Scientific Management and the Human Relations School of Thought - Coursework Example

3.3 ESSAY BRIEF Scientific management and the human relations school of thought Customer to insert his/her name Customer to insert Tutor’s name Customer to grade course Date Scientific management and the human relations school of thought ‘Approaches to management, as embodied in The Human Relations and Scientific Management schools of thought, were only relevant to management in the early 20th century, when they first hit the headlines, and have no relevance to management in the early 21st century.’ Management is a very important aspect in the running of organizations, whether small or big. Management involves getting people together for purposes of accomplishing the desired objectives and goals by efficient and effective utilization of the available resources. This is achieved through a number of functions which include Planning, organizing, leading, coordinating, and controlling, staffing, and directing an individual or groups of people to harness their effort for purposes of accomplishing the desired goal (Wilson & Rosenfeld 1990). Management also encompasses resources which deal with the deployment and manipulation of financial, human, technological as well as natural resources in a manner that accrues the highest benefit to the organization. Viewing an organization as a system has led to another definition of management as human action that includes design for purposes of facilitating the production of helpful outcomes from the system. Management has often been looked at from a theoretical perspective. Two of the most common theoretical approaches of management are the scientific management and the human relations management. Opinion is however divided on whether these theories were only relevant in the 20th century when they were introduced in business circles and have gradually lost their usefulness in modern time; of whether they are still relevant. This is the question that the rest of this paper will endeavour to look at. Scientific Approach to Management The scientific theory of management emerged and gained prominence in the late 19th and the early 20th century. This theory was advanced by Fredrick Winslow Taylor, whose influence in the field of management continues to be felt to date. Scientific Management is the precursor to modern organizational management. Around the late 19th and early 20th century, decried the system of management as being fraught with awkwardness, inefficiency and ill-directed movement of individuals within the organization. He looked at this as not only an organizational, but also a national loss (Wilson & Rosenfeld 1990). To help make a difference in the way organizations were being managed, Taylor called for a shift from the prevailing personal management system to one that is scientific. This kind of management envisaged a situation where the captain of the organization or industry was personally brilliant. Taylor held the view that if a group of ordinary men followed the scientific approach to management, their performance would outstrip that of a similar group of personally brilliant individuals following the older style of management (Taneja, Pryor & Toombs 2011). Taylor tried to replace the previous management style based on ‘the rule of thumb’ with one based on observations from which the best practice would be developed. He developed a method of systematically training workers based on the beat practice instead of allowing each employee room to perform tasks at his discretion. A good management fosters the spirit of cooperation between itself and the workers. This spirit would then motivate workers to pursue the one best practice that management has established. Taylor also held the view that management and the workers would evenly share out tasks within the organization in which management would be concerned with performance of the scientific and instructional part of it while the workers would perform labour-related functions. This way, each group would do “the work for which it is best suited” (Taylor 1911, p. 91) for the overall improved performance of the organization. Taylor was also strong advocate of the breaking down of complex tasks into numerous subtasks. The subtasks would then be performed optimally to realize increased profitability of the organization. Taylor’s philosophy has however been criticised for tending to dehumanize workers and treating them like objects. Modern readers would, indeed, conclude that Taylor stands convicted by the words which he says; … in almost all of the mechanic arts, the science which underlies each act of each workman is so great and amounts to so much that the workman who is best suited to actually doing the work is incapable of fully understanding this science, without the guidance and help of those who are working with him or over him, either through lack of education or through insufficient mental capacity. (Taylor 1911, p. 151). He also says; to work according to scientific laws, the management must takeover and perform much of the work which is now left to the men; almost every act of the workman should be preceded by one or more preparatory acts of the management which enable him to do his work better and quicker than he otherwise could. (Taylor 1911, p. 152) The Relevance of the Scientific Approach to management to management in the 21st Century The scientific approach to management may have evolved in the 20th century but it still finds relevance in management practices in the 21st century. Taylor’s philosophy on scientific management was based on frameworks such as clear delineation of authority, responsibility, separation of the planning and operations functions, incentive schemes for employees, management by exception and task specialization (Taylor 1911). Taylor noted that some workers are more talented and can do a perfect job than others. If these workers are paid uniform salaries irrespective of their skills and talents, the most talented and skilful ones tend to become unmotivated and their productivity plummets. This is because the talented workers do not see their talent and skills being rewarded; neither do they see their unproductive colleagues being punished. Modern management has woken up to this fact and put in place measures aimed at rewarding talented employees and punishing the unproductive ones. Productive employees are for example rewarded with bonus payments, promotion, salary increments, and higher commissions on sales and so on. Those who are not productive may be retrenched, paid lower commissions, and denied promotion and so on. Rewarding the good performers motivates them to produce more. Punishing the unproductive employees makes them want to avoid punishment by working hard. This is an area that modern management has learnt form the scientific management approach. Compensation that is linked to output is likely to motivate employees to put in their best effort for increased production. Taylor’s compensation plans often included piece rates for purposes of motivation the workers. Another aspect of work that Taylor observed during his time was the exhaustion that used to come from exertion. Many people doing the same kind of work over and over again would get bored and record a reduction is productivity. He observed workers performing manual work such as hovelling, loading and offloading cargo from containers or railroad cars, lifting heavy objects and so on. The productivity of such workers would be boosted if they are given time to rest breaks. Modern day work place management has incorporated rest breaks in their schedules to enable workers recover from physical and mental fatigue. Workers who enjoy rest breaks record increased productivity, alertness and are prone to make very few mistakes. The concept of various types of leaves stemmed from this belief. Most workplace environments provide for annuals leaves to take care of the workers’ physical and mental well-being. The scientific approach to management advocates for a clear delineation of authority. People cannot manage themselves and need a manager to take care of the administrative and other details that arise at the workplace. This has brought about the division of work between the administrators and the workers. It is for example the responsibility of the administration to select the person it considers best suited to do the job in the right way. Management in the 21st century has created a hierarchy that must be followed in the operations of organizations. There are top, middle level and low level managers. There are also the general workforce that is actually involved in the productive work. The reporting relationships are based on this hierarchy. Modern day organizations have specific organizational structures which define these kinds of relationships. Taylor held the view that in an organization, some individuals would be glad to take up challenging responsibilities and accept to he held accountable while others would not want to take up such responsibilities for fear of being held accountable, especially if the outcome of their decisions are unfavourable. In contemporary management practice, managers have learnt to disperse power from the centre to the periphery where middle level and junior managers are given the responsibility to make decisions. Delegation is very much at the heart of this. Delegation has proved useful in removing a heavy load from the shoulders as senior managers and nurturing leadership for tomorrow. The scientific management approach as propounded by Taylor envisaged a situation where inferior methods of production would be replaced by the superior ones. This would be used to hasten the production process. This framework has a strong leaning towards mechanization, automation and offshoring. This would make the production system more efficient and effective. This kind of thinking is relevant to contemporary management practice where organizations are keen on putting in place measures that would make them achieve efficiency in their production activities. Computers and other forms of advanced technological gadgets are widely used by managers to achieve efficiency in their workplaces. To make sure that each member of the organization does what he is best suited to do, most managers have opted to obtain some services from offshore companies. This is meant to help the organizations concentrate more on their core activities while outsourcings non-core services and activities. The scientific approach to management advocated for the separation of planning from operations functions within the organization. Each one of these two functions is to be perfumed by either management or workers in equal measure. Each of the groups would perform the tasks for which they are suited. In the previous system, sole responsibility rested on the workers. Whereas senior management did the planning, the junior management or workers performed the operations part of it. Modern times have also copied from this by dividing tasks among the various departments within the organization. Management deals with policy formulation while the rest of the departments deal with implementation. Fixation with doing the right thing and in the right way was one of the objectives of the scientific theory of management. This is the genesis of task specialization in most organizations, where individuals are given work on the basis of their qualifications. Placement of individuals within certain jobs is done on the basis of their skills. Taylor was a staunch supporter of a scientific process of selecting, training and developing workers. This is in opposition to the practice where employees were allowed to choose their own tasks and train themselves as best they could. This would allow management to source for the best employees based on some agreed upon criteria. Managers in modern times have a similar way of selecting, training and developing their workforce to avoid obsolescence and mediocrity in these processes. Employees are sourced for from either from within the pool of employees within the organization or those from outside it. Scientific methods and processes are often used to arrive at the employees for the organization. Taylor envisaged a work environment in which both workers and management would cooperate to ensure a hearty cooperation between each other so that their duties are performed according to the procedures that have been scientifically developed. Organizations have learnt to integrate management with the employees in the spirit of cooperation. Managers have learnt to interact with junior colleagues in sporting and corporate social responsibility affairs. Workers’ voices are increasingly being heard with the cooption of some of them in school policy. The spirit of friendship fostered this way as able to increase the level of friendship and productivity among all the members within the organisation. The Human Relations Approach to Management The human relations approach to management integrates sociology and psychology in the management of employees. The approach views and organization as a social system consisting of interpersonal as well as intergroup relationships (DuBrin 2007). These relationships can be positively exploited in the management of people. The proponents of this approach posited that the best way through which management can derive the best output from the workers is by satisfying their psychological and social needs. According to the human relations approach to management, a happy worker easily translates into an efficient worker. The implication is that an organization that keeps its workforce happy ends up increasing its productivity and profitability. The worker in this organization is kept happy and contented by the emoluments and other benefits that he deserves from the organization and when the organization provides him with these, the worker feels a sense of belonging to the organization. Such a feeling motivates the worker to put in the best of his effort to uplift up the performance of the organization in the market. The human relations approach to management is closely associated with Elton mayo and his Hawthorne Works Experiments (Bruce & Nylan 2011). Mayo emphasized the fact that natural groupings within the organization take precedence over organizational structures based on functions. His position is that individuals are the most important component in an organization as opposed to the organizational structures put in place by management. He also emphasized on the aspect of upward communication. He advocated for a two-way communication from the chief executive to the worker and from the worker to the chief executive. When channels of communication are open, there is free flow of information which creates avenues for instruction and settlement of grievances when they arise. Mayo also stressed the view that a cohesive and good leadership is necessary for the communication of goals and achievement of a decision-making regime that is effective and coherent. There are a number of principles that underpin the human relations approach to management. In the first place, the approach holds the view that financial rewards are not the only thing that motivates human beings to perform. Human beings also need to be recognised and appreciated. The second principle posits that as human beings, workers need to be treated as such, and not as machines. Managers in the organization need to understand their emotions and feelings. A management that empathises with workers are able to get the most out of them in terms of productivity. The third principle is that an organization works through formal as well as informal relations. Managers must therefore help employees establish informal relations as much as they form formal ones. The fourth principle is that workers require a high degree of job satisfaction and security, and management must therefore provide it to them. The workers’ need for an open communication channel should be met by the creation of avenues through which they can effectively communicate with bruising their ego. The sixth principle rests of the fact that workers dislike conflicts and misunderstandings and managers need to stop them before they reach crisis levels. It has also been established that workers value their freedom and must therefore not be subjected to vey strict supervision. The eighth principle holds that workers value participation in decision-making, more so on matters that affect their interests. Managers must therefore create room for workers to participate in making decisions in the organization. The Relevance of the Human Relations Approach to management to management in the 21st Century The human relations approach to management has been found to be quite relevant to management in contemporary times. Many organizations have realised that employees are not only motivated by monitory but other incentives such as recognition and appreciation. Employees whose performance is exemplary are for example given mention during special functions and given awards such as the longest serving employees. Other forms of recognition include promotion, medals and certificates among others. In appreciating the fact that employees are human beings with emotions and feelings, companies have come up with many programs that are meant to address issues of their welfare. There are for example recreation facilities, welfare programs, counselling sessions for those in distress and so on. Most managers have continued to encourage the formation of informal alongside the formal groupings within their organizations. There are departmental welfare groups, benevolent groups, sporting activities among others. Employees who are brought together within these informal groupings have been noted to realise improved performance because they feel at home in the organization. It has also been established that workers deliver more on the job where their job security is guaranteed. Most organizations have therefore sought to recruit most of their crucial staff on permanent and pensionable basis. The process of dismissing employees has been tightened, and this is done only in exceptional cases. Most organizations have realised the value of improved communication between management and the workers. They have chosen to operate on the basis of an open door policy where employees are encouraged to share with management on issues they feel obliged to. Managers also mingle with employees during coffee, tea and lunch breaks at which informal chats could be used to pass important messages across. Information that demands the highest levels of confidentiality is communicated through suggestion boxes or anonymous letters. Toll free telephone facilities have also been established in many organizations to aide in free flow of information. As far as conflicts are concerned, most organizations have come up with mechanisms of detecting and preventing conflicts between employees before they reach crisis levels. The Human Resource Management departments have been used in most organizations to realize this. Other conflicts are sorted out by involving workers’ representatives drawn from their trade unions. Alive to the fact that workers need to operate with relative freedom, organizations have attempted to reduce the degree of supervision that workers are subjected to. Emphasis has been put to self-regulation and evaluation where an individual’s productivity and accrued benefits help him regulate his work. It has also been noted that employees enjoy being involved in decision-making within the organization, especially when decisions that touch on their interests are to be made. Managers use departmental meetings and other sessions to elicit the views of employees on any change programs that are likely to affect them. Another source through which employers participate in making decisions in the organization is through their union representatives. Apart from feeling a sense of ownership of the decisions reached, employees feel good when they know that their views are valued by the organization and this is likely to boost their productivity. Conclusion It is evident from the discussion above that though scientific and human relations approaches to management were developed a number of decades ago and from different perspectives, their relevance to organizational management in contemporary times cannot be gainsaid. Contemporary managers have continued to apply most of the principles of these two approaches, either consciously or unconsciously, to varying degrees of success. The trends in contemporary times point to the fact that the principles and ideals espoused in these principles will continue to be relevant to management for a long time to come. Reference List Bruce, K & Nylan, C 2011, ‘Elton Mayo and the Deification of Human Relations,’ Organization Studies, Vol 32, No 3, pp 383-405. DuBrin, A J 2007, Human Relations Interpersonal Job-Oriented Skills, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Taneja, S, Pryor, MG & Toombs, LA 2011, ‘Frederick W. Taylor's Scientific Management Principles: Relevance and Validity’, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, Vol 16, No 3, pp 60-78. Taylor, F 1911, The Principles of Scientific Management, Harper Bros., New York. Wilson, D & Rosenfeld, R 1990, Managing Organizations, McGraw Hill Book Company, London. Read More