OBJECTIVE: In the classical approach we have studied the contributions of Luther Gulick and Lyndall Urwick. Here, we shall discuss the contributions of Taylor, another classicist of scientific management. What will we learn here?
An Introduction: The fundamental contribution of scientific management movement was the application of scientific method to discover new knowledge. It is the method of controlled experimentation, with well defined steps in proper sequence under controlled situation. In late 19th century there was growth of managerial class in American Business. The practices of management began to change from a day-to-day problem solving approach to a more an inclusive, comprehensive, long-run approach to encounter multiple managerial problems which were not faced previously. Prominent leaders like Henry Towne, Henry Metcalf and Frederick Taylor tried to develop a unified system of management and Towne called this new philosophy of management as the science of management.
- explain how the scientific methods and approaches were introduced in the management of organisations state
- Taylor's concept of management and explain his principles of scientific management describe the mechanisms to serve the principles of scientific management; and
- critically evaluate Taylor's contributions to scientific management.
An Introduction: The fundamental contribution of scientific management movement was the application of scientific method to discover new knowledge. It is the method of controlled experimentation, with well defined steps in proper sequence under controlled situation. In late 19th century there was growth of managerial class in American Business. The practices of management began to change from a day-to-day problem solving approach to a more an inclusive, comprehensive, long-run approach to encounter multiple managerial problems which were not faced previously. Prominent leaders like Henry Towne, Henry Metcalf and Frederick Taylor tried to develop a unified system of management and Towne called this new philosophy of management as the science of management.
Who was Taylor?
In early 20th Century, Frederick Winslow Taylor undertook researches in management of industry in the USA. None of his predecessors were engaged directly in the analysis of the work methods.
Taylor believed that the principle "best management is a true science" is applicable to all kinds of human activities.Taylor attempted to bring the precision of science to the analysis and measurement of work, he wanted it to be universally applicable to improve productivity by establishing a rationale for organizing work. Taylor's influence on management has been so profound that his methods are used in most countries. Therefore, he is generally regarded as the father of scientific management.
TAYLOR'S EARLY WORK: Taylor's contribution to the development of scientific management was recorded in his papers like A Piece-Rate System, Shop Management, and The Art of Cutting Metals etc. Among his early works, Taylor also discussed defects of management and Time and Motion Study.
1. A Piece-Rate System: Taylor's first paper on Piece-Rate system was considered as an outstanding contribution to the principles of wage payment. He proposed a new system consisting of three parts:
(a) observation and analysis of work through time study to set the 'rate' or standard,
(b) a 'differential rate' system of piece work, and
(c)paying men and not positions.
(a) observation and analysis of work through time study to set the 'rate' or standard,
(b) a 'differential rate' system of piece work, and
(c)paying men and not positions.
2. Shop Management: In his second paper on Shop Management, he discussed at length, workshop organisation and management. He focused attention, in this paper, on his philosophy of management as given below:
- The objective of management must be to pay high wages and have low unit production costs to achieve the increased industrial efficiency.
- Management has to apply scientific methods of research and experiment to the management problems.
- Standardization of working conditions and placing the workers on the basis of scientific criteria.
- Management must dive normal training to workers and specific instructions to perform the prescribed motions with standardized tools and materials.
- Friendly cooperation between workers and management on the basis of scientific system of labour organisation.
3. Cutting Metal: Taylor expressed for better labour management, conflict particularly between foreman and workers over the quantity of output. He failed to resolve the problems by persuasion and force. Realizing that a new industrial scheme was essential to prevent encounters, he began searching for a science of work. In the process he conducted a series of experiments for more than two decades. He experimented with machine tools, speed, metals, materials, etc. His experiments at the Midvale and Bethleham Steel Company led to the discovery of high speed steel and revolutionized the art of cutting metals. The paper on "The An pf cutting Metals" presented to ASME was considered as the most remarkable piece of research ever presented at a conference. The paper was based on the longest and most exhaustive series of about 30,000 experiments conducted over a period of 26 years at a cost of about $2,00,000. The achievements of metal cutting experiment its were considered more important than Taylor's other contributions because they initiated a major break through in the development of American industry.
4. Defects of Management: While at Midvale Steel Company, Taylor made serious observations and study of operations of many factories, and identified the following major defects in management:
- management had no clear understanding of worker management responsibilities;
- lack of effective standards of work;
- restricted output because of 'natural soldering' and 'systematic soldering' of work by the workers;
- failure of management to design jobs properly and to offer proper incentives to workers to overcome the soldering;
- most decisions of the management were unscientific as they were based on hunch, intuition, past experience, and rule-of-thumb;
- lack of proper studies about the division of work among departments; and
- placement of workers without consideration of their ability, aptitude and interests.
5.Time and Motion Study: In his other experiments he studied through motion and the study and analysed how the workers handled materials, machines and tools, and developed a coordinated systems of shop management. Taylor set out to determine scientifically the ability of workers in dealing with equipment and materials and this approach led to the true beginning of scientific management. In the development of his shop system Taylor wished to know that unties optimum conditions, how long a man or a machine would or should take to perform a given task in a specified process, using specified materials and methods. He used scientific fact-finding methods to determine empirically the right ways to perform tasks with the help of stop watch. Taylor also recognized the need for scientific method of selecting the right men for the right jobs considering their initial qualifications and potential for further learning, He wanted effective supervision of a worker and his working conditions after placing the worker in the right place. Taylor wanted to lay down the foundation for sound personnel management i.e. to match the worker's abilities to the job.
TAYLOR'S CONCEPT OF MANAGEMENT: Before we discuss Taylor's great principles of management, it is desirable to know his views on the concept of management. Taylor pointed out that management is a true science. The Paradigms resting upon fixed laws, rules and principles. He argued that management comprised a number of principles which are applicable to all organisations-both private and government. The main object of management, according to him is to secure the maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled with the maximum prosperity for each employee. His philosophy of scientific management is that there is no inherent conflict in the interest of the employers, workers and consumers. The primary concern of Taylor was that the results of higher productivity should equally benefit all people i.e. workers, employers, and consumers in the shape of higher wages to the workers, greater profits to the management and payment of lower prices for the products by the consumers. Taylor observed that management neglected its functions and shifted its burden to the labour while keeping for itself minor responsibilities. He advised that management should take the responsibility of determining standards, planning work, organizing, controlling and devising incentive schemes.
PRINCIPLES OF SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT: Taylor advocated in the interest of societal prosperity close collaboration and deliberate cooperation between the workmen and the management. His philosophy of management was based on mutual interests and on four basic principles of scientific management:
- the development of true science;
- the scientific selection of the workmen;
- the scientific education and development of workmen;and
- intimate and friendly cooperation between the management and the men.
1. Development of a True Science of Work: When science is viewed as an 'organised knowledge' every act of a workman can be reduced to a science in the interests of the worker and management, it is necessary to know as to what constitutes a fair day's work. It saves the worker from the unnecessary criticism of the boss, and enables the management to get the maximum work from worker. This needs a scientific investigation of a 'large daily task' to be done by qualified workers under optimum conditions. The investigation can take the form of collecting information about worker's past and present working methods. The results of investigation have to be classified, tabulated, and reduced into rules and laws to find out the ideal working methods or what is called 'one best way of doing the job'. Such development of science of work enables the organisation to produce more; enables the worker to receive higher wages and a much larger profit to the company.
2. Scientific Selection and Progressive Development of the Workmen: To ensure effective performance of the work which is developed through scientific investigation, there is also a need to select only those workers who possess the necessary physical and intellectual qualities. This needs a deliberate study of the aptitude, nature and performance of the worker and finding out what possibilities and limitations one has for future development. Taylor believed that every worker has potentialities for development. He insisted that every worker must be systematically and thoroughly trained. Taylor felt that it is the responsibility of the management to develop the worker offering him opportunities for advancement to do the job to the fullest realization of his natural capacities. It is necessary to ensure that the employees accept the new methods, tools and conditions willingly and enthusiastically.
3. Bringing together the Science of Work and scientifically selected and Trained men : To enable the worker to do his job and to ensure that he may not slip back to the earlier methods of doing work, there must be somebody to inspire the workers. This Taylor felt is the exclusive responsibility of the management. He believed that workers are always willing to cooperate with the management, but there is more opposition from the side of management. Taylor maintained that this process of bringing together causes the mental revolution.
4. Division of Work and Responsibility: In the traditional management theory, the worker bore the entire responsibility for work while management had lesser responsibilities. But Taylor's scientific management assumes equal responsibility between management and worker. The manager unlike in the past is equally busy as the worker. This division of work creates understanding and mutual dependence between them. There will also be constant and intimate cooperation between them. All this results in elimination of conflicts and strikes. However, none of these four principles could be isolated and called scientific management. It is a combination of all elements described above. We can summarize the philosophy of these principles as under:
- Science, not rule of thumb;
- Harmony,not discord;
- Cooperation, not individualism;
- Maximum output, in place of restricted output; and
- Development of efficiency and prosperity.
FUNCTIONAL FOREMAN-SHIP: Taylor doubted the efficacy of the 'linear' system or the military type of organisation in which each worker is subordinate to only one boss. He replaced this system with what is called 'functional foreman-ship' in which the worker receives orders from eight narrowly specialized supervisors. He divided the work not only among workers, but also at the supervisory level. Of the eight functional bosses, four will be responsible for planning and the remaining four for execution: 'The gang-boss, the repair-boss, the speed-boss and the inspector are the four bosses for execution. The order la work and route clerk, the instruction card clerk, the time and cost clerk, and the shop disciplinarian are the four planning bosses. Taylor believed that in this functional type of organisation, the foreman can be trained quickly and specialization becomes very easy. The concept of division of work between planning and execution was incorporated in line and staff concept, with line being the executing agency and staff being the planning agency. Taylor also specified nine qualities which will make a good 'foreman'. They are: education, special or technical knowledge, manual dexterity and strength, tact, energy, grit, honesty, judgement and good health.
MECHANISMS OF SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT: Apart from functional foreman-ship, Taylor also developed some more mechanisms to serve his principles of scientific management. They are:
- Time study;
- Standardization of all tools and implements used in the trades and also of the acts or movements of workmen for each class of work;
- The desirability of a planning room or department; The 'exception principle' in management;
- The use of slide-rules and similar time saving implement; Instruction cards for the workman;
- The task idea in management, accompanied by a large bonus for the successful performance of the task;
- The 'differential rate';
- Mnemonic systems for classifying manufactured products as well as implements used in manufacturing;
- A routing system; and
- Modem cost system.
- It is not an efficiency device;
- It is not a new scheme of paying men;
- It is not a new system of figuring cost;
- It is not a time study or motion study: and
- It is not divided foreman-ship or functional foreman-ship.
MENTAL REVOLUTION: Scientific management in its essence, according to Taylor, primarily involves a complete mental revolution on the part of workers and management regarding their duties, towards their work, towards their fellow workers, and towards all of their daily problems. It demands 'the realization of the fact that their mutual interest is not antagonistic; and mutual prosperity is possible only through mutual cooperation.
According to Taylor, in every organisation a exists between workers and management due to improper division of output, to avoid this, it is essential to change the mental attitude of both sides. Thus Taylor propagated the concept of 'mental revolution'.
Taylor was of the view that in an organisation both workers and employers should cooperate with each other and work together towards increasing the productivity. The workers and management should concentrate only on increasing output and nothing else; they should continue to do so until the output increases to such an extent that it becomes unnecessary to quarrel over its division. Increased output would give better wages to worker and high profit to management and this atmosphere of conflict will be placed by peace and harmony.
According to Taylor, in every organisation a exists between workers and management due to improper division of output, to avoid this, it is essential to change the mental attitude of both sides. Thus Taylor propagated the concept of 'mental revolution'.
Taylor was of the view that in an organisation both workers and employers should cooperate with each other and work together towards increasing the productivity. The workers and management should concentrate only on increasing output and nothing else; they should continue to do so until the output increases to such an extent that it becomes unnecessary to quarrel over its division. Increased output would give better wages to worker and high profit to management and this atmosphere of conflict will be placed by peace and harmony.
CRITICISM: Scientific management became something of a 'movement' and offered the hope of resolving industrial problems. But there were many criticisms on Taylor's concept. The criticisms primarily came from:
Trade unions felt that Taylor was more interested in the mechanical aspects of work and not much concerned about the total work situation. A number of agitations by the labour organisations and their representations to the American Congress led the House in 1912 to appoint a Special Committee of the House of Representatives to investigate into Taylorism. Although the report of the.committee favored neither the labour nor Taylor, the trade unions in 1915 succeeded in getting an amendment to Army Appropriation Act, forbidding the use of stop watches or the payment of premiums or bonuses in Army Arsenals.
Trade Union's opposition to Taylorism also led to an investigation conducted by Robert Hoxie for the United States Commission on Industrial Relations. Professor Hoxie in his report criticized Taylor's scientific management and Taylor's approaches as they were concerned only with mechanical aspects and not with the human aspects of production. The report also stated that the basic ideals of scientific management and labour unionism were incompatible.
Taylorisrn was also attacked by the managers. Those who wanted quick promotions to the high managerial positions opposed Taylor's stand, which advocated training by experts. The managers did not appreciate his scornful comments on rule of thumb method. Those who had fought their way to high managerial positions without the benefit of higher education were sensitive to Taylor's stand that unless assisted by highly trained experts they were unqualified to manage". It is very interesting to note that Taylor had to resign from both Midvale Steel Works and Bethleham Steel because of the friction with the company managers.
Among others who criticized Taylor include Oliver Sheldon, a British Management thinker, Mary Parker Follett, an American business philosopher, Sam Lewisohn, Elton Mayo, Peter Drucker and others. They charged that Taylor's scientific management was impersonal and under emphasized the human factor. This criticism led to a series of experiments in industrial sociology and social psychology. The classic Hawthorne Experiments of Elton Mayo and other research studies on human relations and group dynamics in industry rejected Taylorism. (We will learn more on this in future posts.)
Elton Mayo through his classic Hawthorne investigations conclusively proved that it is not the structural arrangements which are important for increasing productivity and efficiency in the organisation, but it is the emotional attitude of the worker towards his work and his colleagues. The Taylor's philosophy that men were generally lazy and try to avoid work has also been disputed. It is evident from Brown's analysis that "work is an essential part of man's life, since it is that aspect of life which gives him status and binds him to the society. When they db not like it, the fault lies in the psychological and social conditions of the job rather than the worker".
Another criticism of Taylor is that he did not properly understand the anatomy of the work. His emphasis on the minute division of work and specialization was severely criticized on several grounds. Firstly, the work gets depersonalized and the worker becomes a mere cog in the machine. Relations between the worker and manager become remote as a result the worker loses the sense of participation in the work. More than anything the worker finds no outlet to exhibit his abilities and potentialities. Secondly, it may even lead to automation of the workers which may have physiological and neurological consequences. As has aptly been put by Peter Drucker the organisation becomes a piece of poor engineering judged by the standards of human relations, its well as by those of productive efficiency and output. Thirdly, Taylor's division of work into planning and executive divisions has severely been criticized. It is argued that in such situations it is difficult to develop proper team spirit, and if planning is totally divorced From execution it is difficult to secure the participation of the workers in the progress of-the firm. It has also been argued that Taylor overlooked the fact that the principle of division and sub-division of work into minutest parts is subject to the law of diminishing returns. Thus Taylor's philosophy was summarized in the following words: "First, he confuses the principle of analysis with the principle of action. Second, planning and doing are separate parts of the same job; they cannot be totally divorced".
Behaviouralists charged that Taylor's methods of scientific management sacrifices the initiative of the worker, his individual freedom and the use of his intelligence and responsibility. Herbert Simon and March have described the scientific management as the 'physiological organisation theory'. Braveman characterized Taylorism: (a) as abstracting the craft skill from the worker and housing it in a system of control, and (b) using this knowledge so gained to legitimize control of the worker.
The second point about legitimizing the managerial control of the worker has been expanded by Whitaker. He asserted that it is an effort by capitalist philosophy to resolve the contrast between representative political democracy and then pointed non-responsible authority in business and industry in modern industrial societies.
AN EVALUATION OF TAYLOR'S CONTRIBUTION: Despite the limitations -- limitations concerning an adequate understanding of human psychology, sociology and the anatomy of work -- Taylor's work remains supremely important. By all accounts Taylor must be regarded as a pioneer in the study of human beings at work. He was the first person to initiate the quest for better performance at work. He was also the first to apply quantitative techniques to the study of industrial management. Modern scientific management, operations research, method study, time study, systems analysis, management by exceptions, etc., are all a part of Taylor's heritage.
Taylor's scientific management became something of a movement. In an age of growing achievement in the physical sciences it offered the hope of resolving industrial problems through the use of objective principles. For young and imaginative engineers, it provided an, ethos and a mission in life. After the initial period of resistance it conquered the citadels of old fashioned industrial management in the United States and had a tremendous effect on industrial practice. It spread to Germany. England, France, USSR, and other European countries. Japanese Industry has used the techniques of scientific management extensively during the entire period of its growth to improve its unit cost production. Many of the developing countries have been trying to use scientific management with varying effect. Scientific management was supported in Russia and Taylor's principles were included in the curriculum of education and training of the engineers. Ruthlessly exposing the essence of the Taylor system as "the last word in reckless capital exploitation" Lenin explained "we must introduce the Taylor systems and scientific efficiency of labour throughout Russia by combining the system with reduction in working time, with the application of the new methods of production and work organisation undetrimental to the labor power in the working population"'. Taylor-ism took shape as "Stakhanovite movement" in USSR.
- Trade Unions and Organised Labor
- Managers
- Human Relations Theorists and Behaviouralists.
Trade unions felt that Taylor was more interested in the mechanical aspects of work and not much concerned about the total work situation. A number of agitations by the labour organisations and their representations to the American Congress led the House in 1912 to appoint a Special Committee of the House of Representatives to investigate into Taylorism. Although the report of the.committee favored neither the labour nor Taylor, the trade unions in 1915 succeeded in getting an amendment to Army Appropriation Act, forbidding the use of stop watches or the payment of premiums or bonuses in Army Arsenals.
Trade Union's opposition to Taylorism also led to an investigation conducted by Robert Hoxie for the United States Commission on Industrial Relations. Professor Hoxie in his report criticized Taylor's scientific management and Taylor's approaches as they were concerned only with mechanical aspects and not with the human aspects of production. The report also stated that the basic ideals of scientific management and labour unionism were incompatible.
Taylorisrn was also attacked by the managers. Those who wanted quick promotions to the high managerial positions opposed Taylor's stand, which advocated training by experts. The managers did not appreciate his scornful comments on rule of thumb method. Those who had fought their way to high managerial positions without the benefit of higher education were sensitive to Taylor's stand that unless assisted by highly trained experts they were unqualified to manage". It is very interesting to note that Taylor had to resign from both Midvale Steel Works and Bethleham Steel because of the friction with the company managers.
Among others who criticized Taylor include Oliver Sheldon, a British Management thinker, Mary Parker Follett, an American business philosopher, Sam Lewisohn, Elton Mayo, Peter Drucker and others. They charged that Taylor's scientific management was impersonal and under emphasized the human factor. This criticism led to a series of experiments in industrial sociology and social psychology. The classic Hawthorne Experiments of Elton Mayo and other research studies on human relations and group dynamics in industry rejected Taylorism. (We will learn more on this in future posts.)
Elton Mayo through his classic Hawthorne investigations conclusively proved that it is not the structural arrangements which are important for increasing productivity and efficiency in the organisation, but it is the emotional attitude of the worker towards his work and his colleagues. The Taylor's philosophy that men were generally lazy and try to avoid work has also been disputed. It is evident from Brown's analysis that "work is an essential part of man's life, since it is that aspect of life which gives him status and binds him to the society. When they db not like it, the fault lies in the psychological and social conditions of the job rather than the worker".
Another criticism of Taylor is that he did not properly understand the anatomy of the work. His emphasis on the minute division of work and specialization was severely criticized on several grounds. Firstly, the work gets depersonalized and the worker becomes a mere cog in the machine. Relations between the worker and manager become remote as a result the worker loses the sense of participation in the work. More than anything the worker finds no outlet to exhibit his abilities and potentialities. Secondly, it may even lead to automation of the workers which may have physiological and neurological consequences. As has aptly been put by Peter Drucker the organisation becomes a piece of poor engineering judged by the standards of human relations, its well as by those of productive efficiency and output. Thirdly, Taylor's division of work into planning and executive divisions has severely been criticized. It is argued that in such situations it is difficult to develop proper team spirit, and if planning is totally divorced From execution it is difficult to secure the participation of the workers in the progress of-the firm. It has also been argued that Taylor overlooked the fact that the principle of division and sub-division of work into minutest parts is subject to the law of diminishing returns. Thus Taylor's philosophy was summarized in the following words: "First, he confuses the principle of analysis with the principle of action. Second, planning and doing are separate parts of the same job; they cannot be totally divorced".
Behaviouralists charged that Taylor's methods of scientific management sacrifices the initiative of the worker, his individual freedom and the use of his intelligence and responsibility. Herbert Simon and March have described the scientific management as the 'physiological organisation theory'. Braveman characterized Taylorism: (a) as abstracting the craft skill from the worker and housing it in a system of control, and (b) using this knowledge so gained to legitimize control of the worker.
The second point about legitimizing the managerial control of the worker has been expanded by Whitaker. He asserted that it is an effort by capitalist philosophy to resolve the contrast between representative political democracy and then pointed non-responsible authority in business and industry in modern industrial societies.
AN EVALUATION OF TAYLOR'S CONTRIBUTION: Despite the limitations -- limitations concerning an adequate understanding of human psychology, sociology and the anatomy of work -- Taylor's work remains supremely important. By all accounts Taylor must be regarded as a pioneer in the study of human beings at work. He was the first person to initiate the quest for better performance at work. He was also the first to apply quantitative techniques to the study of industrial management. Modern scientific management, operations research, method study, time study, systems analysis, management by exceptions, etc., are all a part of Taylor's heritage.
Taylor's scientific management became something of a movement. In an age of growing achievement in the physical sciences it offered the hope of resolving industrial problems through the use of objective principles. For young and imaginative engineers, it provided an, ethos and a mission in life. After the initial period of resistance it conquered the citadels of old fashioned industrial management in the United States and had a tremendous effect on industrial practice. It spread to Germany. England, France, USSR, and other European countries. Japanese Industry has used the techniques of scientific management extensively during the entire period of its growth to improve its unit cost production. Many of the developing countries have been trying to use scientific management with varying effect. Scientific management was supported in Russia and Taylor's principles were included in the curriculum of education and training of the engineers. Ruthlessly exposing the essence of the Taylor system as "the last word in reckless capital exploitation" Lenin explained "we must introduce the Taylor systems and scientific efficiency of labour throughout Russia by combining the system with reduction in working time, with the application of the new methods of production and work organisation undetrimental to the labor power in the working population"'. Taylor-ism took shape as "Stakhanovite movement" in USSR.
LET US SUM UP:The contributions of Taylor to the philosophy and principles of Scientific Management have been highlighted in this unit. We have discussed the four principles of scientific management propounded by Taylor. Other contributions like functional foreman-ship. the different mechanisms to serve his principles have also been highlighted in this unit. Taylor's contributions evoked severe criticisms from different quarters even during his times. We have made, therefore, a critical evaluation of his contributions. One of the criticisms against Taylor's principles is that it sacrificed human element for the sake of mechanical efficiency. Taking clue from these criticisms later scholars developed what is now popularly known as human relations approach to the study of organisations.
In the following post we would study the contributions of Elton Mayo.
No comments:
Post a Comment