This paper examines two related questions in organizational management history. First, it considers what strategies a factory owner during the Industrial Revolution might use to recruit, retain, and motivate workers — tracing the evolution from piecework pay to scientific management and company loyalty programs. Second, it analyzes how bureaucracy manifests in real organizational charts from institutions such as Argonne National Laboratory and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, comparing their hierarchical structures, levels of complexity, and functional versus people-centered approaches to organizational design.
Today, because of the apparently unjust conditions facing workers during the early days of industrialization, modern sympathies tend to lie with factory workers in their efforts to unionize and secure their rights. However, even from the capitalist's perspective, unmotivated employees were not as productive as loyal and motivated laborers — and so it was arguably a mistake for factory owners to be openly unconcerned about workers' rights. At the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, capitalist factory owners were often frustrated by the challenge of imposing discipline upon workers who were accustomed to the rhythms and methods of agricultural labor. Their initial response was to pay workers by the completed piece, hoping to incentivize greater output. This technique, however, proved ineffective at retaining employees.
Gradually, modern industry learned that encouraging company loyalty and establishing a specific method and pace of work could make workers both loyal and efficient. The assembly line encouraged the consistent reenactment of standard operating procedures within a factory setting. But it was through paying workers higher salaries than competitor companies, offering regular and consistent wages, and rewarding excellent employees with additional benefits, bonuses, and recognition that workers became truly motivated and more willing to remain with a particular employer. Encouraging loyalty through monetary and promotional recognition, combined with consistent training, proved superior to simply paying workers by the piece or pushing laborers as hard as possible for lower wages.
Scientific management offered additional tools for creating standardized operating procedures in factory organizations, though it did not fully account for the human elements of corporate loyalty or the potential contributions that floor workers could make to streamline management. Limiting worker motions, streamlining production, and improving labor-management relations must be a joint venture — not merely a top-down operation.
"Bureaucracy structures large institutions into departments"
"Functional vs. human-focused hierarchy chart differences"
You’re 53% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.