Taylorism, also called as scientific management was developed in the manufacturing industries as a source, by an industrial engineer from Philadelphia named Frederick Winslow Taylor (also known as Father of Scientific Management). This theory of management evaluated the enhancements of financial efficacy and the productivity of labor. The theory emphasized on the ways to define the best possible way for the worker to perform the job using the right tools and practical training, and give rewards for the decent work. Depending on Taylor’s experiences in the manufacturing industries he derived 4 principles of the scientific management. My aim in this paper is to describe about the concepts of Taylorism and whether Taylorism is still practiced in the workplaces in 21st century.
In the article “Not so fast; scientific management started as a way to work. How did it become a way of life? The author provides information on the multiple personalities that had contrasting theories related to scientific theory, and how the principles of Taylor began and got incorporated into the social life. In my opinion even if Mr. Taylor fabricated the data regarding his experiments on the best way to work for workers, or lied to the clients, or exaggerated the results of his success, his main motive was to provide good benefits to the workers and better living conditions by instigating the thought process in the management to pay the workers accordingly for their hard work. I believe that the principles of Taylorism system are effectively utilized in almost all the industries, and the higher level management has been proactive and thoughtful in reforming the rules of the organization to adjust to Taylor’s principles. At least 50,000 workmen in the United States are now employed under this system; and they are receiving from 30 percent to 100 percent higher wages daily than are paid to men of similar caliber with whom they are surrounded, while the companies employing them are more prosperous than ever before (Taylor, 11).
The author gives credit to Louis Brandeis, a public minded reformer from Kentucky who believed in the theory proposed by Taylor. I intensely support Brandeis and his belief that “Under Scientific Management men are led, not driven”. According to me the method used by Taylor to time the workers to complete the task is appropriate as it provides a rough estimate to complete the other pending tasks. The author was successful in making me feel that Taylor had a vision to determine the essential jobs using the stopwatch to time the jobs and the worker who worked like a machine was more productive. It is disheartening to know that the Trade Unions did not believe in the laws of Taylorism though Taylor spent most of time to develop a better environment for the workers, and I feel miserable to know that no worker attended his funeral.
Scientific management always focuses on the mechanics and I agree that it fails to value the intelligence involved in the work whereby motivation and workplace satisfaction are important factors for an organization to be successful. The principles of Taylorism are still followed in this competitive world where the demand for a product is less than the supply, however I feel that in the industries where the intelligence of an employee is required it may be difficult to follow Taylorism. Breaking with Taylorism entails structural changes that transcend the level of the individual jobs (Pruijt, 22). To summarize briefly, I would say that the rigid and rules-driven organizations will not struggle to adapt the principles of Taylorism and I feel that there are these principles will not work in result driven organization.
Works Cited
Taylor, Frederick Winslow. The Principles of Scientific Management. Cosimo, Inc. 2006. Print.
Pruijt, Hans D. Job Design and Technology: Taylorism Vs. Anti-Taylorism. Vol. 4. Psychology Press,1997. Print.
