Human Relations Theory
Introduction
The Human Relations Theory of organization came in to existence in 1930s as a reaction to the classical approach to organizational analysis. This is because the classical theorists neglected the human factor in the organization. The Classical theorists took a mechanical view of organization and underemphasized the sociopsychological aspects of individual’s behaviour in organization. It is this critical failure of the classical theory that gave birth to the human relations approach. Human relations theory is also known by various names like Humanistic Theory, Neoclassical Theory, etc. Elton Mayo, an American Sociologist is the founder of the Human Relations Theory. The other writers who contributed to
…show more content…
Bruce and Nyland (2011) suggest that many academics preceded Mayo in identifying a concept similar to that of the human relations movement even going as far to suggest that the output and information collected by the Hawthorne investigations was identified well before Mayo by Taylor. In addition, Wren and Greenwood (1998) argue that Taylor made important contributions to what inspires human motivation, even though his ultimate findings were somewhat different to the human relations movement.[
Another name which has been attributed to pre-existing human relations ideas is that of Henry S Dennison. The one time president of the Taylor Society has been linked to both Taylorist principles as well human relation ideals thus creating a nexus between Taylorism and human relation thought. Dennison demonstrated an activist concern both with the rationale and character of workers, and with the control and management undertaken by managers of the business enterprise. In order to assess the validity of human relations as a benchmark for rights within the workplace, the contribution of Taylorism in comparison to human relations must be established. Taylorism and scientific management entailed to be a "complete mental revolution" and as Taylor explained, Taylorism sought to encourage managers and labourers to "take their eyes off of the division of the surplus as the important
Frederick W. Taylor worked across the United States in the first 15 years of the 20th century looking to solve production problems (Owens & Valesky, 2011, p. 67). He was an engineer in steel manufacturing and studied developed what what is now known as the four principles of scientific management. These principles spell out what both managers and workers are to do. Two important principles include having the management set goals, plan, and supervise workers, and the workers perform the work, and that organizations should establish the standard where management “sets the objectives and the workers cooperate in achieving them” (p. 67). Taylor’s principles are still used today by some organizational leaders who fight the movement that management should work as a team with the workers (pp. 67-68). Taylor’s principles have led to things such as strict discipline, the idea that workers must focus on their task with little or no interaction with colleagues, and the idea of incentive
Frederick Taylor’s fundamental thoughts on scientific management dated back to early 1880s when he was employed at Midvale Steel Company and observed his coworkers “soldiering” at work. In the following two decades, he moved around different companies while developing his management theory
Elton Mayo, Chester Barnard, Abraham Maslow, and Douglas McGregor were four theorists that helped establish the foundation of the neoclassic theoretical perspective; which deals with the human factor. These theorists created a human relations movement to deals with the factors, that benefit the worker and encourage higher performance, such as, improved working conditions, lowering of hours of work, and improved social relations.
Throughout today’s society there are several different cultural perspectives which form theoretical and practical understandings of natural environments, creating various human-nature relationship types. In this essay, I will describe and evaluate different ways of knowing nature and the impact of these views on human-nature relationships. From this, I will then explore my own human-nature relationship and reflect on how my personal experiences, beliefs and values has led me to this view, whilst highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each and reflecting upon Martin’s (1996) continuum.
Scientific management evolved into Fordism, which was established by the American entrepreneur Henry Ford. It basically involved mass production and an assembly line. Workers were attracted and motivated by higher wages, paid daily, which resulted in reduced staff turnover and productivity increase. Scientific management had many disadvantages, especially for the worker. Workers felt socially isolated, the work was exhausting, monotonous and stressful. As a result, in the 1930s, a movement, opposing Scientific management was created- the Human Relations movement. It emphasized on the cooperation of workers by treating them humanely and shifted the emphasis from utilitarian to normative control. Yet, it developed from Scientific management's principles. Post Tayloristic ideas influenced modern HRM, which unlike Taylorism, emphasizes on the commitment and individuality of
One difference between the motivational theories of Frederick Winslow Taylor's Scientific Management and Elton Mayo's human relations perspective as illustrated by the Hawthorne Studies is
Frederick W. Taylor was ahead of his time for his concept of Scientific management. It was a revolutionary way of running a business, that swept all over the globe, and his ideas were applicable to many different industries. Substituting disorder and conflict for a new untested method of control, cooperation, and science. Taylor understood there were no incentives for working harder. Knowing this, he payed workers based on output, allowing workers to make more money on any given day. It seemed like everyone would enjoy and prosper under this system, but that was not the case. Workers liked the opportunity to make more money in this system but many of them resisted this new idea. Being under constant supervision made work much harder for them.
He believed that these employees were easily replaceable for less pay. These kinds of procedures and ideas created an environment that was ripe for alienation. In an attempt to satisfy workers, “In return for a workers lost dignity, freedom, power and skill, Taylor promised higher pay” (Hoopes 48). Taylor also created the “differential piece rate” (Hoopes 38) which would further alienate workers from each other, claiming it improved production. Overall, Taylor’s theory of scientific management created a good environment for business owners but it only fueled alienation between the workers and the workers and society.
George Elton Mayo is credited with founding the human relations movement. Mayo conducted an experiment in the 1920’s and 1930’s know as the Hawthorne study. Two of the main aspects of the study centered around illumination in the work place and varying levels of break time and work hours (Wickström, 2000). The illumination study consisted of four different experiments over the course of three years. In each experiement, there was a control group and a study group. In the varying studies, the researchers experimented with varying levels of light and varying sequences of increasing and decreasing the level of light (“Hawthorne effect”). Throughout the experiments, researchers would often find patterns of increased productivity, leading them to believe that they had
There are a number of management theories that have changed the management business environment in the twentieth century. The theories have assisted managers to come up with better ways of management and organization of people. Managers have been able to increase profits, reduce costs and maximize efficiency. The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast the contributions of scientific management and the human relations movement to the modern management. This essay will use Frederick Winslow Taylor’s theory on scientific management and Elton Mayo’s human relations theory. These two movements have been proven to increase productivity in the workplace (Mullins, 2005).
Taylorism is a management system which was popular in the late 19th century. It was designed to increase efficiency by breaking down and specialising repetitive tasks. This is exhibited as mentioned in ‘Selection and Development: A new perspective on some old problems’ that several jobs presently no longer consist of clusters of similar tasks, but are now process based collections of activities (Harrington, Hill & Linley 2005). According to Weber’s foundation of organisation theory; bureaucracy was portrayed as an “instrument or tool of unrivalled technical superiority which entailed charismatic, traditional and rational authority” (1978, cited in Clegg 1994). Thereafter, other theories derived based on the instrument being used as a form of manipulation. This is evident in Knights & Roberts’ (1982) concept of human resource management and staff misunderstanding the nature of power, treating it as if it were an individual possession, as opposed to a relationship between people (Knights & Roberts 1982). Subsequently, this led to the establishment of unions and increasing cooperative resistance in the workplace as employees seek change in the occupational structure (Courpasson & Clegg 2012). The change in this occupational structure was based around the ‘superior-inferior’ concept where managers prioritise their own success
In today’s environment, Human Relations seem to be more relevant to the business management than scientific management. Scientific management looks for the efficiency of productivity of the workers. Human Relations is more concern on the workers’ need, which will change over the years. It shows that human relation approach is more acceptable to the world today, as well as the ability to adapt to the constant changing of the worker needs.
In management literature today, the greatest use of the concept of Taylorism is as a contrast to a new, improved way of doing business. In political and
Evaluating my own reflection was indeed something hard to do until I started learning Human Relations. Without self-awareness and self-disclosure, one can’t see his own reflection. It’s like a mirage in the dessert. We assume that something is there, but it won’t be there. And others mostly won’t envision the views we perceive. We may even have different opinions and may end up in fights.
Human Relations School theory is indeed an efficient management approach with a profusion of benefits. Being a large business, the human relations system is beneficial as directors are appointed and decision making is made based on discussions. This was the case when after negociations, the sales manager was in charge of price cutting to keep customers, the advertising manager taking charge of new adverts and Roberto concentrating on the prospect of entering the gluten-free market.