F W Taylor - (1856 - 1915), USA- The Scientific Management School
Taylorism involved breaking down the components of manual tasks in manufacturing environments, timing each movement ('time and motion' studies) so that there could be a proven best way to perform each task. Thus employees could be trained to be 'first class' within their job. This type of management was particularly relevant to performance drives e.g 'Action On' projects.
This was a rigid system where every task became discrete and specialized. It is fair to suggest that this is unlikely to be of value to the NHS with the Modernisation agenda suggesting that we should have a flexible workforce.
Key points about Taylor, who is credited with what we now call 'Taylorism':
- he was in the scientific management school
- his emphases were on efficiency and productivity
- but he ignored many of the human aspects of employment
For the managers, scientific management required them to:
- develop a science for each operation to replace opinion and rule of thumb
- determine accurately from the science the correct time and methods for each job (time and motion studies)
- set up a suitable organisation to take all responsibility from the workers except that of the actual job performance
- select and train the workers (in the manner described above)
- accept that management itself be governed by the science deployed for each operation and surrender its arbitrary powers over the workers, i.e. cooperate with them.
For the workers, scientific management required them to:
- stop worrying about the divisions of the fruits of production between wages and profits.
- share in the prosperity of the firm by working in the correct way and receiving wage increases.
- give up their idea of time wasting and co-operate with the management in developing the science
- accept that management would be responsible for determining what was done and how
- agree to be trained in new methods where applicable
The benefits (mainly for the management) arising from scientific management can be summarised as follows:
- its rational approach to the organisational work enables tasks and procedures to be measured with a considerable degree of accuracy
- measurement of paths and processes provide useful information on which to base improvements in working methods, plant design, etc
- improving work methods brought enormous increases in productivity
- it enabled employees to be paid by results and to take advantage of incentive payments
- it stimulated management into adopting a more positive role in leadership at shop floor level.
- it contributed to major improvements in physical working conditions for employees
- it provided the formation for modern work studies
The drawbacks were mainly for the workers:
- it reduced the worker's role to that of a rigid adherence to methods and procedures over which he/she had no discretion
- it led to increased fragmentation of work due to its emphasis on divisional labour
- it generated an economically based approach to the motivation of employees by linking pay to geared outputs
- it put the planning and control of workplace activities exclusively in the hands of the managers
- it ruled out any realistic bargaining about wage rates since every job was measured and rated 'scientifically'
Therefore, in summary, while the scientific management technique has been employed to increase productivity and efficiency both in private and public services, it has also had the disadvantages of ignoring many of the human aspects of employment. This led to the creation of boring repetitive jobs with the introduction of systems for tight control and the alienation of shop floor employees from their managers.
Taylorism prevailed in the '30s through to the early '60s - and in many organisations considerably later than this. Peters and Waterman in the 70s/80 and Senge late '80s/early '90s led us towards what we now call 'systems thinking' where the rights and potential wider contributions of employees received considerably greater emphasis.
