Work and organization: theory and practice

Work and Organization

It was only at the inception of the twentieth century that the fundamentals of 'modern management' were detailed by Henri Fayol and Frederick W. Taylor. However, both of them were neither economists nor entrepreneurs but are engineers having much authority to management posts earlier kept aside for owners. He narrated management as an all round strategy of administration entailing appropriate information, a diversity of skills and a capacity for coordination. Such elements were no longer mastered by the boards of directors and major shareholders and those were regarded by Fayol as the new kind of manager. The contribution of Taylor emerge from a varied prospective. He initiated by commenting the conventional wage system companion model while workers, like merchants, negotiated piece rates with their foremen. Taylor was in contradiction to these market compromises within the company. Work and payment rules should stem from scientific studies are to be carried out by particularly commissioned experts. (Issues in Regulation theory)

Taylor, in his theory of Scientific Management, recommended that in any organization, the roles are transparent and detectable, workers work and managers manage. It was also extensively believed that managers were born and not generated and that the same fate held true for the working class. As this was a convenient theory to narrate what 'seemed to be' in the early 1900s, clearly such extensively accepted though would as time progressed prove to be an impediment for those that might be desirous and able to learn the skills essential for individual and/or group leadership. Henri Fayol further recommended that management is solely liable for planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling the workforce. Fayol by the late 1940s had acknowledged that some specific leadership capabilities could be cultured however, his theory confined the impact of those 'in the trenches' that might have on the organization operation. (the 21st Century Principal: Educational leader and Business Administrator) in multiple ways their consideration were exemplifying some of the differences between the U.S.A. And Europe. (People whose Ideas Influence Organizational Work: Henri Fayol)

The scientific management strategy of Charles Taylor is recognized as the Taylorism. This approach of "command-and-control demarcates a clear distinction between managers and employees." (Silverstein, 1999, p. 5) the inherent philosophy was that workers work, managers think. The methodology of the Charles Taylor was a representation of the era i.e. The industrial era with the factories association and assembly lines - environments that necessitated tight management regulation. (Silverstein, 1999, p. 5) Frederick Taylor, with his approaches to the Scientific Management initiated the age of modern management. In the later part of the nineteenth century and early part of the twentieth century, Frederick Taylor was condemning the embarrassing, ineffective, or ill-directed movement of men as national wastage. He supported a variation from the old system of personal management to a new approach to the scientific management. (an overview of Management Theory)

Under the personal management the leader of the company is anticipated to be personally intelligent. Taylor asserted that an association of ordinary men, following a scientific method would supersede the older personally brilliant leaders of industry. Taylor persistently sought to depose the management by the rule of thumb and substitute it with the real timed observations giving rise to the one best practice. Adhering to this philosophy he also advocated the methodical training of workers in the one best practice instead of permitting them personal discretion in their jobs. He has the faith that an inclination of hearty cooperation would develop between the workers and management and that cooperation would make certain that the workers would adhere to the one best experience. (an overview of Management Theory)

Frederick Taylor generated the most successful method of carrying out work tasks. He advocated that people would behave as they wish and the organization if they understood rectify work procedures and were awarded for adhering them. The stress of Taylor was on the actual mode of enhancing output was to 'work smarter' not necessarily harder. Being aware of the nature of the job, the process of work could become more effective. Taylor believes strongly that management instead of workers should choose the methods of carrying out organizational tasks. The management is required to concentrate on the situations those do not adhere to the standards and procedures within the norms, once the output standards and routine work procedures were spelled out. The gains and profits that emerged from the system of Taylor were quite impressive, such as the attempt to apply such principles to reform naval manufacturing his efforts supposedly a failure. (Management & Organizational Behavior)

Taylor advocated his norms on the ground of a "mental revolution that would take place in the attitudes of management and labor in that both sides would acknowledge the necessity for cooperation and the significance of scientific investigation rather than the individual judgment and opinions as the basis for organizing work assignments." (Management & Organizational Behavior) Taylor assumed that the better job environment taking into account the shorter hours, rest periods four times a day, paid days off for girls every month and strenuous scientific work procedures would result in both higher factory output and higher wage levels and therefore to more pleasant relations between employer and employees. Taylor also incorporated the consumers those buy the product of employer and employees and those ultimately pay both the wages of the workmen and the profits of the employer and employees and those finally pay both the wages of the workmen and the profits of the employers. (Modern Leadership Theory and Sweatshops: In and Out of the Box)

Under such philosophies Taylor further thinks that the workload would be consistently distributed between the workers and management with management performing the science and instruction and the workers performing the labor, each group performing the work which is found appropriate to them. The strongest positive inheritance of Taylor was the ideology of splitting up of a complex task down into a number of small subtasks and optimizing the performance of the subtasks. This positive inheritance gives rise to the meticulously measured time trials that in turn lead to the strongest negative legacy of the Taylor. Many opponents both conventional and present have indicated that the theory of Taylor leads to dehumanizing the workers. (an overview of Management Theory)

Contrary to this the micro-level approach to the management by Taylor, another macro-level approach has been devised by Henri Fayol followed by different other replica. (III. Management of Adults Education Institutions - general overview) Contrary to the theory of Taylor, the work of Fayol represents a tension between his acknowledgements that managers are not super beings, and still more the employees are not necessarily permitted sufficient autonomy and liability to resolve the second-rated problems. Moreover, the contribution of Fayol entails much more insights into the intellectual underpinnings of the approach. (Henri Fayol (1916) General and Industrial Management) the work of the Fayol is more inclined towards the management layer. (an overview of Management Theory) Fayol integrated several norms or principles of organization and management and Taylor on work methods, measurement and simplification to secure efficiencies. (Fayol (1841-1925) Functions and Principles of Management)

Several texts regard Fayol and Taylor as mechanistic modernists. In reality, Fayol have preferences for an organic metaphor for leading and organizing, while Taylor continued with the mechanistic one. Fayol initiated a management knowledge revolution, Fayolism contradicted Taylorism extensively. The five functions of Fayol are planning, organizing, command, co-ordination and control. However, he was organic in his rhetoric rather than of mechanistic. (Modern Leadership Theory and Sweatshops: In and Out of the Box) Taylor emphasized on four basic tenets of management. Firstly, there is the development of true science of work. The main philosophy of Taylor was that the worker did not actually recognize what was expected on him. There was no basic measure as to what consisted of a fair day's work. That Taylor tried to devise was a measure or standard of the amount of work that a suitable worker could attain in a normal day under optimum conditions. For this Taylor was prepared to pay higher than average wages. The age old illustration of Taylor was a man shoveling coal or iron ore at the Bethlehem steel works. This work is necessitated recurrence performance that has now been mechanized for the most part.

Taylor also had faith in single skills, largely unconnected in much of present day multi-skilled settings. However, there still exist some businesses that actually do not understand if they are entailing value out of the few operatives that continue on the shop floor. The shop floor labor may only be 12% of total turnover in comparison to the materials of 56% but if net margin is only 5%, there is little room for error or complacency. The Direct labor may not exist merely on the shop floor. A product may necessitate installation engineers and the management still requires understanding if they are working efficiently and that is a proficient rate of working. Second on was related to the scientific choice and the persistent improvement of the worker. Taylor had faith that the best man for the job is to be chosen. He is required to possess the physical and intellectual qualities to attain the required output. However, it was up to the management to make it sure that the right people were chosen and trained. This forms the foundation for the quality circles.

Operatives congregate to deliberate on work related difficulties, prove into the reasons and solutions and take appropriate action. However, for this to work effectively, the involved operatives must be trained. Third one is to bring together the science of work and scientifically chosen and skilled personnel. The students are to visualize an anticipation of MacGregor here. What Taylor was actually, anxious to eliminate was the managerial mental block. Management, he discovered opposed his philosophy due to the fact that they visualize higher hourly rates of pay. What they did not visualize was the potential for much higher productivity. Fourth one is the persistent and intimate co-operation of management and men. Under this concept, R.C. Townsend always had a reference to the battle of Dienbienphu, where the French were defeated by an army where the colonels progressed with their men and lived with their men under the same conditions. He is quite well-known for three things. (the relevance of traditional management theories to the 21st Century)

Fayol contrary to this had recommended three organizational attributes. First, he recommended the six functional groups. Fayol recommended that all functions can be tuned to perform six basic functions. Those can be grouped as "Technical-production, manufacture, adaptation; Commercial- buying, selling, exchange; Financial - search for optimum use of capital; Security - protection of property and personnel; Accounting - stocktaking, balance sheets, costs, statistics - bean counting; Managerial activities - planning, organization, command, co-ordination and control." (the relevance of traditional management theories to the 21st Century) Secondly, he recommended the managerial factors. This was a reaction to the question as to what the management is. He indicated five elements such as Prevoyance- analyzing the future and chalking out of a plan of action- the factor of approach; to organize- construct the structure, both material and human, of the undertaking; to command- continuance of the functioning among the personnel; to co-ordinate - binding together, uniting and integrating all functions and efforts; to control - visualizing that everything stems in line with the established rule and expressed command. Out of this emerged the third contribution of Fayol, his 14 tenets.

However, he could admit that they were his rules, devised out of his own experience and did not essentially have general application or even longer continuance. (a) Division of work - the stress was on specific area for greater efficiency. This has been substituted by high levels of multi-skilling. (B) Authority - the power to endorse instructions. This must be in line with the liability for the consequences. There was no scope for vacillation in the Fayols environment and the approach of Lord Hurcombe depicting, 'we shall be criticized if'. This was the backdrop to Sir Michael Edwards widely accepted 'right to manage'. - Discipline - employees will only adhere to the instructions if management entails good leadership. (D) Unity of command - This concept is presently about 2000 years old. The old proverb is 'No man can be the slave of two masters'. As a result of its original legacy the tenets of Fayol one boss and no contradictory lines of command has discovered faithful adherents among managers. (E) Unity of Direction - while there is always the threat of rigidity, there must be a unity of purpose and goal resemblance. The plan is to be accepted and have the backing at all levels. Communication is very significant; both up and down the hierarchy. (the relevance of traditional management theories to the 21st Century)

F) Subordination of the individual interest to the corporate good. The objectives of the firm are always significant. There can be no scope for loose cannons on deck (G) Remuneration - Fayol believed in reality. He advocated from empirical evidence and finally, approved that there is no such thing as a perfect system. After sixty years, Charles Handy stressed that money was a precise, specifically quantifiable motivator. (H) Centralization / Decentralization - whatever were suitable. (I) Scalar chain - a hierarchy was essential for communication, but it is required to be flexible and no horizontal communication can be precluded from it. (J) Order - Fayol argued both material and social arrangement. It is quite probable in the former that he expected the ideas of MRP and JIT, necessary to the businesses of all scales. The JIT recommends quite a Darwinian approach to recruitment. As the choice of the good people is an ideal, sometimes small business may not have the option. It will not be able to sustain passengers that it will do to make the people grow.

K) Equity-- This is quite essential and devised by a combination of justice and awareness. In the words of Townsend, everybody is required to be evaluated as per his performance, not on his appearance, manners, personality or connections. A small business has the enough scope to be initiated from nothing meaningful and to build a system that is just. It is fascinating to note that there is no such reference of Vinnicombe and Colwell's the Essence of Women in Management nor is there any reference to Henri Fayol. (L) Stability of Tenure - the success leads to continue with more persistent managerial structures. There is definitely no place in the small, battling business for the frustrated chess player. (M) Initiative - the element of liberty to think and the capability to visualize beyond the existing horizon approaches closer to this. Small businesses are thought of on the basis of initiative they required to develop and become successful by persistently fostering the initiative and to a minimum a medium-term strategy to business solutions. (N) Esprit de corps- in order to persist the small business is required to foster high morale at all the times to come. This implies that the prioritized talent is required to have the ideas, along with the capability to pull people along with him. The effective ideas can fail if the ability to pilot the people is absent. (the relevance of traditional management theories to the 21st Century)