A critical analysis on the advantages and disadvantages of Taylor’s
Scientific Management
In the recent era, there have been a substantial number of changes being made
everyday. Innovations, developments and many new ideas have been brought forward in the last few decades. In such rapidly evolving times, F.W Taylor’s (1856-1915) Scientific Management is well “outdated”. Taylor chose tasks which are repetitive and completed by a number of individuals which would save time and the level of production would increase significantly. “Taylorism, or scientific management has been the key feature in the devaluation and dequalifictaion of work”. (Braverman, H.,1998). This approach is unmanageable in the modern business because the deskilling of labour has made them unapproachable to complex situations in the workplace. Taylorism aimed at achieving ‘one best way’ of performing a task. (Huczynski and Buchanan, 2013, p.466). Scientific management laid emphasis on short monotonous tasks and failed to recognize the holistic needs of the workers and focused more towards their economic welfare. This essay aims to critically evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of Taylorism in relation to Human Relations School of Thought using various theories and arguments. I shall identify the unique problems which arise in the work place due to human nature and attempt to show that Taylorism is not ideal for dealing with such problems.
“Scientific management means knowing exactly what you want men to do and seeing that they do it in the best and the cheapest way”. (Taylor,1947, p.21). Taylor’s principle about finding the one best approach towards achieving the completion of a task hindered the capability and the individualism of the worker. This principle was one of the most focal arguments against Scientific management .It deprives the workers of the most essential factor of exhibiting their creativity and expanding their horizons. The allocation of tasks leaves no scope for the workers to excel or think and highly demotivates them. (Sandrone, 1997; Blake and Moseley, 2010). Braverman (1974, p.59) argues that “it lacks the characteristics of a true science because its assumptions reflect nothing more than the outlook of the capitalist with regard to the conditions of production”. The workers are quite rigid and show no transferability in the workplace due to their very little or no knowledge on how to perform other tasks. No autonomy was given to the workers to take decisions and were expected to work like robots. Hence, “this would make for a successful machine, not a successful human being.” (Lawrence,2010).
The Human Relations Management objective is to create cultures in which high quality employees develop commitment through strong identification with the organization. (Guest, 1989). A worker should feel a sense of belongingness and responsibility for the organisation in which he is working for the betterment of that organization. “The human relations management theory is a researched belief that people desire to be part of a supportive team that facilitates development and growth. (L. Perry, 2017). There should be encouragement of participation in the workplace which motivates them and should perceive that their work has significance.
“Taylorism laid the foundations for science-based management more than 100 years ago. But early implementations led to worker resistance and distortions that have never quite gone away”. (Witzel, 2005, p.89). Taylorism disregarded the needs of the workers and confined them to performing monotonous and repetitive tasks which demotivated them. While Taylorism achieved in meeting the financial needs of employees it disregarded the subjective side of work. It failed to give importance to personal needs such as status, job satisfaction, job enrichment etc. which are important to keep the workforce motivated. (Huczynski & Buchanan, 2013). Abraham Maslow in his research “ A Theory of Human Motivation” (1943) stated that human have needs other than financial needs. Maslow argued, Self-actualization and transcendence are the ultimate goal. Maslow’s hierarchy of need showed how Taylorism only covered the lower order biological and safety need of a human being and ignored the needs at the top. These needs on fulfilment of social, self-respect and transcendence needs help in the better performance of a worker. Social needs give a sense of belongingness to the worker and the affection he receives from co-workers. Self-respect needs represent the need to be appreciated for the work which has been done by the worker himself. Transcendence needs indicate a spiritual need, the need to be “ one with the universe” or “achieving nirvana”. (Huczynski & Buchanan, 2013).
Scientific Management makes the workplace exceptionally rigid and is unsuccessful in valuing the work which the labourers put in new methodology. Taylorism restricted personal interactions in the workplace and limited the workers from moving or “scrounging” around. This usually led to conflicts in the workplace between managers and workers. There can be many causes for fatigue like long working hours, doing unsuitable work or bad working conditions etc. Such hindrances in good performance should be removed. (Pathak, 2016). The working environment was made dull and mundane due to no social interaction. Elton Mayo (1928) conducted a study in which female worker of a factory were placed inside a more intimate atmosphere rather than a shop floor which led to increased productivity as female workers experienced a sense of individualism amongst them. Mayo concluded that the satisfaction of working in a group and having the right mental attitude contributed more towards productivity and self-esteem than a bonus or an increase in wages.
Regardless of the fallacies, Taylorism cannot be disregarded. “The legacy of Scientific Management is found wherever machine-like precision in an operation is required to improve profitability”. (Bell and Martin 2012, p.107). There are several criticisms towards Scientific Management, however, a great number of organisations have benefitted greatly from it. Many companies like Mc Donald’s, Burger King etc have earned surplus profits by adapting this method. One unique concept is that of time and motion study. It was a study which applied a number of trials for the determination of the time taken to complete a task involving human input, undertaking a set of guidelines and conditions. (Grönroos, 1994).
Scientific Management in some cases has resulted in acting as a motivator because of the piece wage rate system which allows the worker better financial incentives for the higher productivity a worker achieves. The workers have a better understanding of the procedures as they are precise and makes their work smoother, efficient and they are able to complete a piece of work with much more ease.Scientific Management has led to reduction in confustion in the workplace. There is increased calculability, i.e an organization is calculate its sales more precisely and has incresed predicatablily. (Moonesirust, 2016). “Scientific Management surely and speedily separates the efficient from the inefficient workers, and affords speedier and more certain promotion and advancement to the former than management of the ordinary kind”. (Monthly Review of the U.S. Bureau of Labour Statistics, 1916, p.36).
Scientific Management was not flawed: its applicability was. Many systems have arisen in today’s world on many of the basic principles of Taylorism. Mass productions and surplus profits is still the main motive of the organizations present around the globe. Many examples are present which depict the success of Taylorism in many cases. One examples Taylor gave is of a worker Schmidt who worked in Bethlehem Steel works and was able to earn 60% more wages on increasing pig iron loading from 12.5 tons per man to 47 tons per man per day in box cars by following the principles of Scientific Management. (Pathak, 2016). “Ford’s production system fulfilled the need of a growing economy and its characteristic as a seller’s market and built the basis for mass production”. (Stamm et al., 2009, p.7). Henry Ford (1863-1947) adopted the principles of Scientific Management in the mass production for the Model T motor car. This helped him increase efficiency and productivity immensely and his techniques came to be known as Fordism. . (Huczynski and Buchanan, 2013).
Scientific Management was one of the greatest revolution in its time and developed a new outlook on how we looked at the working of an organization. It provided workers with a new platform; and Taylorism shows how it has succeeded in the workplace where standardisation rather than specialisation is to be maintained. Scientific Management has led to increased efficiency, output levels in many establishments such as McDonald’s which continue to maintain its standards across the globe by following the basic principles of Taylorism. Even though it has lessons to teach us, I believe that Taylorism can only exist in an “idealistic” or a “perfect” world and not in the modern business world. It is impossible for Taylorism to thrive in a world were self- expression and individualism are key for the development and the future of an organization. Scientific Management is viewed as redundant and is continuously losing its aptness.
References
Bell, R.L., & Martin, J.S. (2012). The Relevance of Scientific Management and Equity Theory in Everyday Managerial Communication Situations. Journal of Management Policy & Practice, 13(3), 106-115.
Blake, A. M., & Moseley, J. L. (2010). One hundred years after The Principles of Scientific Management: Frederick Taylor's life and impact on the field of human performance technology. Performance Improvement, 49(4), 27-34
Braverman, H. (1998). Labor and Monopoly Capital: The Degradation of Work in the Twentieth Century. New York: NYU Press.
Gabriel L.Perry (2017). Human Relations Management Theory Basics. Retrieved from https://www.business.com/articles/human-relations-management-theory-basics/.
Grönroos, C. (1994). From Scientific Management to Service Management. International Journal Of Service Industry Management, 5(1), 5-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09564239410051885
Huczynski, A.A., & Buchanan, D.A. (2013). Organizational Behaviour (8th ed.). Harlow: Pearson.
Mayo, E. (1945). The social problems of an industrial civilization (1st ed., p. 64). Boston: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University. This
Moonesirust, E. (2016). Academic Writing [PDF Document]. Retrieved from Moodle Web site: https://moodle.bath.ac.uk/mod/folder/view.php?id=547462
Pathak, R. (2016). Principle: Science, Not Rule of Thumb. Management Diary. Retrieved from https://mgtdiary.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/principle-science-not-rule-of-thumb.html this
Sandrone, V., & Engineer, Q.A. (1997). F.W. Taylor & Scientific Management. Retrieved from http://geocities.ws
Stamm, M.L., Neitzert, T.R., Singh, D.P.K. (2009, June 14-17). TQM, TPM, TOC, Lean and Six Sigma – Evolution of manufacturing methodologies under the paradigm shift from Taylorism/Fordism to Toyotism? Paper presented at the 2009 16th International Annual EurOMA Conference. Retrieved from http://aut.researchgateway.ac.nz/handle/10292/3858
Taylor, F. (1947). Scientific management, comprising Shop management (1st ed., p. 21). New York: Harper.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1916). Scientific Management and Labor. Monthly Review of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2(1), 28-38
Witzel, M. (2005). Where Scientific Management went awry. European Business Forum, (21), 89-91.