PERSPECTIVES ON PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION (DSC-102)

Theoretical Perspectives :
Classical Theories: Scientific Management (F.W.Taylor)
1st Semester Honours.
Compiled by Sushila Baraily,
Asst. Professor, Political Science Department,
Sonada Degree College.
University of North Bengal

SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT APPROACH

INTRODUCTION

Scientific Management Approach is one of the important approaches in the field of administrative
theory. This theory came in the wake of new industrial revolution that has taken place during the
later part of the nineteenth century. Scientific Management approach is an attempt to solve the
problems of complex organisations that have emerged as a result of industrial development.
Frederick Winslow Taylor is generally regarded as the pioneer of the scientific management
approach, which paved way for the modern management approaches and techniques.

( F.W. Taylor was born in a German town in Pennsylvania on March 20, 1856. He received
education in France and Germany. He also received Mechanical Engineering degree from Stevens
Institute of Technology of Hoboken, New Jersey. At the age of eighteen he joined the Enterprise
Hydraulic Works, Philadelphia and served as apprentice for four years. In 1878 he went to work
at Midvale Steel Company as a labourer and he became the Chief Engineer of that company in
1884. He became General Manager of Manufacturing Investment Company in 1890. In 1893 he
opened an office in New York as a consulting engineer.

As an engineer he is instrumental in the development of new technologies, he invented several

tools to increase the production. Some of the important tools he developed were cutting tool, a
heat-treating tool, a steel hammer, hydraulic power loading machinery, boring and turning mills
etc. He was always interested in improving upon the techniques of management. He emphasised
on the scientific way of developing the tools as well as scientific way of performing the job. He has
passion for efficiency and scientific way of work in the organisations. )

The contribution of Taylor for the scientific management approach can be traced in his major
writings. His writings bear his intimate observation of the work at the work place and his desire to
improve the production and efficiency in the organisation. The major writings of Taylor are, A
Piece Rate System (1895), Shop Management (1903), The Art of Cutting Metals (1906), The
Principles of Scientific Management (1911) and The Testimony before a Special Committee of the
House of Representatives (1912). In ‘A Piece Rate System’ he propounded three basic principles.
(1) Observation of work through time study (to complete the work and to determine the standard
rate) for completion of work, (2) differential rate system for completing piecework and (3)
payment to men not to positions. In his article on “Shop Management’ he focused basically on
organisation and management of workshop. He dealt about the need to maintain low production
unit costs and payment of high wages, applying scientific methods of research, standardisation of
working conditions, need for training and cooperative relations between workers and
managements. His work on ‘The Art of Cutting Metals’ is based on extensive research of thousands
of experiments conducted over a period of 26 years. He developed instruments for cutting of steel,
studied motion and time and analysed how workers handle materials, machines and tools when
they perform different works. Taylor felt that there is a best way to do every work and scientific
selection of right men for right job is essential for maximum production in any organisation.

SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT: THE BASIC PRINCIPLES

To overcome the deficiencies in the management Taylor formulated four new principles / new
duties to be assumed by the management which are known as the principles of scientific
management. They are:

1. The development of a true science of work

2. The scientific selection of workmen and their progressive development

3. Bringing together of science of work and the scientifically selected workers

4. The equal division of work and the responsibility between management and workers

The Development of a True Science of Work

Taylor believed that there is a need to develop science of work. He further believed that there is
one ‘best way’ of doing every job. This can be achieved by systematic study of any work and
replacing the old thumb-rule method by developing a scientific method. This requires
gathering mass of traditional knowledge, recording it, tabulating it and in many cases finally
reducing it to laws rules and even to mathematical formulae. And later these laws and rules are to
be applied to the everyday work of all workmen of the organisation. The scientific method of work
saves worker from unnecessary criticism of the boss and the management to get maximum work
from worker. It also results in establishing a ‘large daily task’ to be done by the qualified workers
under the optimum conditions.

Scientific Selection and Progressive Development of Workmen

To ensure effective performance of the scientifically developed work there is a need to select the
workers on scientific basis. It is the duty of the management to study the character, the nature and
the performance of each worker with a view to finding out his limitations and possibilities for his
development. Taylor believed that every worker has potentialities for development. Every worker
must be systematically and thoroughly trained. Scientific selection involves selecting a right
person for a right job. It is also necessary to ensure that the employee accepts the new methods,
tools and conditions willingly and enthusiastically. There should be opportunities for advancement
to do the job to the fullest realisation of his normal capabilities.

Bringing together of Science of Work and Scientifically Selected Workers

The third principle of the scientific management is bringing of science of work and scientifically
selected and trained workmen together. Taylor says ‘bringing together advisedly because you may
develop all the science that you please and you may scientifically select and train workmen just as
much as you please, but unless some men bring the science and workmen together all your labour
will be lost’. Taylor felt it is exclusive responsibility of the management to do this job. He believed
that workers are always willing to cooperate with the management but there is more opposition
from the side of management.

Division of Work and Responsibility between Worker and Management

Traditionally the worker bears the entire responsibility of the work and the management has lesser
responsibility. But Taylor emphasised on equal responsibility between worker and management.
This division creates understanding and mutual dependence between them. This results in
elimination of conflict and mistrust between the worker and management. Taylor thinks that
scientific management can be justly and truthfully characterised as management in which harmony
is the rule rather than discord.

SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT: OTHER IMPORTANT CONCERNS OF TAYLOR

In addition to the above four basic principles Taylor also expressed the concern for the following
in the scientific management method. They are:

 Mental Revolution

 Functional Foremanship

 Work Study and Work Measurement

 Standardisation of Tools

 Selection and Training of Workers

 Task Prescription

 Incentive Schemes

 Work as an Individual Activity

 Trade Unions

 Development of Management Thinking

 Division of Work

Mental Revolution: Taylor was of the view that scientific management requires a great revolution
that takes place in the mental attitude of management as well as the workers. Instead of focusing
more on the division of surplus they should together turn their attention towards increasing the
size of the surplus until the surplus become so large that it becomes unnecessary to quarrel over
how it should be divided. Both should stop pulling one another and instead both should work
together in the same direction to increase the surplus. They should realise that the friendly
cooperation and mutual help results in increasing the surplus. Once the surplus increases there is
ample scope for increasing the wages for the workers and increase in profits for the management.
It is along this a complete change in the mental attitude of both the sides is required. Taylor further
emphasised that the scientific management involves change in the attitude of the workers and the
management with regard to their duties and responsibilities and towards their fellow workers. It
demands the realisation of the fact that their mutual interest is not antagonistic and mutual
prosperity is possible only through mutual cooperation. The principle object of management is to
secure maximum prosperity for the employer as well as the employee. Taylor believed that there
is no conflict in the interest of employees, workers and consumers. His major concern was that the
results of higher productivity should equally benefit the employer, worker and consumer.

Functional Foremanship: Taylor is critical of linear system of organisation in which each worker
is subordinated to only one boss. He replaced this system with what is called functional
foremanship. In the functional foremanship the worker receives orders from eight different
specialised supervisors. Thus he divided work not only among the workers but also at the
supervisory level. Out of the eight functional supervisors, four functional foreman, namely the
gang boss, the repair boss, the speed boss and the inspector will look after the execution of work
and the remaining four will take care of planning aspects. They are the route clerk, the instruction
clerk, the time and cost clerk and the shop disciplinarian. Through this functional foreman system
Taylor wanted to create the narrowly specialised supervisor for each type of skilled work. He
thought this will result in efficiency rather than one supervisor looking after all the activities. He
further believed that in this type of organisation a foreman can be trained quickly and specialisation
became easy.

Work Study and Work Measurement: Taylor advocated the need for systematic study of work.
The use of time study can help us in finding out the optimal way of study carrying out a task. He
considered it as an essential component of scientific management. It involves measuring and
studying the ‘unit times’. Taylor conducted several studies to find out the standard unit of work to
be carried out by an individual worker. He studied each and every movement of the worker in
performing a particular task with the help of a stopwatch. By studying each and every movement
of the work we can eliminate the unnecessary movements of the workers and find out the time
required for each movement. With the help of time study and work-study it is possible to perform
a particular task with a lesser movement. The purpose of work- study is to eliminate not only
unnecessary movements but also to eliminate the slow movements and fatigue of the workers there
by it is possible to find out ‘the best way’ of performing each activity.

Standardisation of Tools: Taylor maintained that in addition to determining the best methods,
the management also should standardize the tools in the light of the needs of the specific jobs. In
an experiment at Bethleham Steel Works on shovelling of coal, Taylor found that the average
shovel load varied from 16 to 38 pounds. Further experiments showed that good workers were able
to shovel more tones per day if they used a shovel carrying the load of 21 to 22 pounds.
Subsequently Taylor found that with the different types of materials to be shovelled, about 15
different types of shovels were needed. From then on when workers arrived in the morning they
received written instructions on what to shovel and what type of shovel to be used. After three and
half years 140 men were doing the work formerly handled by 400 to 600 workers. This shows that
by using a proper instrument for each type of work we can achieve more work with the help of
less number of workers.

Selection and Training of Workers: Taylor insisted that each worker should be given the job for
which he was best suited. According to Taylor ‘one of the very first requirements of the worker
who is fit to handle the pig iron as a regular occupation is that he shall be stupid and so phlegmatic
that he more nearly resembles in his mental makeup the ox than any other type’. Taylor further
felt that “there is work for each type of man, just as for instance, there is work for the dry horse
and work for the trotting horse. There is no type of work, however, that suits all types of man”. It
is therefore essential to find the realistic ways of judging their capacities of different workers. The
management should give them formal training and clear instructions on precisely how to perform
the prescribed motions with the standardized tools and materials.

Task Prescription: Not only the tasks be divided and optimal methods of achieving the tasks be
prescribed, the worker should also be given clear description of what he should do. Here Taylor
emphasises that the tasks should be well planned in advance and the worker be given clear
instructions concerning his particular task to be done. Proper task prescription will provide clarity
to the worker as well as the management.

Incentive Scheme: Taylor suggested that the pay should be linked to the piece of work done by
the worker. Payment should depend upon his achieving the prescribed output. In the event of
achieving a greater output, then a bonus payment should be made to the worker. The bonus paid
should be generous and consistent. This system will provide encouragement to the workers to
produce more.

Work as an Individual Activity: Taylor is always opposed to any kind of group activity. He
believes that people are motivated by personal ambition, and that once put into a group the
individual looses his individual drive. He believes that the influence of the group makes one
produce less. Further he argued that female workers were prone to such personal pressures and
indeed separated them in such a way that verbal interaction was impossible. (Clegg and Dunkerley,
1980.p.89).

Trade Unions: Since Taylor was critical of group activity he was also against trade union
movement. He regarded trade unions as unnecessary under his system of work. The employer
according to him was on the same side of the workers. The goal of the workers and the employers
is the same. Acceptance of scientific management principles would reduce conflict between
workers and the management. Since management itself laid down what was the ‘fair day’s pay’
for fair day’s work through objective rationale means, the need for trade unions does not arise.

Development of Management Thinking: Taylor through scientific management saw the

development of management as a science. It implies that specific laws could be derived for
management practice and those laws relate specifically to wage rates and ways of doing work.
Arriving at these laws involved management in the use of scientific method.

Division of Work: Taylor felt that not only there should be a division of labour on a shop floor
but also the division of work between the worker and management. According to Taylor the main
function of management should be planning for future. The responsibility of worker is to
concentrate totally on carrying out the given task. He believed that there were distinct personality
types for performing planning function and doing function. The planning function relates to the
managements and doing function relates to the workers. He also recommended minute division of
tasks for each individual in the organisation.

SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT MOVEMENT

Louis Brandeis first used the word scientific management in the year 1910. In the earlier days
Taylor usually referred to these techniques as the “Task System” or “Task Management”. Later
Taylor welcomed the more appealing nomenclature and declared “management is a true science
resting upon clearly defined laws, rules and principles”. He felt that his work covered the entire
sphere of Industrial Management. He was convinced that same principles could be applied with
equal force to all social activities “to the management of our homes; management of our farm;
management of our business of our tradesmen; of our Church; our philanthropic institutions; our
universities and our government departments”. Very soon Taylor became very popular. His close
associates such as Henry Grantt, Frank Gilbreth and Lillian Gillberth etc., carried out further
research in the area and published many articles and books. Many followers of Taylor served as
advisors to hundreds of companies. Engineering Schools began to give courses on shop
management and industrial management. Schools of business administration also started giving
courses in these areas. Many special disciplines rooted in scientific management have emerged.

In brief scientific management became a “movement”. It offered the hope of resolving industrial
problems through the use of objective principles. The movement soon became replete with
popularisers, traditionalists and dissidents. It had a tremendous effect on industrial practices in the
United States. The movement soon became international, spread to Germany, England, France,
Sweden and other European countries. Its greatest success however was in Russia. In 1917
immediately after the Bolshevik revolution, Lenin welcomed Taylor’s techniques to Russia. He
referred to Taylor’s system as “a combination of subtle brutality of bourgeois exploitation and a
number of its greatest scientific achievements”. The movement seems to have been supported by
all contending factions at the higher levels of the Russian Communist Party. Taylor’s ideas were
built into the curriculum for the education and training of the engineers who subsequently tended
to monopolise managerial posts in the Soviet industry.

CRITICISM

Though scientific management became a movement and offered solutions to some of the industrial
problems, it was equally opposed and criticised by many people. The scientific management has
emerged at a time when capitalist development had reached the stage of requiring organisational
changes in the functioning of industrial enterprise. Hence it is considered more as a pro-capitalist
theory. The critics considered that the scientific management helped more the owners of industries
than the workers. The trade unions were against scientific management methods. They considered
Taylorism as not only destroying trade unionism but also destroying principles of collective
bargaining. They felt that the scientific management was a menace to the community at large as it
causes continuous increase in unemployment. Trade unions felt that Taylor was more interested in
mechanical aspects of work and not much concerned about the total work situation. As a result
there were a number of agitations by labour unions in America, which led the American Congress
in 1912 to appoint a special committee of the House of Representatives to investigate in to
Taylorism. The trade unions in 1915 succeeded in getting an amendment to the Army
Appropriation Act forbidding the use of stopwatches or the payment of premiums or bonuses in
army arsenals.

A still stronger attack was made by the investigation conducted by Professor Robert Hoxie on
industrial relations. The Hoxie Report concluded that the approach of Taylor and his associates
dealt only with mechanical and not with the human aspects of production.

A strong criticism came from Harry Braverman who in his book ‘Labour and Monopoly Capital’
(1974) argued that an analysis of Taylor’s work enables us to distinguish three general principles
of scientific management (Clegg and Dunkerly, 1980). They are:

 The principle of dissociation of labour process from the skills of the workers: The
Taylorism in other wards results in separation of worker from the knowledge that the
worker might poses, particularly that knowledge deriving from a craft or traditional
process. Now the labour process therefore is dependent upon managerial practices rather
than worker abilities.
 The principle of separation of conception from execution: By this Braverman refers to
the division under the scientific management of manual and mental labour. The
implementation of Taylorism leads to a situation where the organisation of work is the
prerogative of the management whereas the worker has to simply execute the work. In
other words, this is separation of ‘mind’ from the ‘hand’. Those who work with hand and
those who work with mind are two separate entities. This results in alienation of labour
from the labour process.
 The principle of use of monopoly over knowledge to control each step of labour
process and its mode of execution: This principle is logically derived from the pervious
two. It shows that the Taylorism results in the managerial section monopolising the
knowledge of work and controlling the worker in each and every aspect of execution of the
work. This results in domination of managerial class over the workers.

Several others criticised scientific management. Even the managers at that time were critical of
scientific methods. They did not appreciate his comments on ‘thumb-rule’ methods (refers to a
principle with broad application that is not to be strictly accurate or reliable for every situation.
It refers to an easily learned and easily applied procedure or standard, based on practical
experience rather than theory) Managers were opposed to the Taylor’s ideas of training
programmes for the managers. It is interesting to note that Taylor had to resign from Midvale Steel
Works and Bethlehem Steel Company because of the differences with the company managers.

The other critics of Taylor’s scientific management include Oliver Sheldon, Mary Parker
Follette, Elton Mayo, Peter Drucker and others. They charged that Taylor’s scientific
management was impersonal and underemphasised the human factor. This criticism led to a series
of experiments in industrial sociology and social psychology. The studies of Elton Mayo and other
researchers on human relations have rejected Taylorism. Taylor’s philosophy that men were
generally lazy and try to avoid work has also been criticised.

Another criticism of Taylor is that he did not properly understand the anatomy of work. His
emphasis on minute division of work was criticised on several grounds. Firstly, the work gets de-
personalised and the worker becomes a mere cog in the machine. The worker lacks the sense of
participation in the work; the worker has no outlets to exhibit all his potentialities. Secondly,
Taylorism may lead to automation of workers, which may have psychological consequences. Peter
Drucker, management expert, aptly says that the organisation became a piece of poor engineering
judged by the standards of human relations as well as those of productive efficiency and output.

Taylor’s functional foremanship was criticised by many saying that it will lead to confusion when
each worker kept under the control of eight supervisors. A worker may not be able to satisfy eight
supervisors in all the aspects.

SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT: RELEVANCE

Scientific management helped many industrial organisations in the United States to overcome the
problems of workers. In the similar way Taylorism spread to England to resolve industrial crises
in that country. At a time when there is an industrial unrest and increasing unemployment, the
scientific management came to the rescue of industrial organisations. Any developing country like
India which are facing similar industrial problems can learn lessons from scientific management.
With the application of principles of scientific management, it is possible to improve the efficiency
of organisations. As it is discussed earlier, even the socialist societies such as Russia have
welcomed the scientific management principles, which are developed in the context of capitalist
economy. This shows the relevance of Taylor’s scientific management to the organisations
irrespective of the nature of economy.

CONCLUSION

The above discussion on scientific management shows that the Taylor’s scientific management
was responding to the problems of the early industrial organisations. Taylorism provided certain
practical solutions to the problems of industries and they got benefited from scientific
management. Taylor firmly believed that there is a ‘best method’ for doing any work. One has to
find out the best method by systematic study of work. Taylor emphasised that the management has
to take up equal responsibility for the work done in the organisation. He also emphasised that there
is a need to select the right type of persons to perform the job and also train them in improving the
performance. Apart from systemic study of the work, the standardisation of tools and procedures
are necessary. There is also a need for complete understanding and cooperation between the worker
and the management. They should instead of focusing on increase in the wages and profits; they
should give importance to increase the production.

Taylor’s ideas have helped the industrial societies to overcome the basic problems of low
production and labour problems. Because of the scientific nature of Taylor’s ideas, they have
spread not only to the European countries but also to the socialist societies like Russia.

----------------x----------------