Scientific Management is also known as Taylorism, and this may be attributed from one theorist known as Frederick Winslow Taylor, who started the Scientific Management Movement in the early 20th century so as to aid us in understanding various managerial practices as well as ways to improve workplace efficiency. Taylor and his colleagues mainly focused on how the work was performed and how it affected workers productivity. His philosophy dwelt on the thought that making people work as hard as they could not bear quality fruits compared to when one optimized the way the work was done (Taylor, 2004).
Taylor also gave an idea that if jobs were optimized and simplified, the productivity would increase. He also emphasized on the idea that if workers and managers cooperated with one another, there would be better outcomes. The approach was very different from the previous one where there existed an enormous gap between the managers and the workers (Nelson, 2008). A firm’s manager previously had little contact with the subordinates whereby he left them to produce the necessary product on their own. It led to low production standards, and the employee’s primary motivation was only continued employment with no incentive to work efficiently and quickly as possible.
The theorist-Taylor also came up with one of the best remedy for scientific management whereby he advocated for systematic soldiering also known as the piecework system. The idea of systematic soldering came up since Taylor believed every worker was motivated by the money he gained and with this he advocated for the idea of getting fair pay after performing a fair day's work. That is in case a worker did not work enough in a day; the results should be implicated in his pay in that he should not be paid as much another worker who may have been highly productive. Taylor also noted that a situation where systematic soldering worked practically. For example, if the manager identifies that a worker is producing below her capacity in a day, and he tries to raise the volume to be produced without increasing the employee’s remuneration. This change would make the worker lower significantly her efficiency and rate of production to resemble that of the slowest worker in the firm (Taylor, 2004). This will be a tactic to discourage the employer from changing the pay rate.
It can be agreed that hardworking employees can feel de-motivated since they will see that their efforts are futile and not recognized and will, therefore, withdraw them, after all, they will be paid the same amount as lazy employees. Taylor also studied time and motion regarding its impact on workplace efficiency and was able to conclude that some people work more efficiently than their colleagues. He saw that these were the best people who managers ought to seek for hire where possible. This selection of the right person for the job brought maximum workplace efficiency rather than randomly assigning the employees to any job. He explained that assigning work to the workers based on motivation and their capabilities as well as training them would lead to better yields, and it is agreeable that each department as a functional unit would have expertise in their area, and the overall result will be of high quality since it will have passes via various specialists.
Monitoring of the workers’ performance, as well as supervision and providing instructions, is another way that Taylor advocated. He argued that this is to ensure that the employees are using the most of the efficient ways of working required to drive to the right goal. I support this view since close examining of the employee will make the employee feel guilty towards performing malpractices and will strive to do his best since he knows he is under watch. Close examining will also help the quality management detect flaws in the systems and, therefore, will improve the quality of the produce.
Taylor also had a view that increased use of communication technology as well as computerized information systems and technologies have made it easier in structuring and monitoring of the interactions between members of the firm and the customers by increasing efficiency due to automation in the Call-Center department which deals with the interactions between the employees and the customers of the organization (Taylor 32)
Allocating and defining of work between managers and workers leads to efficiency in an organization. This helps the members of every rank to know their rightful duties and avoid performing duplicated roles example it will make managers use their time in planning and training while the employees will get to perform their obligations efficiently without interruptions (Ludäscher, Altintas, Bowers, Cummings, Critchlow, Deelman & Klasky, 2009). This will also help in maintaining the organization structure for it will clearly show the order of authority and responsibility in the organization by demonstrating who is answerable.
The theorist also advocated for the replacement of working by "rule of thumb" also known as the mere habit or common sense, and he instead advocated for the use a scientific method which involves studying the piece of work and later determine the best and efficient way to perform the required tasks. He argued that a scientific approach was much detailed and would yield better results compared to the use of conventional sense which depended only on a general view.
Taylor also warned of the ways that managers use to implement changes in the organization whereby they apply the changes without a formula claiming that that is the culture of the organization, he advocated for required commitment by the management to the change as well as the need to educate the employees about the new change as well as practicing gradual implementation. The implementation style ought to be in line with Taylor’s view of change is not always welcome in the modern organizations, especially among the employees mainly due to fear of the unknown as well as disruption of the comfort that had been created by the previous system.
References
Taylor, F. W. (2004). Scientific management. Routledge.
Ludäscher, B., Altintas, I., Bowers, S., Cummings, J., Critchlow, T., Deelman, E., &
Klasky, S. (2009). Scientific process automation and workflow management. Scientific Data Management: Challenges, Existing Technology, and Deployment, Computational Science Series, 230, 476-508.
Nelson, D. (2008). A mental revolution: Scientific management since Taylor. Ohio State
