Total Quality Management Implementation and Competitive Advantage - Essay Example

Institution : xxxxxxxxxxx Title : xxxxxxxxxxx Tutor : xxxxxxxxxxx Course : xxxxxxxxxxx @2013 Introduction The emergence of the factory and wage system positively transformed the productivity of many industries. This is because an increasing number of people joined the labour market in order to sell their labour power to the capitalist. After labour was gathered in the factory, managers and owners initiated the real subordination of labour strategy. Despite of the existence of the subordination of labour approach, controlling labour was real a struggle. Labor therefore become a major problem under the system (Jaffee, 2001). In order to counter this particular problem various managerial approaches arose. Scientific management was the initial management school of thought. Contention has however arisen on whether the approach is really just a system for controlling workers (Jaffee 2001). This particular paper seeks to evaluate the major advantages and disadvantages of scientific management in the past and the present. Furthermore, the paper will analyze whether scientific Management is appropriate in workplaces today for effective management in general and for worker motivation in particular. Scientific management was proposed by Frederick Winslow Taylor (1865- 1915). According to Taylor management is a discipline that involves the calm and systematic tasks of planning, organizing, leading, and controlling. In general scientific management entails the application of scientific methods in order to ensure productivity of workers (Jaffee 2001). One of the advantages of scientific management essentially in the past is that it assisted in resolving the problem of labour. The labour problem was manifested in two ways, this include the control and possession of knowledge concerning the methods of production and the ability to implementation discretion in the application of work effort. Jaffee (2001) highlights that scientific management attempted to deal with the labour problem in a more systematic way. These two problems were openly confronted by scientist management on basis of the views of the owners. In most cases the knowledge of the workers was a potential problem for employers this is because it gave workers more power. The managers mostly depended on the knowledge of the workers for production to proceed. However, based on the fact that workers may sometimes be unscrupulous, lazy and even conceited, production was bound to be affected. The scientific management view therefore resolved these particular challenges by reducing labour to an object within the process of production, as opposed to having labour as the key determinant of production within the work place. Consequently, through the application of science labour would be a factor of production that is more controllable and prone to malleability and manipulation (Jaffee, 2001). It can be argued that the reduction of labour to a factor production just like any other factor is beneficial to management even in contemporary organizations. This is because as presented by Mintzberg (1971) managerial work entails organizing, controlling, coordinating and planning. Consequently, when labour is more controllable and prone to malleability, the work of the managers becomes more specific as opposed to the period before the factory system whereby the role of the managers was not well outlined. Another advantage of the scientific management approach is that the principle of delegation of work between the management and the workers is an effective step of minimizing the workload for both parties and thus enhancing efficiency in the process of management and also the performance of the employees. Mintzberg (1971) reveals that one major problem that was facing many managers in the 20th centaury, in spite of the expansion of modern organizations is that managers expected to get little help. In most cases the work load of most managers is too much. He/she must take full charge of the organization, design the information system, control the employee and plan most of the activities of the organization. In addition the manager is forced to carry the full burden of responsibility in the organization. Managing the organization therefore becomes a burden. As much as the manager would want things to be done right it becomes quite difficult. According to Mintzberg (1971) managers face the dilemma of delegation. Based on Mintzberg (1971) description of the situation in modern organizations; essentially concerning the dilemma of delegation that is facing most managers. It can be argued that scientific management is quite relevant and beneficial to modern organization. This is because by delegating tasks to the workers the manager can become more efficient. The 21st centaury has however witnessed effective utilization on the scientific management approach based on the fact that many managers today delegate duties. This has proven to be beneficial for many organizations. For instance the employees in Chinese firms have become increasingly innovative due to the involvement of employees in decision making (Yuan, et al, 2006). Scientific management is also beneficial both in the past and present day because it assisted the management of organizations to have a more proactive role in the leadership of organizations. Scientific management gave managers more power over the workers. As stated by Frederick Taylor during the factory system the workers had a lot of power as opposed to managers. In most cases managers/ employers depended on the craft and knowledge of the workers in order for production to proceed (Jaffee, 2001). Consequently, the workers had more power to influence production. As argued by Knights and Roberts (1982) power is a significant aspect in management. Power is logically linked to the capability of human action to influence others in order to attain the objectives of the organization. Before the emergence of the scientific management ideology, the management had minimal influence on the actions of the workforce. The emergence of the scientific management ideology therefore instigated a more powerful approach for managers and thus giving them a proactive management role. This is because managers were now able to coordinate with the workers in order to ascertain that all jobs are undertaken according to guidelines that are scientifically determined. Through the principle of equal division of labour, managers were given the role of conceiving ideas while the workers executed the ideas of the managers. Due to the application of the scientific management ideology, managers have developed a more proactive role in the leadership. Another advantage of the scientific management approach essentially in modern organizations is that it has assisted businesses to attain a competitive advantage. This is due to the application of scientific methods in the process of production which has enabled many firms to be more competitive in the market as opposed to others. For instance, a study conducted by Isaksen and Spilling, (1996) on regional innovation systems revealed that many organization today apply scientific approaches such as the application of R& D in the production process in order to come up with new innovations that capture wider markets like the international market. R& D involves the development of new information and knowledge which entails sustaining searches for technological and scientific opportunities and new markets through innovation. In addition, the application of Total quality management (TQM) in many organization has been grounded on scientific approaches in order to ensure that quality is maintained in the services and products offered by organizations today. Consequently, the application of science in R& D and TQM has assisted organizations today to attain a competitive advantage (Thomas & William, 2001). Scientific management has various disadvantages both in the past and in contemporary society. One of the demerits of scientific management is that it lowered the role of employees to the adherence of rigid procedures and methods in which employees have no opportunity to come up with their own ideas. Providing an opportunity for employees to come up with their own ideas is a significant aspect in the production process. The scientific management approach however proposed that the allocation of work was to be done specifically by the management. The role of the manager was to not only to give direction of what should be done, but also how it should be done and the actual time that is allowed for performing the task. It can be argued that such an approach of working would definitely reduce the workers or employees to a mere robot as opposed to being innovative worker. In addition the knowledge the workers may not be effectively developed due to the lack innovative opportunities (Khorana, 2009). Lack of effective motivation is another demerit associated to the scientific management approach. Watson (1996) argues that motivation is a relevant and useful management practice. According to Watson (1996) it is important for managers to ensure that the Maslow’s motivation approach of the needs of hierarchy is implemented. If the needs of the employees within the hierarchy can be actualized then employees are bound to be more productive. The Maslow theory consists of both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The scientific management view however does not encourage effective employee motivation. This is because Taylor's perspective of motivation majorly stressed on the use of monetary incentives (extrinsic motivation) as a key strategy of motivating the workforce. The approach therefore left a certain gap in the process of motivation. This is because extrinsic rewards such as monetary incentives have drawbacks. When employees are mainly motivated by external rewards, then the implication is that they are bound to perform their tasks on the basis of the returns they are offered. As a result, monitory rewards only drive the worker to carry out a given task for the sake of material rewards as opposed to their interest in the task. Motivation from monetary rewards is usually short lived. (Philip 1984). It can therefore be stated that the motivation approach proposed by the scientific management approach is not effective in motivating the workforce. In terms of the relevance of the scientific management approach in the motivation of the workforce, it can be argued that the approach is not effective in the motivation employees. This is because by focusing on the monetary incentives, employees will only be motivated on the basis of the pay and in the event that the pay is not sufficient then they will not be motivated to work. As argued by Datta (2010) motivation strategies should have the objective of creating a good working environment as well developing policies and practices that will result into higher performance levels from the employees. Consequently, managers should strive to motivate their workers both extrinsically and intrinsically. The employees will therefore strive inwardly to be proficient because they enjoy the work and also the rewards they gain from the work. Scientific management may be viewed as different from what it was in the past and what it is in contemporary society. This is because although the view propagated for an increase in the powers of the management, whereby the management could now utilize scientific methods to train, develop and supervise the workforce instead of them performing such activities for themselves. Today, organizations are increasingly adopting a more liberal approach whereby the views of the employees are integrated in the process of the organization. Although Mintzberg (1971) argued that modern managers face the challenge of delegation. Nevertheless, as stated earlier, in the 21st centaury many changes have taken place. Many managers today have acknowledged the significance of delegation through approaches such as the use of team work and employee innovation. Conclusion The paper has presented various advantages and disadvantages of scientific management both in the past and also in cotemporary society. One of the advantages of scientific management is that it assisted in resolving the problem of labour. Also the principle of delegation of work between the management and the workers has been an effective step of minimizing the workload for both parties and thus enhancing efficiency in the process of management and also the performance of the employees. Another benefit of scientific management is that it has enabled managers to take a proactive role in the leadership of organizations. In terms of the disadvantages of scientific management one of the major demerits noted was that the approach lowered the role of employees to the adherence of rigid procedures and methods in which employees have no opportunity to come up with their own ideas. Also the approach can lead to lack of effective motivation of the employees. From the above discussion it can be concluded that scientific management is both beneficial and at another angle it has its limitations. However as the paper noted scientific management is still relevant in improvement of productivity and also in terms of issue such as delegation of work which is still significant in today’s management practice. References Datta, P.R, 2010, Strategic Human Resource Management: Motivation at Work, p76-91. Jaffee, D. (2001). 'The rise of the factory system' Organization Theory: Tension and Change, McGraw Hill, Boston, pp. 42-63. Khurana, A, 2009, Scientific Management: A Management Idea to Reach a Mass Audience, Global India Publications. Isaksen, A and Spilling, D . (1996). Regional Innovation Systems: The Integration of Local ‘Sticky’ and Global ‘Ubiquitous’ Knowledge. Journal of Technology Transfer. Knights, D and Roberts , J, 1982, The power of Organization or the Organization of powe, Manchester Institute of Science , Mintzberg, H. (1971). ‘Managerial Work: Analysis from Observation’ Management Science 18(2), pp. 97-110. Philip C, 1984, Employee Motivation: Principles and Practice, Vantage Press, New York, p 69-77. Thomas, D and William, J, 2001, Total Quality Management Implementation and Competitive Advantage: The Role of Structural Control and Exploration Watson, T, 1996, Motivation: That's Maslow, isn't it, Sage Publication. Yuan Li, Yongbin Zhao, Yi Liu, 2006, "The relationship between HRM, technology innovation and performance in China", International Journal of Human Resource, 27 ( 7), pp.679 – 697. Read More