Two approches to the scientific management (реферат)
The traditional model characterised
asadministration under "the formal
control of political leadership, based on a strictly hierarchical model of
bureaucracy, staffed by permanent , neutral and anonymous officials, motivated
only by the public interest, serving any governing party equally andnot contributing to policy but merely
administering those policies decided by the politicians" (Public
Management and Administration and Introduction by Owen E Huges, p.23).
By the 1920s this model was fully
formed and continued with extremely little change for at least fifty years.
"Young" practitioners wereso
assured of their theories and they believed that the improvement of government
and its administration would promote a better life for all.
After the critique of the theory of
the separation between administration and politics considered as the myth to
tolerate that politiciansand
administrators could be separated, the argument took place between scholars of
Neverthelessthe political control and the theoretical
basis of the bureaucracy were thoroughly established and unchanged, there were
public sector adaptations of management theory. The row of imports from the
private sector took place and the most importantis the scientific management. That was
explained by pretending that Public Management is able to be non-political and
hence the operational methods used in the public sector would bethe same as those used in the private sector.
But the larger waste is still human
resources, like human efforts, which go on every day through such of our acts
as are blundering, ill-directed or inefficient, and which referred to as a lack
of "national efficiency".
The basic assumptionof this school is the philosophy that
workers, at the operationallevel, are
economically motivated and that they will put forth their best efforts if they
are rewarded financially. The emphasis is on maximum output with minimum
strain, eliminating waste and efficiency. The work of Frederick Winslow
Taylordominates the thinking of this
Biography of F.Taylor
Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856-1915)was a mechanical engineer whose writings on
efficiency and scientific management were widely read. Taylor devised the system he called scientific management, a form of
industrial engineering that established the organisation of work.The main goal of his theory was to increase
productivity. And at the same time he did not favour unions or industrial
democracy. That's why his theory is regarded as authoritarian style of
Efficiency was the most important theme of Taylor's works. As a steel works manager in Philadelphia, he was
interested in knowing how to get more work out of workers, who are
"naturally lazy and engage in systematic soldiering." This attitude,
he found, was contributed to by poor management. He observed "when a
naturally energetic man works for a few days beside a lazy one, the logic of
the situation is unanswerable. "Why should I work hard when the lazy
fellow gets the same pay that I do and does only half as much work?".He proposed using scientific research methods
to discover the one best way to do a job.
Taylor's efforts were resented by unions and managers alike:
managers because their intuition and discretion were challenged, unions because
their roles were questioned. Taylor was fired
from his original job in Philadelphia.
He then went to Bethlehem Steel, where he again was fired after three years.
The unions, indignant by this time, were instrumental in getting his methods
investigated by a special congressional committee; they succeeded in forbidding
the use of "stop watches" and "bonuses" in army arsenals
until World War II. However, his concepts spread to Europe and Great Britain and received impetus in the Soviet Union after the Revolution. Many maintain that
this movement represents techniques only and "hinders" the
development of a philosophy.
Conception of Frederic Taylor
Tayrol's attitude toward work was
that man and machine are similar. He stated that "it is no single element,
but rather this whole combination, that constitutes scientific management, which
may be summarised as: Science, not rule of thumb; Harmony, not discord;
Co-operation, not individualism; Maximum output, in place of restricted output;
The Development of each man to his greatest efficiency and prosperity."
Taylor believed that the best management
is the true science, resting upon clearly defined laws, rules, and principles
of scientific management which are applicable to all kinds of human activities,
from our simple individual acts to the work of our great corporations, which
call for the most elaborate co-operation. He also believed thatwhenever these principles correctly applied,
results must follow which are truly.
Taylor expounded several basic principles:
1)To gather all traditional
knowledge and classify, tabulate, and reduce it to rules, laws, and formulas so
as to help workers in their daily work.
2)To develop a science of each
element of man's work to replace the rule-of-thumb method.
3)To scientifically select and then
train, teach, and develop the worker.
4) To co-operate with workers to
ensure is done according to developed science principles.
5) To effect an almost equal
division of work and responsibility between workers and managers are to be
given work for which they are best fitted, as are employees.
He felt that faster work could be assured only through:
standardisation of methods
2)enforced adaptation of best instruments and working conditions
Scientific management as a process
1) time-and-motion studies to decide
a standard for working;
2) a wage-incentive system that was
a modification of the piecework method already in existence;
3)changing the functional
Although he hasn't invented
time-and-motion studies but did carry them out morethoroughly than predecessors.
Among the experiments he performed to prove his theory were:
1. Work study:
One experiment detailed movements of workers in a shop and suggested short cuts
or more efficient ways of performing certain operations. Within three years the
output of the shop had doubled.
2. Standardised tools for shops:
In another area he found that the coal shovels being used weighed from 16 to 38 pounds. After
experimenting, it was found that 21-22 pounds was the best weight. Again, after
three years 140 men were doing what had previously been done by between 400 and
3. Selection and training of workers:
that each worker be assigned to do what he was best suited for and that those
who exceeded the defined work be paid "bonuses." Production, as might
be expected, rose to an all-time high.
Taylor, as a result of these experiments, advocated
assignment of supervisors by "function" - that is, one for training,
one for discipline, etc. This functional approach is evident today in many organisations,
Taylor took many of his concepts from the bureaucratic model
developed by Max Weber, particularly in regard to rules and procedures for the
conduct of work in organisations. Weber, the first to articulate a theory of authority
structure in organisations, distinguished between power and authority, between
compelling action and voluntary response. He identified three characteristics
which aided authority:
The concept of bureaucracy developed about the same time as scientific
management, and thoughts on specialisation of work, levels of authority, and
control all emerged from Weber's writings. Weber was more concerned with the structure
of the organisation in which people perform their work roles, rather than with
the individual. Most of his writings and research related to the importance of
specialisation in labour, regulations and procedures, and the advantages of a
hierarchical system in making informed decisions.
Luther Gulick and Lyndal Urvick's Principals of Administration
The culmination of the Principles of
Administration Approach was the publication of Luther Gulick and Lyndall
Urwick's Papers on the Science of Administration. In that time, 1937, public
administration scholars had come to believe in a static set of principles by
which any organisation could be designed or its function improved. These
principles, implied that organisations were very much like machines, and that
managers could follow a set of formulae to maximise their efficiency.
Luther Gulick and Lyndall Urwick are
known in the world for the work "Notes on a Theory of Organization"
issued in 1937. They developed the acronym POSDCORB to describe the administrative
functions of managers.
POSDCORB stands for:
Planning -Preparing methodical plans for managing programs;
Organising- Creating the different sub-units of the
Staffing- Hiring competent employees to fill
Directing- Issuing directives with time and
An often repeated criticism of the
scientific management approach is that it overemphasised productivity and
underemphasised human nature. This criticism is well expressed by Amitai
Etzioni, who wrote that "although Taylor originally set out to study the
interaction between human characteristics and the characteristics of the
machine, the relationship between these two elements which make up the
industrial work process, he ended up by focusing on a far more limited subject:
the physical characteristics of the human body in routine jobs - e.g.,
shovelling coal or picking up loads. Eventually Taylor came to view human and
machine resources not so much as mutually adapt able, but rather man
functioning as an appendage to the industrial machine". Similar criticism
could be levelled at other movements within the scientific management approach.
The Scientific Management approach directed to create scientific,
specialized, technocratic environment which makes it clear how to be more
productive and maximize rewards. But his theory can be seen as one-sided. You
cannot interpret the human being as a machine as it has it's own interest, it's
own needs, that the human being is a entity of the different moods and
emotions. He hasn'tcounted that the
motivating factor for employees can be not only monetary, worker can be
motivated for example by the interest of working in the particular field (e.g.
teachers donot owe a lot of money
fromtheir work but they are usually
motivated by the interest working with people; e.g. some tourists guides also
do not owe a lot of money but they are interested in meeting new people and
travelling), experience that he/she would gain through being on particular
working place (e.g. nurse doesn't get much money for her work, butshe wants to get more experience with time).
It is also noted that
design of work procedures is not
possible to establish in every field.
Luther Gulick and Lyndall Urwick tried to establish principles of
management to motivate worker they believed that economic efficiency rooted in
human tendency toward rationality and order.
As with the Principles of
Administration Approach, subsequent experience has shown public organisations,
and the implementation process, to be far more complex than was imagined in
The both of theories was searching
for the "one best way of doing work" for increasing of productivity,
efficiency and effectiveness ofcompleting any work. But implementation of each of them has limited
effect on the productivity and depends on particular circumstances.
Not any of listed theories can be
implemented in modern society, specially in modern Public Administration, the
reason for that is extremely complicated human relations. Public Administration
is a human sciencetherefore human
behaviour plays the most important role in the subject ofPA.
Therefore, there is no use in
implementing of the considered theories of Science Management in practice.
1. Lecturer Notes.
2. Owen E Huges Public Management
and Administration and Introduction, Great Britain: Macmillan Press
3. Public Administration
4. THEORY AND ANALYSIS IN PUBLIC
5. Scope and Theory Of Public
Реферат на тему: Two approches to the scientific management (реферат)