Scientific Management and Human Relations Movement

Classical organizational theory supports two views. Scientific management which focuses on managing work and employees and administrative management which addresses issues which

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

Theory X and Theory Y represent two sets of assumptions about human nature and human behaviour that are relevant to the practice of management. They describe two contrasting models of workforce motivation. Theory X represents a negative view on of human nature that assumes individuals generally dislike work, are irresponsible, and require close supervision to do their jobs. Theory Y represents a positive view of human nature and assumes individuals are generally hard-working, creative, and able to take on responsibility

Compare and contrast of the classical school of management and the human relations school of management

There are many Management Theorists who have devised ways in which a business can achieve success efficiently. The two management theorists that I am going to talk about are Fredrick Winslow Taylor and Max Weber, and I will also compare and contrast their contributions to the field of management. There are 4 main classical theories in management which are: 1. Scientific Management 2. Bureaucracy 3. Administrative Management 4. Human Relations. The two that I will be focusing on for this assignment are Scientific Management and Bureaucracy. Frederick Taylor (March 20th, 1856-March 21st, 1915) was an American Engineer. He sought to improve industrial efficiency in the workplace. The birth of Scientific Method is attributed to Taylor and his main

Accept that management itself is governed by the science developed for each operation and surrender its arbitrary power over worker, that is, cooperate with them.

There are very many factors that motivate employees to do outstanding work in their jobs. Though most of them are non-monetary factors like participative decision making, work teams, challenging jobs, goals in life or in the company, power and other factors. Most of the employees that emerge in their workplace, either in a small cubicle or a mega office have got some drive that enable them to perform in their work, but the key question is, is money is the key motivation in their workplace? In this essay both sides will be argued in order to find the answer to this (Robbins, Odendaal & Roodt, 2003).

Managers throughout history have been interested in studying ways to increase productivity. For example, Frederick Taylor began the movement of scientific management in the 1880’s. Scientific management looked to improve productivity through means of scientific analysis of worker’s tasks and work processes rather than the old “rule of thumb” (Taylor, 1914). Taylor believed that he could maximize worker efficiency and productivity through focusing on workers specific hand motions and patterns. After this period, beginning in about the 1930’s, managers looked to take productivity to yet another level by studying worker physiology and motivation. This new movement came to be known as the human relations movement.

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).

Throughout history, there have been many different approaches of management theories. Some theories longer exist because they are no longer relevant in today’s environment, but some theories are still implemented like Scientific Management and Human Relations. Scientific management emphasizes on efficiency productivity by motivating workers with monetary rewards. Human relations emphasize on motivation of workers by both financial rewards and a range of social factors (e.g. praise, a sense of belonging, feelings of achievement and pride in one’s work).

Nowadays we have new implementing plans for management. The different theories of management are: classical, behavioral, quantitative and quality management theory, systematic and contingency management theory.

The classical management has two basic drives namely scientific and general administrative management. Scientific management focuses on how to increase productivity whiles the administrative management theory looks at organizations in general and concentrate on how to make them effective and efficient.

Taylor's own name for his approach was scientific management. This sort of task-oriented optimization of work tasks is nearly ubiquitous today in industry, and has made most industrial work menial, repetitive, tedious and depressing; this can be noted, for instance, in assembly lines and fast-food restaurants. Ford's arguments began from his observation that, in general, workers forced to perform repetitive tasks work at the slowest rate that goes unpunished. This slow rate of work (which he called "soldiering", but might nowadays be termed by those in charge as "loafing" or "malingering" or by those on the assembly line as "getting through the day"), he opined, was based on the observation that, when paid the same amount, workers will tend to do the amount of work the slowest among them does: this reflects the idea that workers have a vested interest in their own well-being, and do not benefit from working above the defined rate of work when it will not increase their compensation. He therefore proposed that the work practice that had been developed in most work environments was crafted, intentionally or unintentionally, to be very inefficient in its execution. From this he posited that there was one best method for performing a particular task, and that if it were taught to workers, their productivity would go up.

First, I will discuss the exemplary management theories that transpired around the twentieth century. These involve scientific management, which center of attraction was on associating per-sonnel and jobs to increase effectiveness; and administrative management, which center of atten-tion is on recognizing the principles that will impel to the beginning of the nearly adept structure of management and organization. Next, you have behavioral management theories which was estab-lished both prior and subsequently the Second World War, which spotlight was on supervisors should guide and supervise their personnel to optimize their effectiveness. Then you have man-agement science theory, which was current during the Second World War and which has evolved to be very

The scientific management theory have an assumption that workers are lazy, not smart in analyzing tasks, only prefers simplified work and only works for money (Miller & Form, 1964). According to Taylor (2004), workers are unable figure out the most efficient way in doing work. Therefore, they are thought as replaceable working parts like a machine in the production line and can be trained to specialize in a certain procedure in the production. They are assumed to adopt the Protestant work ethic, working for long hours and not taking any breaks. Whenever a worker or a ‘part’ failed to perform its tasks, they