What is the Hawthorne Effect?

To put it simply, the Hawthorne Effect refers to the change or increase in

performance by individuals once they become aware of the fact that they’re being
watched, noticed, or paid attention to by supervisors or researchers. The term was
coined in 1958 by Henry A. Landsberger while doing evaluations of several studies
at Western Electric’s Hawthorne Works, a plant near Chicago, Illinois.

The studies that were done at the plant featured a research team consisting of
several scientists and company representatives, including Mayo, Roethlisberger,
Whitehead, and Dickson. The so-called Hawthorne studies consisted of four
separate experiments:
1. Illumination Experiments
2. Relay Assembly Test Room Experiments
3. Experiments in Interviewing Workers
4. Bank Wiring Room Experiments (Perera, 2021)
Experiments & Studies

1. Illumination Experiments

Conducted between 1924 and 1927, this was the most influential experiment done
on the subject of the Hawthorne Effect. The purpose of the experiment was to
establish whether there was a connection between the work environment and
productivity. More specifically, they wanted to see whether the level of lighting in
a factory would impact the productivity levels of the employees.

To begin with, the first group of workers making electrical relays was subjected to
several lighting changes throughout their shift, and their performance was observed
in response to the changes. The study found that any change in lighting, regardless
of whether it was a positive or negative change, led to a boost in productivity.
However, the study also found that productivity dipped again once the attention
faded, which implied that the increase was a direct result of a motivation effect. To
summarize, the fact that the employees knew that they were being observed led to
an increase in job performance (Perera, 2021).
2. Relay Assembly Test Room Experiments

Following the initial findings, more experiments were conducted at the same plant
over the following eight years. The researchers focused on examining changes in
rest periods, the average length of the workday, physical conditions, and overall
work structure. The initial findings were reinforced when the results were
summarized: An increase in performance was apparent when individuals were
noticed, watched, or supervised by researchers or their supervisors.

The remaining experiments and studies, which were conducted up until 1932, all
confirmed the previously hypothesized theory and finally, the term the Hawthorne
Effect was coined in 1958 (Perera, 2021).

3. Experiments in Interviewing Workers

Between 1928 and 1930, approximately 20,000 interviews were conducted during
the course of the experiments. The purpose of these interviews was to determine
the employees’ attitudes towards the company, wages, supervision, promotions,
etc. This interview experiment provided researchers with valuable information on
the overall behavior across the company.

4. Bank Wiring Room Experiments

The purpose of this study was to determine if and how payment incentives would
affect productivity. Conducted between 1931 and 1932, the experiment featured a
group of fourteen men who were in charge of putting together telephone switching
equipment. It was concluded that the productivity of the workers did not improve
despite the incentives due to a variety of social factors (Chand, 2014).
Some of the major phases of Hawthorne experiments are as follows: 1.
Illumination Experiments 2. Relay Assembly Test Room Experiments 3.
Mass Interviewing Programme 4. Bank Wiring Observation Room
Experiment.

1. Experiments to determine the effects of changes in illumination on

productivity, illumination experiments, 1924-27.

2. Experiments to determine the effects of changes in hours and other

working conditions on productivity, relay assembly test room experiments,
1927-28;

3. Conducting plant-wide interviews to determine worker attitudes and

sentiments, mass interviewing programme, 1928-30; and

4. Determination and analysis of social organisation at work, bank wiring

observation room experiments, 1931-32.

1. Illumination Experiments:
Illumination experiments were undertaken to find out how varying levels of
illumination (amount of light at the workplace, a physical factor) affected the
productivity. The hypothesis was that with higher illumination, productivity
will increase. In the first series of experiments, a group of workers was
chosen and placed in two separate groups. One group was exposed to varying
intensities of illumination.

Since this group was subjected to experimental changes, it was termed as

experimental group. Another group, called as control group, continued to
work under constant intensities of illumination. The researchers found that as
they increased the illumination in the experimental group, both groups
increased production. When the intensity of illumination decreased, the
production continued to increase in both the groups.

The production in the experimental group decreased only when the

illumination was decreased to the level of moonlight. The decrease was due
to light falling much below the normal level.

Thus, it was concluded that illumination did not have any effect on
productivity but something else was interfering with the productivity. At that
time, it was concluded that human factor was important in determining
productivity but which aspect was affecting, it was not sure. Therefore,
another phase of experiments was undertaken.

2. Relay Assembly Test Room Experiments:

Relay assembly test room experiments were designed to determine the effect
of changes in various job conditions on group productivity as the illumination
experiments could not establish relationship between intensity of illumination
and production. For this purpose, the researchers set up a relay assembly test
room two girls were chosen.

These girls were asked to choose for more girls as co-workers. The work
related to the assembly of telephone relays. Each relay consisted of a number
of parts which girls assembled into finished products. Output depended on
the speed and continuity with which girls worked. The experiments started
with introducing numerous changes in sequence with duration of each change
ranging from four to twelve weeks.
An observer was associated with girls to supervise their work. Before each
change was introduced, the girls were consulted. They were given
opportunity to express their viewpoints and concerns to the supervisor. In
some cases, they were allowed to take decisions on matters concerning them.

Following were the changes and resultant outcomes:

1. The incentive system was changed so that each girl’s extra pay was based
on the other five rather than output of larger group, say, 100 workers or so.
The productivity increase as compared to before.

2. Two five- minute rests one in the morning session and other in evening
session were introduced which were increased to ten minutes. The
productivity increased.

3. The rest period was reduced to five minutes but frequency was increased.
The productivity decreased slightly and the girls complained that frequent
rest intervals affected the rhythm of the work.

4. The number of rest was reduced to two of ten minutes of each, but in the
morning, coffee or soup was served along with the sandwich and in the
evening, snack was provided. The productivity increased.

5. Changes in working hours and workday were introduced, such as cutting

an hour off the end of the day and eliminating Saturday work. The girls were
allowed to leave at 4.30 p.m. instead of usual 5.00 p.m. and later at 4.00 p.m.
productivity increased.

As each change was introduced, absenteeism decreased, morale increased,

and less supervision was required. It was assumed that these positive factors
were there because of the various factors being adjusted and making them
more positive. At this time, the researchers decided to revert back to original
position, that is, no rest and other benefits. Surprisingly, productivity
increased further instead of going down.

This development caused a considerable amount of redirection in thinking

and the result implied that productivity increased not because of positive
changes in physical factors but because of the change in girls’ attitudes
towards work and their work group.

They developed a feeling of stability and a sense of belongings. Since there

was more freedom of work, they developed a sense of responsibility and self-
discipline. The relationship between supervisor and workers became close
and friendly.

3. Mass Interviewing Programme:

During the course of experiments, about 20,000 interviews were conducted
between 1928 and 1930 to determine employees’ attitudes towards company,
supervision, insurance plans, promotion and wages. Initially, these interviews
were conducted by means of direct questioning such as “do you like your
supervisor?” or “is he in your opinion fair or does he have favorites?” etc.

this method has disadvantage of stimulating antagonism or the oversimplified

‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses which could not get to the root of the problem, the
method was changed to non- directive interviewing where interviewer was
asked to listen to instead of talking, arguing or advising. The interview
programme gave valuable insights about the human behaviour in the
company.
Some of the major findings of the programme were as follows:
1. A complaint is not necessarily an objective recital of facts; it is a symptom
of personal disturbance the cause of which may be deep seated.

2. Objects, persons or events are carriers of social meanings. They become

related to employee satisfaction or dissatisfaction only as the employee
comes to view them from his personal situation.

3. The personal situation of the worker is a configuration, composed of a

personal preference involving sentiments, desires and interests of the person
and the social reference constituting the person’s social past and his present
interpersonal relations.

4. The position or status of worker in the company is a reference from which

the worker assigns meaning and value to the events, objects and features of
his environment such as hours of work, wages, etc.

5. The social organisation of the company represents a system of values from

which the worker derives satisfaction or dissatisfaction according to the
perception of his social status and the expected social rewards.

6. The social demands of the worker are influenced by social experience in

groups both inside and outside the work plant.

During the course of interviews, it was discovered that workers’ behaviour

was being influenced by group behaviour. However, this conclusion was not
very satisfactory and, therefore, researches decided to conduct another series
of experiments. As such, the detailed study of a shop situation was started to
find out the behaviour of workers in small groups.
4. Bank Wiring Observation Room Experiment:
These experiments were conducted to find out the impact of small groups on
the individuals. In this experiment, a group of 14 male workers were formed
into a small work group. The men were engaged in the assembly of terminal
banks for the use in telephone exchanges.

The work involved attaching wire with switches for certain equipment used
in telephone exchanges. Hourly wage for each worker was fixed on the basis
of average output of each worker. Bonus as also payable on the basis of
group effort.

It was expected that highly efficient workers would bring pressure on less
efficient workers to increase output and take advantage of group incentive
plan. However, the strategy did not work and workers established their own
standard of output and this was enforced vigorously by various methods of
social pressure. The workers cited various reasons for this behaviour viz. fear
of unemployment, fear of increase in output, desire to protect slow workers
etc.

The Hawthorne experiments clearly showed that a man at work is motivated

by more than the satisfaction of economic needs. Management should
recognise that people are essentially social beings and not merely economic
beings. As a social being, they are members of a group and the management
should try to understand group attitudes and group psychology.

The following were the main conclusions drawn by Prof. Mayo on the
basis of Hawthorne studies:
1. Social Unit:
A factory is not only a techno-economic unit, but also a social unit. Men are
social beings. This social characteristic at work plays an important role in
motivating people. The output increased in Relay Room due to effectively
functioning of a social group with a warm relationship with its supervisors.

2. Group Influence:
The workers in a group develop a common psychological bond uniting them
as £ group in the form of informal organisation. Their behaviour is influenced
by these groups. Pressure of a group, rather than management demands,
frequently has the strongest influence on how productive workers would be.

3. Group Behaviour:
Management must understand that a typical group behaviour can dominate or
even supersede individual propensities.

4. Motivation:
Human and social motivation can play even a greater role than mere
monitory incentives in moving or motivating and managing employee group.

5. Supervision:
The style of supervision affects worker’s attitude to work and his
productivity. A supervisor who is friendly with his workers and takes interest
in their social problems can get co-operation and better results from the
subordinates.

6. Working Conditions:
Productivity increases as a result of improved working conditions in the
organisation.
7. Employee Morale:
Mayo pointed out that workers were not simply cogs, in the machinery,
instead the employee morale (both individual and in groups) can have
profound effects on productivity.

8. Communication:
Experiments have shown that the output increases when workers are
explained the logic behind various decisions and their participation in
decision making brings better results.

9. Balanced Approach:
The problems of workers could not be solved by taking one factor i.e.
management could not achieve the results by emphasizing one aspect. All the
things should be discussed and decision be taken for improving the whole
situation. A balanced approach to the whole situation can show better results.