The paper "Why Despite Promotion of Employee Engagement, Organisations Still Want to Exert Tighter Control" is a great example of management coursework. Fredrick Taylor introduced scientific management (Taylorism) in the 20th century. The theory main focus was the improvement of business through enhanced efficiency. Use of Taylorism enhanced production through standardisation of work and continuous improvement. The theory has divided work into subtasks that lead to job specialisation (Newman & Guy, 1998). The theory has been criticised due to poor employee motivation, dehumanising employee, punishing management and use of structured rules. The systematic approach used by Taylorism was interrupted by the rise of people-centred theories such as Industrial organisational psychology (Zuffo, 2011).
The new theories empowered workers and utilised a more holistic approach to productivity and their working environment. Despite the rhetoric of employee engagement, organisations still use scientific management that helps them exert tighter control. This essay will critically evaluate why despite the promotion of employee engagement, organisations still want to exert tighter control. Taylor scientific management principle is based on four main principles. The first principle is replacing the rule of thumb with scientific management.
This involves basing pay and reward with employee output. The second principle is scientific employee selection. Employees are selected scientifically, developed and trained. Employees are supposed to be specialised in their tasks. The third principle is based on monitoring employee performance. The management is supposed to monitor employee and ensure that they are efficient. The fourth principle is based on ensuring that management and workers tasks are separated (Newman & Guy, 1998). Managers are supposed to engage in planning and training while employees engage in tasks. Growth of Taylorism The scientific management theory has grown and is being applied in some modern organisation.
The first successful use of Taylorism was in the 20th century by Ford Motors (Newman & Guy, 1998). Through specialisation, the organisation was able to enhance productivity. Taylor’ s method had its focus on hierarchical organisations where functional managers directed tasks to workers. Taylorism was criticised on dehumanising workers by treating them as machines (Koumparoulis & Vlachopoulioti, 2012). Dehumanising workers led to the formation of unions to protect workers. The Rise of unionisation brought human factors in workforce management.
Criticism of Taylorism brought human-centred management theories. In the 21st century, a lot of activities in the workplace are based on Taylorism. Use of scientific management has changed management systems. In most organisations, specialisation is common where tasks are assigned to those who have experience in them. Organisations still support division of labour that has helped in innovation and efficiency (Yang, Liu & Wang, 2013). In modern organisations, employees have been required to increase their knowledge in order to keep their work positions. Scientific management has been used by the modern organisation in solving problems (Trujillo, 2014).
Organisations have been carrying out scientific surveys when venturing into a new market or making a product launch. Organisations collect information from the target market and use scientific methods to analyse them. This helps in coming up with the most viable market. This has been encouraged by organisations with the aim of enhancing efficiency. Fredrick Taylor is considered as the founding father of management philosophy (Yang, Liu & Wang, 2013). His ideas have evolved to fit modern organisations. This can be explained by modern industries where employees are controlled by time clocks.
His theory was based on a workplace that has maximum production and reduced ambiguity. The organisation using Taylorism have highly detailed work descriptions and employees are paid based on the output. Jobs are assigned based on the best fit. The main aim is increased production through efficiency and cutting the costs (Koumparoulis & Vlachopoulioti, 2012). To maximise production, workers are supposed to be taught how to work more efficiently.
Heller, V. L., & Darling, J. R. 2012, “Anatomy of crisis management: Lessons from the infamous toyota case,” European Business Review, Vol.24, no.2.p. 151-168.
Koumparoulis, D. N., & Vlachopoulioti, A. 2012, “The Evolution of Scientific Management,” Evolution, Vol.3, no.2.p.420-424.
Morgan, G 1997, ‘Mechanization takes command: organizations as machines’ in Images of organization, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California, pp.11-31.
Newman, M. A., & Guy, M. E. 1998, “Taylor's triangle, Follett's web,” Administrative Theory & Praxis, Vol.20 , no.3, p.287-297.
Pfeffer, J., & Veiga, J. F. 1999, “Putting people first for organizational success,” The Academy of Management Executive, 13(2), 37-48.
Pruijt, H. 2000, “Repainting, modifying, smashing Taylorism,” Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol.13, no.5, p.439-451.
Ritzer, G. 2011, ‘An introduction to McDonaldization’, The McDonaldization of society (6th ed.), SAGE/Pine Forge, Los Angeles, pp. 1-22.
Sekiguchi, T. 2004, Person-organization fit and person-job fit in employee selection: A review of the literature. Osaka keidai ronshu, Vol.54, no.6, p.179-196.
Trujillo, T. 2014, “The Modern Cult of Efficiency Intermediary Organizations and the New Scientific Management,” Educational Policy, Vol.28, no.2, p.207-232.
Yang, C. X., Liu, H. M., & Wang, X. X. 2013, “Organization theories: From classical to modern,” Applied Sci, Vol.13, no.21, p.4470-4476.
Zuffo, R. G. 2011, “Taylor is Dead, Hurray Taylor! The “Human Factor” in Scientific Management: Between Ethics, Scientific Psychology and Common Sense,” JBM, Vol. 23.no.1, p.21-38.