Scientific Management Report

Frederick Taylor (1917) developed scientific management theory (often called "Taylorism") at the beginning of this century. His theory had four basic principles: 1) find the one "best way" to perform each task, 2) carefully match each worker to each task, 3) closely supervise workers, and use reward and punishment as motivators, and 4) the task of management is planning and control.

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

Taylor the “Father of Scientific Management” was an American mechanical engineer, born in 1856. He decided against going to Harvard despite passing the entrance exam, instead joining the working world and later whilst working for Midvale Steel he completed his degree at the Stevens Institute of Technology in New Jersey. He would go on to apply his engineering background to the scientific study of management (Simha and Lemak 2010).

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

Scientific Management is also known as Taylorism. Fredrick Winslow Taylor wanted to divide the work process into small, simple and separate steps (Division of Labor). Division of Labor meant every worker only had one or two steps, this was created to boost productivity. Taylor also believed in Hierarchy, he wanted a clear chain of command that separated the managers from workers. He did this so managers would design work process and enforced how the work was performed and employees would simply follow directions. Taylor wanted to select and train high performing workers or first-class employees and match them to a job that best suited them. Taylor believed the most productive workers should be paid more. Employees who could not meet the new higher standard were fired.

Human Relation Management was founded by Professor Elton Mayo (1880-1949). During the industrial revolution in early 1920’s, Mayo initiated the Human Relation Theory of Management. A psychologist, Henry C. Link (as cited in Miller & Form, 1924, p. 657) relates that the ideal employment method is receiving applicants from all kinds at one end, sort, interview, and record them, before labelling them with the righteous job. Mayo introduced an experiment, the Hawthorne Studies, to look into the impact of working environment on the productivity of workers.

The year 1911 saw Frederick Winslow Taylor publish a book titled ‘The principles of scientific management’ in which he aimed to prove that the scientific method could be used in producing profits for an organization through the improvement of an employee’s efficiency. During that decade, management practice was focused on initiative and incentives which gave autonomy to the workman. He thus argued that one half of the problem was up to management, and both the worker and manager needed to cooperate in order to produce the greatest prosperity.

Scientific Management Theory by Frederick W. Taylor – Throughout the industrial world employees are the large part of the organisation and Fundamental interests of employees are necessarily aggressive. So as a manager it is necessary to arrange mutual relations with employees so their interests become identical. In case of any single individual the greatest prosperity can exist only when that individual has reached his highest state of efficiency and that is, when he is turning out his largest daily output (Frederick Winslow Taylor, 2007).

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).

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.

Successful management requires an understanding of the fundamental concepts of effective management techniques and principles. In order to gain such insight, and manage effectively and efficiently, managers must develop an awareness of past management principles, models and theories. From the turn of the 20th Century, the

Scientific management (also called Taylorism, the Taylor system, or the Classical Perspective) is a theory of management that analyzes and synthesizes workflow processes, improving labor productivity. The core ideas of the theory were developed by Frederick Winslow Taylor in the 1880s and 1890s, and were first published in his monographs, Shop Management (1905) and The Principles of Scientific Management (1911).[1] Taylor believed that decisions based upon tradition and rules of thumb should be replaced by precise procedures developed after careful study of an individual at work.

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.