Some of the views are tied to individual problem solving, while others focus on the abstract "organization" and its ability to make meaningful decisions.
Scientific Management in 21st Century by: Sean Priestley It is not difficult to find examples of Scientific Management in the 21st Century; the car and computer manufacturing plants, the work environments we go to everyday, the hospitals we are treated in and even some of the restaurants we might eat in, - almost all of them function more efficiently due to the application of Scientific Management.
In fact, these methods of working seem so commonplace and so logical to a citizen of the modern world that it is almost impossible to accept that they were revolutionary only years ago. Although Scientific Management does play an important role in the 21st century, it is necessary to note that this method of management contains weaknesses that limit its influence in current work environments, and consequently not all of its tenants are applicable to modern organizations.
Scientific Management is perhaps best seen as an evolutionary stage in management ever developing history. This essay will attempt to highlight both the strengths and weaknesses of Scientific Management in context of the 21st century through examination of its application in several modern organizations.
Scientific Management was developed in the first quarter of the 20th Century; its father is commonly accepted to be F. Taylor, although some variations of the theory have been developed by Gantt and Gilbreth. Through this study, Taylor could see that work was more efficient when broken down into its constituent parts, and the management, planning, and decision-making functions have been developed elsewhere.
Furthermore, workers were scientifically selected resulting in workers performing tasks they were biologically able to cope with, and tasks that equaled their skill. Taylor and later Gant drove this system by incentivying workers with money.
Invariably managers found that maximal efficiency was achieved by a subdivision of labor.
In many ways McDonalds is the archetypical example of an organization employing Scientific Management in production. Within this restaurant chain, uniformity is complete; no matter what country you are in every branch of McDonalds is the same, as are the methods used to prepare food, clean floors, promote staff and lock up on closing.
It is this ability to efficiently supply standard food and service throughout the world that has allowed McDonalds to become the biggest restaurant chain on the planet Peters and Watermanp.
A theory, whose roots are based on the scientific management model is Fordism. With Fordism, jobs are automated or broken down into unskilled or semi-skilled tasks.
The pace of the continuous flow assembly line dictates work. Autocratic management ensures a high division of labor in order to effectively run mass production; this leads to little workplace democracy and alienation.
Equally, with emphasis on the continuous flow of the assembly line, machinery is given more importance than workers. Workers are driven by financial motivation; being given a consolation of high wages while employers maintain control over the workforce. The antithesis of scientific management is the human relations movement established by Elton Mayo.
The model is based on the research undertaken by Mayo at the Hawthorne electrical components factory between and The benefits of scientific management lie within its ability to coordinate a mutual relationship between employers and workers.
The theory provides a company with the focus to organize its structure in order to meet the objectives of both the employer and employee. Scientific management also provides a company with the means to achieve economies of scale. This phenomenon occurs because the theory stresses efficiency and the need to eliminate waste.
Managers are given the duty to identify ways in which costs can be accounted for precisely, which leads to a division of labor and a specialization amongst staff, thus allowing each employee to become highly effective at carrying out their limited task.
Consequently, firms will have in place efficient production methods and techniques. Another benefit of scientific management for a company adopting it is that it will obtain full control of its workforce.
Management can dictate the desired minimum output to be produced and, with a piece rate payment system in place, can be guaranteed workers will produce the required amount. Scientific Management, however, is an incomplete system. Their cognitive input is not required and their motions do little to develop themselves; it is here that we touch upon the first problem Scientific Management faces in the 21st Century.
People are no longer content to receive only fiscal reward for their tasks. In current organizations, on the other hand, it has been recognized that productivity and success is not just obtained by controlling all factors in the work place, but by contributing to the social well-being and development of the individual employee.
The negative aspects of scientific management are apparent when evaluating the treatment of employees and with the problems that arise from the piece rate payment system. Thousands of plants introduced elements of scientific management, but few firms created formal planning departments or issued instruction cards to machine workers in fear of alienating the workforce Nelson, The principals of scientific management are unquestionably authoritarian in that they assume decision-making is best kept at the top of the organization because there exists a lack of trust in the competence of the employees.
Taylor believed productivity and efficiency would both rise if there were a division between workers and experts, and contended that almost every act of the workman should be preceded by one or more preparatory acts of the management. He also reasoned that each person must be taught daily by those who are over them This style of management can be the catalyst for causing anti-motivation and dissatisfaction amongst employees.
If workers feel as though they are being treated without due respect, many may become disenchanted with the company and refuse to work to their maximum potential.From traditional approach to scientific approach and then Scientific Management to Modern phase; methodology, principles and approaches have reached its current stage.
The History of Modern Management Essay Introduction: The value of history and theory of modern management have always been questioned by the community. To become modern management as it is today it had to run through a lot of complicated changes and developments.
Several people assume that history was and is irrelevant to our contemporary society of the business world and that theory . Modern management theory has changed the way managers look at their jobs.
Advancements and refinements in management theory and practice have enabled . Industrial relations or employment relations is the multidisciplinary academic field that studies the employment relationship; that is, the complex interrelations between employers and employees, labor/trade unions, employer organizations and the state..
The newer name, "employment relations" is increasingly taking precedence because "industrial relations" is often seen to have relatively. with its maximum principle for nonlinear optimal control, established the foundations of Modern Control Theory.
3. Frequency-Domain Approach One of the first mathematical analysis of control systems was the frequency-domain approach. This is based on the developments of .
Scientific Management was developed in the first quarter of the 20th Century; its father is commonly accepted to be F.W. Taylor, although some variations of the theory .