientific management is no longer suitable in modern workplaces, as this theory tends not to allow for the constant innovation that is necessary to maintain a competitive advantage in the marketplace.
To say that scientific management theory doesn't exist at all in modern organisational life would be incorrect, as the problem with this idea is simply that it does not cater for all of today's business needs.
In the past, some businesses did not estimate their costs and would have no idea whether they would have profit or loss at the end of the year. Thanks to his experience at the Pennsylvania Railroad, Carnegie understood the importance of cost control. Tracking costs led to increased accountability because Carnegie could discover, “who saved material, who wasted it, and who produced the best results” (95). Knowing costs also allowed Carnegie to confidently charge low prices, understanding they would produce a profit. Additionally, he thought that if he kept costs low, profits would take care of themselves. One technique used to slash costs was speeding up individual operations to produce more goods per dollar of capital. Another technique was reducing labor costs while sustaining current production. These practices revolutionized big business because they began to focus on cutting excess costs that were hurting profits. Cost management improved the efficiency of labor and profits of
In my essay we will take a look at Frederick Taylors principles of scientific management and his contribution to manufacturing and the influence he has had. We will use Ford as the organization as Fordism I closely linked to Taylorism and has been majorly influenced by it. The U.S. motor vehicle industry emerged at the end of the 19th century as a craft production system with a labor force that included skilled workers who had knowledge about mechanical design and the materials they were working with. After World War I, Henry Ford invented the mass production system (now known as Fordism). In his system, the product, the production process, and the tasks that each particular worker performed were standardized.
Scientific management is a way that an organisation regulates their staff within a workplace. The theory behind this is accomplished by selecting the ‘best person for the best role’, who will undertake the training to train each worker to do a ‘specific role the right way’ (Frederick Taylor). This extracts the responsibility from the employee whilst handing over executive decisions to the employer to make strategic directions. Frederick Taylor required the managers to set the tasks for the employees in advanced and that each task was to be detailed to each employee, to be done in a certain way and completed by an exact time no less.
In the article entitled “The Human Side of Enterprise” by Douglas Murray McGregor , McGregor stated that industry has fundamental know how to utilize physical and technology science. The conventional view of management consisted of three propositions which are called Theory X (Shafritz & Hyde,2012).
Comparisons that can be made include Fordism's mechanisation of mass production and Taylor's attempts at using employees as machines. Taylor designed this using his principles of management that included developing a science for each element of work and finding the quickest way the job could be done.
This is similar to Fredrick Taylor’s theory of scientific management. This was an oldest form of management theory which focuses on efficiency and labor productivity. It is characterized by a chain of commands, span of control, specialization and the use of vertical levels of
The term “workaholism” appeared in the beginning of the 20th century after Frederick Taylor integrated new organization of work system. Taylor, famous businessman was born in 1856 in Philadelphia, and was known as “father of scientific management”. His new theory of work management has been known as “Taylorism”. The term “Taylorism” is seldom used in a positive way. For a short description, according to JoAnn Greco, the journalist of “The Journal of Business Strategy”, “Taylorism” is “a sort of ruthless and quasi-Victorian efficiency that melds man with machine, often to man’s disadvantage.” According Taylor’s theory of work organization the worker is nothing but a tool for gaining profit. (Greco)
Frederick Taylor and Henri Fayol are both considered classical contributors to management theory. Both were developing and expression their viewpoints at similar time period with the aim of “raising standard of management in industry” (Brodie,1967, p7) in a period were very few publications and theories on management. While both theories were developed with the same influencing factors such as war, social struggles and industrial revolution (Urwick. 1951, p7) each developed quite different management theories. Frederick Taylor is considered the Father of Scientific management and he developed scientific principles of management, focusing on the individual,...
The twentieth century has brought in a number of management theories which have helped shaped our view of management in the present business environment. These emerging theories have enabled managers to appreciate new patterns of thinking, new ways of organising and new ways of managing organisations and people. Over the years these different theories have enabled the study of trends that have taken place in the management field. The major management viewpoints- which include the classical, behavioural and contingency approaches- have assisted in the formation of the contemporary twenty-first century management theory and techniques (S. C. Certo & S. T. Certo, 2006). Although, there are significant differences among all these approaches they seem to be unified by the efforts of improving an organisation’s efficiency in terms of proper human resources management. Furthermore, the dissimilarities seen in these approaches are due to the always changing organisations and environments which demand new management practices and techniques be applied to maintain the efficiency of an organisation.
Today’s era of business world adapts to everything new but these modern concepts are an indirect tribute to the theories produced by Taylor, Fayol, Mayo and Weber. Taylor’s Scientific management theory is one such example which has become such an important aspects of modern management that it feels unbelievable that his concepts were a part of the history. It is falsely assumed that as the society progresses, the older theories tend to lose their importance. The thing to be noted here is that these theories are based on basic human needs which do not change with time; the thing that changes is the method to fulfil those needs. Investigating earlier management theories is important because these theories are less complex and provide immediate solution to the problems. These theories basically help us to go to the root of the problem and understand its complexity. The better understanding we have about the problem, the easier it is to accomplish the objectives of the company. The following essay states the importance of the Taylor’s Scientific management theory and how it is implemented even today in the business world.
There are several theories that examine an organization and it’s approach to managing work in an effort to develop efficiency and increase production. Two classical approaches to management are Taylor’s scientific management theory and Weber's bureaucratic management theory. Both men are considered pioneers of in the study of management.
The concept of scientific management is based on the idea that work could be studied to increase efficiency, and specialization. Economist Adam Smith changed the way the world looked at the economy and organization. In his essay, “Of the Division of Labour,” Smith emphasizes the importance of specialization, and how division of labor leads to specialization. He states that this would allow a worker to be more productive and efficient (Shafritz, Ott, & Jang, 2011, p. 41-45). Frederick Taylor introduced the principles of scientific management, which stated that management is a science, workers should be scientifically selected and trained scientifically, and both management and workers should work together.
Scientific Management theory arose from the need to increase productivity in the U.S.A. especially, where skilled labor was in short supply at the beginning of the twentieth century. The only way to expand productivity was to raise the efficiency of workers.
In the past, managers considered workers as machinery that could be bought and sold easily. To increase production, workers were subjected to long hours, miserable wages and undesirable working conditions. The welfare of the workers and their need were disregarded. The early twentieth century brought about a change in management and scientific management was introduced. This sort of management, started by Frederick Winslow Taylor, emphasised that the best way to increase the volume of output was to have workers specializing in specific tasks just like how a certain machine would perform a particular function. His implementation of this theory brought about tremendous criticism by the masses arguing that the fundamentals of Scientific Management were to exploit employees rather than to benefit them (Mullins, 2005)
The scientific management, or Taylorism, approach is present in most industries today. It was initially formed by Frederick Winslow Taylor, where the main objective was to ensure efficiency from workers through strict and specific job design. This approach has several benefits to working conditions but there are also limitations that can apply all industries. Specific industries will find this approach impractical because it is better suited for factory or systematic based markets. This approach also raises complicated