Scientific management or Taylorism is one of the theories of management that focuses the analysis, review, and synthesis of workflows to enhance efficiency and productivity. Fredrick Taylor emphasized productivity and efficiency by utilizing scientific principles rather than values and beliefs of employers and employees. Scientific management received a considerable amount of criticism from many theorists and management experts primarily due to the consideration of efficiency and productivity. Taylor focused productivity, effectiveness, and efficiency of workflows and functions rather than the wellbeing of workers and employees. This theoretical framework stressed on the perspective of organizational objectives and they do not consider the overall effectiveness of the workers. Taylor stressed the training and development of workers to achieve maximum output and efficiency rather than their personal development or growth. Output maximization and efficiency were the primary concerns of Fredrick Taylor in the organizational context rather than the welfare or happiness of workers. However, the training of employees along with the encouragement of coordination was vital for the personal development, success, and growth of the workers.
Scientific management was effective and useful for the organization primarily due to the contributions to productivity and efficiency. However, the principles of scientific management were bad or unfavorable for the employees and workers primarily due to the exclusive emphasis on efficiency. Taylor favored efficiency and mechanistic functioning of workers rather than their personal happiness, well-being, and welfare. Scientific management allowed the organizations to achieve maximum output and productivity from the workforce without considering their welfare and happiness. Conversely, the employees had to work tirelessly to achieve established objectives and goals regardless of their personal capabilities or experience. Scientific management principles had an impartial effect on the community due to an array of positive and negative effects. The productivity and efficiency of the workforce enhanced the profitability and growth of the organizations that led to an increase in quality of life. Conversely, the contentment and happiness of the workers or community members decreased due to stress and pressures of work.
Scientific management in the current scenario is not a workable idea mainly because of the fact that this would exploit the ideology of human beings. The current scenario of human resource management would not work with this perspective of scientific management. Effective team management cannot be possible with the perspective of scientific management. This scenario cannot work on long-term basis, as it is not possible in today’s world that organizations treat human beings as machines. They need effective motivation of employees to flourish in the longer-run. This scenario cannot be possible without the implementation of scientific management techniques as the employees feel de-motivated and they cannot work in such scenarios in the current era. Modern organizations focus on effective employee relationship because they consider the fact that employee motivation can result in the attainment of organizational objectives. This would enhance the overall profitability of the employees and urge organizations to attain long-term returns.
Conclusively, scientific management cannot work in the current scenario because different organizations have realized the fact that they cannot work without focusing on their employees. Organizations that implement the scenarios of scientific management can perform routine tasks and limited tasks only. However, such organizations cannot operate effectively on long-term basis. Scientific management is certainly a bad ploy for workers, employees and the overall society.
References
Certo, S. (2013). Modern Management: Concepts and Skills. New York : Prentice Hall.
Derksen, M. (2014). Turning Men into Machines? Scientific Management, Industrial Psychology, and the 'Human Factor'. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 50(2), 148-165.
