Essays on Comparison of Theories of Frederick Taylor, Henry Fayol and Elton Mayo Coursework

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Comparison of Theories of Frederick Taylor, Henry Fayol, and Elton Mayo" is a great example of management coursework.   Management is a discipline that has existed over the years, especially among researchers and people who have an interest in the running of the organization. Kemp (2013, p. 346) stated that despite its existing there has been no consensus among management theorists on the definition of the term “ management” . Every theorist has come up with his or her perspective to contribute towards this discipline. Even though differences have clearly emerged how the theorists define and explain managers should run the organizations, Heames and Breland (2010, p. 427) contended that all the approaches used by theorists, including scientific and classical management always strive to realize similar ends such as maximizing efficiency, improving the organization on the basis of human resource management.

Therefore, this essay will compare and contrast, Frederick Taylor from two other management theorists including Henry Fayol and Elton Mayo. Basically, the essay will analyze their approaches to management while highlighting their similarities and differences. Overview of Frederick Taylor, Henry Fayol and Elton Mayo Grachev and Rakitsky (2013, p. 515) claimed that Fredrick Taylor was a trained engineer who has often been referred to as the ‘ father of scientific management’ due to his immense contribution towards the betterment of organizational management.

Taylor’ s theories and approaches to management were later termed ‘ Taylorism’ in association with his name (Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson 2011, p. 8). In his argument, he claimed that the variations in labor productivity were inspired by different causes like skills, talent, motive or intelligence. Fredrick Taylor understood that there is just one effective mode of doing any task in what scientific management called specialization.

According to Schachter (2010, p. 439), Taylor believed in planning and argued that it would significantly enhance productivity. He went further to claim that managing workers scientifically was more efficient as compared to incentive' and 'initiative’ way of motivating employees. He conducted different researches like the motion study, time study, and analyzed the different workers’ so as to lessen wastage (Simha & Lemak 2010, p. 237). Fredrick Taylor devised a pay system particularly the piece-rate system in which each employee was remunerated a predetermined piece rate based on every unit produced. Henri Fayol was a management theorist and mining engineer from France who immeasurably contributed towards the modern management concepts.

In his research, Rodrigues (2001) posited that Fayol suggested six 14 fundamental, principles, and functions of management. Has greatly leading in the creation of classical management school of thought which is regarded as a major principle of classical perspective to the management. However, his 14 principles and primary functions theories are considered as task-oriented as opposed to people-oriented (Spatig 2009, p. 197). Fayol is often recognized as the first theorist to differentiate between managerial and technical skills. On the other hand, Elton Mayo was a sociologist and organization theorist from Australia who his highly remembered for the Hawthorne Studies (, J.C.

Wood & M.C. Wood 2004). This study conducted in 1930 demonstrated the significance of groups in influencing the individuals’ behavior at work. Wren and Bedeian (2009) contended that the study enabled Mayo to come up with conclusions regarding how an organizational manager ought to behave. Mayo conducted out several experiments about increasing and enhancing productivity. He established that when employees operate in informal teams their job satisfaction differed to a large extent.

As an initiator of the human relations movement, he contended that human beings are inspired by social needs and serve well in a group setting which is socially bound (Bruce 2011, p. 383). He reasoned that the fundamental challenge for any organization has to be fulfilling the social needs. The theory by Mayo holds that only after an employee is satisfied in the social perspective that he will work efficiently thus organizations are considered to be co-operating social systems where informal groups bear substantial influence on productivity.

References

Buchanan, D & Huczynski, A 2010, Organizational Behaviour, 7th ed. Harlow: Prentice

Hall

Bruce, K 2011, Elton Mayo and the Deification of Human Relations, Organization Studies, vol.

32, no.3, 383-405

Giannantonio, C.M & Hurley-Hanson, A.E 2011, Frederick Winslow Taylor: Reflections on

the Relevance of The Principles of Scientific Management 100 Years Later, Journal of Business and Management – Vol. 17, No. 1, pp.7-20

Grachev, M & Rakitsky, B 2013, Historic horizons of Frederick Taylor's scientific management,

Journal of Management History, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 512-527

Heames, J.T & Breland, J.W 2010, Management Pioneer Contributors: 30-Year Review, Journal

of Management History, Vol.16, No.4, pp.427-436

Kemp, L.J. 2013, Modern to postmodern management: developments in scientific management,

Journal of Management History, Vol. 19, No.3 pp. 345-361

Levitt, S.D & List, J.A 2011, Was there really a Hawthorne effect at the Hawthorne plant? An

analysis of the original illumination experiments, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, Vol. 3, 224–238.

Muldoon, J 2012,The Hawthorne legacy, Journal of Management History, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp.

105 -119

Mullins, L 2011, Management and Organizational Behaviour, 9th ed, Prentice Hall, Harlow

Parker, LD & Ritson, PA 2005, Revisiting Fayol: Anticipating Contemporary Management,

British Journal of Management, vol. 16, pp. 175-194.

Paxton, J 2011, Taylor’s Unsung Contribution: Making Interchangeable Parts Practical,

Journal of Business and Management, Vol.17, No.1, pp. 75-83

Pugh, D & Hickson, D 2007, Great Writers on Organisations: The Third Omnibus Edition,

Gower

Pryor, MG & Taneja, S 2010, Henri Fayol, practitioner & theoretician – revered and reviled,

Journal of Management History, vol. 16, issue 4, pp 489-503

Rodrigues, C 2001, Fayol’s 14 Principles of Management then and now: a framework for

managing today’s organizations effectively, Monclair State University, New Jersey.

Spatig, L 2009, Rediscovering Fayol: Parallels to Behaviouralist Management and

Transformational Leadership, Northwest Business Economics Association Proceedings,

196-199

Schachter, H.L 2010, The role played by Frederick Taylor in the rise of the academic

management fields, Journal of Management History, Vol.16, No.4, pp. 437-448

Simha, A & Lemak, D 2010, The value of original source readings in management education:

The case of Frederick Winslow Taylor, Journal of Management History Vol.16, No.2, pp. 233-247

Taylor, F. W 2008, A report of a lecture and questions put to Mr. Taylor: a transcript, Journal of

Management History, 14: 214-236.

Taylor, F 1947, The Principles of Scientific Management, Harper & Bros, New York.

Taneja, S, Pryor, M.G, Toombs, L. A. 2011, Frederick W. Taylor's Scientific Management

Principles: Relevance and Validity, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 16, No.3, pp.27-42

Wagner-Tsukamoto, S.A 2008, Scientific management revisited: Did Taylorism fail because of

a too positive image of human nature? Journal of Management History, Boris Vol.14, 4, pp.348-372

Wood, J.C & Wood, M.C 2004, George Elton Mayo: Critical evaluations in business and

management, Routledge, London

Wrege, C.D 2008, F.W. Taylor’s Lectures on Management, June 4, 1907, Journal of

Management History, Vol.14, pp. 209-213

Wren, D. A & bedeian, A.G 2009, The Evolution of Management Thought, 6th ed., John Wiley &

Sons, Inc

Wren, D.A 2011, The Centennial of Frederick W. Taylor’s The Principles of Scientific

Management: A Retrospective Commentary, Journal of Business and Management, Vol.17, No.1, 11-22.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us