Principles of control according to ftaylor. What are the principles of Taylor control. Effective management through increasing the productivity of physical and mental labor
As noted earlier, F. Taylor became the main founder of the scientific school of management. To begin with, let's analyze the general concept of the scientific school of management. And so, the main task of the scientific school is to scientifically select people, prepare them, provide them with some incentives and generalize work and person, in order to achieve an aggregate productivity that exceeds the contribution made by the individual labor force.
The main merit of F. Taylor as the "father of management" is that he is the founder of the school of scientific management, developed the methodological foundations of labor rationing, led to the practical part of the scientific approaches to the selection, placement and stimulation of workers' labor, which was the beginning of the revolution in the field of management.
To begin with, let's consider the basic principles of organizing production. F. Taylor formulated four fundamental principles of production management, presented in Figure 2.1:
Rice. 2.1 Basic principles of organization of production by F. Taylor
These four provisions express the main idea of scientific management: for each type of human activity, a theoretical basis is developed, and then his training is carried out (in accordance with the approved regulations), during which he acquires the necessary work skills. This approach opposes the method of volitional decisions, when the tasks of managers and workers are not clearly separated. Taylor believed that through a more efficient organization of labor, the total amount of goods can be increased, and the share of each participant can increase without reducing the share of others. Therefore, if both managers and workers perform their tasks more efficiently, then the incomes of both will increase. Both groups need to experience what Taylor called a "mental revolution" before the widespread application of scientific management becomes possible. "Mental revolution" will consist in creating an atmosphere of mutual understanding between leaders and workers on the basis of meeting common interests.
The greatest effect from the introduction of his system was obtained at the enterprises of Henry Ford, who, thanks to scientific organization Labor achieved a revolutionary increase in productivity and already in 1922 produced every second car in the world at its factories.
As a talented mechanical engineer and inventor, Ford borrowed from Taylor the basic principles of the rational functioning of the enterprise and practically for the first time introduced them in full in its production.
Taylor's assertion that “the art of scientific management is evolution, not an invention” and that market relations have their own laws and development logic, for which there are no and cannot be unified solutions and approaches. Taylor showed that intra-industrial relations, and first of all, subordination, i.e. behavior and communication of ordinary workers and management personnel, has a direct impact on the growth rate of labor productivity. All of these statements have led to the formulation of management principles.
The basic principles of management formulated by F. Taylor:
1. Development of optimal methods for performing work on the basis of a scientific study of the costs of time, movements, efforts.
2. Absolute adherence to the developed standards.
3. Selection, training and placement of workers in those jobs and tasks where they can provide the greatest benefit.
4. Pay by performance: less results - less pay, more results - more pay.
5. The use of functional managers exercising control in specialized areas.
6. Maintenance friendly relations between workers and managers in order to ensure the possibility of scientific management.
F. Taylor noted that the time allotted for specific tasks should be adequate, taking into account the opportunities for rest and breaks in work. This approach gave management the opportunity to set norms that were achievable and pay extra to those who exceeded the established norms.
Two cases can be cited as an example of the effective use of F. Taylor's principles in practice. Workers at Bethlehem Steel handled a variety of coal grades by hand each day. Taylor, who determined that, depending on the material carried, the load on one shovel ranged from 4 to 30 pounds, through experiments he was able to establish that the optimal (in terms of less fatigue of the worker) shovel load is 21 pounds. Shovels were made at his suggestion. different types corresponding to the type of shipped coal. The number of loaders at the marshalling yard was subsequently reduced from 500 to 150, saving the firm $ 80,000 a year; the average number of tons of coal handled by one worker per day increased from 16 to 59; the average wages of employees increased by 1.5 times.
The second experiment at the same firm concerned the process of loading pig iron ingots. F. Taylor introduced his principles of organization and remuneration, which increased labor productivity by 400%, and wages - by 60%. All this served as convincing proof of the superiority of a scientifically based management system.
F. Taylor paid great attention to the system of incentives for workers. He argued: "The reward, in order for it to have the proper effect, must follow very quickly the work itself."
It should be noted that F. Taylor did not present the award only in the form of a monetary award. He always advised entrepreneurs to make concessions to workers, because these concessions are also a reward, as well as various innovations (which some authors still consider as semi-philanthropic): the organization of baths, canteens, reading rooms, evening courses, kindergartens, etc. ...
All of this Taylor considered a valuable "tool for creating more skillful and intelligent workers", which "makes them feel good towards the owners." Moreover, F. Taylor argued that this is not philanthropy, but economic calculation: if you introduce improvements in the labor process and interest the worker (including the appropriate reward), then in the allotted time the same worker will make 3-4 times more than under normal conditions.
It should be noted that there is a significant difference between the teachings of the classic and what is introduced into practice and developed by his followers. "Taylorism" is a perverted teaching of F. Taylor, from which was taken only what the entrepreneurs of the late XIX - early XX century considered useful for themselves. The worker at that time was seen as an appendage of the machine, so the psychological climate was considered an unnecessary luxury. Meanwhile, F. Taylor's teaching is based on the philosophy of cooperation, which implied a great deal of attention to social and even spiritual aspects. F. Taylor spoke about this, in particular, in 1912 before a special parliamentary committee: “The essence of scientific management of enterprises, - stressed Taylor, - comes down to a complete spiritual restructuring of workers employed in a particular enterprise, in a particular industry, complete spiritual restructuring of these people in relation to their responsibilities, their colleagues at work, their leaders. It also presupposes a similar spiritual restructuring on the part of management - foremen, enterprise managers, enterprise owners and its supervisory board - in relation to subordinates and their daily tasks.
The classic of management science looked far away, but since the practitioners took from this teaching only that which concerned the organization of labor, a number of researchers are trying to prove that Taylorism is nothing more than the basis of the scientific organization of labor. One cannot agree with such an assessment. F. Taylor developed the principles of enterprise management according to a deliberate plan based on the "philosophy of cooperation."
F. Taylor's doctrine laid the foundations of the "classical" or "traditional" school of management, the provisions of which are promoted in our days. The "classical" school from the very beginning was created not only by scientists from the United States, but also from other countries, therefore it is not one of the schools in American management theory, but the first stage of the entire science of management. Under its influence, more or less independent schools were then formed both in the United States and in France, Germany and other countries.
The process of effective production management consists in the creation of a scientific organization of labor (STO). The scientific organization of labor is listed as a component of the production management cycle at a short and operational level. The value of work organization is based on scientific achievements and the experience of proven methods that ensure an increase in labor productivity and preserve human health.
At the turn of the 19th-20th centuries, a new branch of scientific knowledge emerged - the psychology of management, and one of the most popular was the theory of the scientific organization of labor developed by Frederick Taylor. Taylor set out his main ideas in the book "Principles of Scientific Management", published in 1911.
Reasons for the emergence of new control theories
In the Middle Ages and early modern times, no special management methods were required. But as a result of the industrial revolution and technological acceleration in the 18th and 19th centuries, the situation changed. Even in small factories and enterprises, there were many workers, which required modernization of traditional management strategies.
It was not only the increase in the number of workers, parallel to the increasing complexity of the business, that posed new organizational challenges. The entrepreneur is primarily interested in the amount of profit he earns. It soon became clear that ineffective management leads to significant losses. Avoiding them required rationalization.
Organizational management theories
Evolution and change of technological orders are always associated with the development of science. But in this case, we are not only talking about inventions that drive progress. Comprehension of the accumulated knowledge, including in the field of management, was the basis on which new organizational models were built.
Management theories began to appear at the dawn of the last century. All of them can be classified according to two criteria: by the method of their development and by the subject of research. In this regard, it can be noted that some of the then theories were created as a generalization of the accumulated experience in the field of labor organization in production, while others appeared due to the transfer of advanced ideas of economics, psychology and sociology to a new environment.
The application of the principles of the latter two sciences is especially interesting. Almost any author of this or that theory of management paid attention to those aspects that were not noticed before: the problems of interpersonal communication in production or the employee's motivation to work and its stimulation. The organization of labor has ceased to be seen as a kind of chaotic system in which the feedback between employees and managers is not traced. Instead, they studied the connections that arise in production and their impact on the functioning of production itself.
An engineer by training, Taylor pioneered the implementation of scientific management principles in manufacturing. He was born in 1856 in the small Pennsylvania town of Germantown into an educated family. Initially, he planned to become, like his father, a lawyer, but a sharp deterioration in his vision did not allow him to continue his studies. In 1878, Taylor became a handyman at the Midwell Steel Works. His career goes uphill: he very soon becomes a mechanic, and then heads several mechanical workshops.
Taylor learned the profession not only from the inside: in 1883 he received a diploma from the Institute of Technology. Even before the creation of his famous theory, F. Taylor became known as a specialist in the field of rationalization decisions. As soon as he got the job of chief engineer, he introduces a differential wage system at the enterprise entrusted to him and immediately registers a patent for his innovation. In total, there were about a hundred such patents in his life.
Taylor's experiments
Scientific management theory might have failed if Taylor had not undertaken a series of tests of his observations. He saw their main goal as establishing quantitative relationships between productivity and the effort expended on it. The result of the experiments was the accumulation of empirical information necessary for the development of methods for performing various tasks that arose before the worker in the labor process.
One of Taylor's most famous experiments was to determine optimal amount iron ore or coal, which one worker is able to lift on shovels of various sizes, without losing his ability to work for a long period of time. As a result of careful calculations and several checks of the initial data, Taylor determined that, under these conditions, the optimal weight is 9.5 kg.
Along the way, Taylor made an important observation that the optimal weight is influenced not only by the time spent on the task, but also by the period of rest.
The evolution of Taylor's views
More than thirty years passed from entering a steel mill as a simple worker to the publication of a fundamental work on management theory. Needless to say, over such a long time, Taylor's views have changed with the increase in knowledge and observation.
Initially, Taylor believed that the introduction of the principle of piece payment was necessary to optimize production. Its essence was that the employee's initiative should be paid directly, which could be measured in units of time: how many products a person produced, for so much he should receive money.
Taylor soon revised this postulate. Experiments related to determining the optimal correlation between the efforts made and the results obtained allowed the researcher to state that in the production process greatest value has control not over labor productivity, but over the methods used. In this regard, he takes up the development of practical recommendations for workers, and also sets new boundaries wages: highest for hard work and minimum for light work.
In the final phase of formulating his theory, Taylor came to grips with scientific analysis labor activity... The reason for this was reflections on the formation of a certain body responsible for planning work activities at the enterprise. The very idea of decentralizing management on the basis of competence required the identification of new grounds for control. These included the time spent on labor, the determination of the labor intensity of a particular task, the establishment of quality attributes.
Basic principles
Based on his work experience, observations and experiments, Taylor formulated the main principles of his control theory. Taylor by them primarily sought to prove that scientific management is capable of making a real revolution in production. Former authoritarian methods based on a system of fines and other sanctions up to and including dismissal, according to the researcher, should have been canceled.
Briefly, the principles of Taylor's theory are as follows:
- The division of labor should take place not only at the grassroots level (that is, within the same workshop or workshop), but also cover the management layers. From this postulate, the requirement for narrow specialization followed: not only the worker must perform the function assigned to him, but also the manager.
- Functional leadership, that is, the fulfillment of the tasks assigned to him by the worker, should be carried out at each stage of production. Instead of one foreman, the enterprise should have several, each of whom would give the worker recommendations according to his competence.
- Detailing of production tasks, which presupposed a list of requirements for the worker and practical recommendations for their implementation.
- Stimulating worker motivation. Taylor considered it necessary to convey to everyone that his salary directly depends on productivity.
- Individualism understood in two dimensions. Firstly, it is limiting the influence of the crowd on the work of a particular person, and secondly, taking into account the individual abilities of each employee.
Planning system
As can be seen from these principles, Taylor's management theory was based on a fairly strict external guidance of the employee's actions. This was precisely the rationalization position of the author of the theory, which later became the main object of criticism from the trade unions. Taylor suggested introducing a special department in the enterprises responsible for the regulation and optimization of production.
This body had four main functions. Firstly, it is the supervision of the order in production and the determination priority directions work. Secondly, the creation of production instructions, reflecting the methodological principles for the implementation of the assigned tasks. Third, rationing the duration of the production cycle, as well as studying its impact on the cost of products sold. The fourth task of the planning department was to control labor discipline.
At the grassroots level, these tenets of Taylor's theory of organization were implemented by the reorganization of the management staff. To carry them out, according to the author, four employees were required: a foreman, an inspector-receiver, a repairman, and an accountant who determined the pace of work.
Human factor
The excessive sociologization prescribed by F. Taylor's theory of management was partly offset by its attention to the individual worker, which the management did not know before. It was not only about the developed principles of bonuses or accounting for individual abilities. Taylor's classical theory also provided for the need for professional selection and training of workers.
Since special aptitude tests did not yet exist, Taylor developed them himself. For example, the speed test for quality control workers was especially often used.
There was a certain patriarchy at the factories, which manifests itself primarily in the fact that, in the spirit of the Middle Ages, young workers were trained by already experienced craftsmen. Instead, Taylor suggested developing specialized curricula for training courses as well as continuing education courses.
Criticism
F. Taylor's theory immediately provoked protests from the trade unions, who saw in its postulates the desire to turn the worker into a "spare part" at the enterprise. Sociologists and philosophers also noted some unfavorable tendencies in the constructions of the American researcher. For example, the French sociologist Georges Friedman saw in Taylorism a gap between his declared principles of trust between managers and workers and their actual implementation. Planning and vigilant control over a person at every stage of labor did nothing to promote a kind-hearted relationship between workers and bosses.
Other critics, in particular A. Chiron, considered the division into thinkers and performers established by Taylor's theory inadmissible. Based on the fact that such a division was provided for in the practical part of his work, Taylor was accused of ordinary demagoguery. Even the stimulation of the workers' initiative caused a lot of criticism. As an example of the erroneousness of this postulate, cases were cited when workers on their own initiative limited production norms, which led to a decrease in their wages, as well as the existence of class solidarity, in the name of which people made various sacrifices, including material ones.
Finally, Taylor was accused of ignoring the capabilities of the human body. In this case, it is not only about the fact that rationing, no matter what experiments on the timekeeping of labor were carried out, was not flexible, but also about depriving the worker of the right to creative activity. Detailed recommendations led to the fact that the spiritual aspect of labor remained the monopoly of the factory bosses, while the worker himself sometimes did not even suspect what and why he was doing. Sociologists drew attention to the possible dangers of both psychological and technical nature from the separation of the execution of assigned tasks and thinking.
Significance of Taylor's concept
Despite a number of critical remarks, quite fair in their basis, Taylor's theory of management is indisputably important in the history of management psychology. Its positive side, first of all, consisted in the rejection of outdated methods of labor organization, as well as the creation of specialized training courses. Taylor's proposed recruitment methods, as well as his fundamental requirement for regular re-certification, albeit modified to take into account new requirements, continue to exist to this day.
Taylor managed to create his own school dealing with the problems of scientific management. His most famous followers are the spouses Frank and Lily Gilberts. In their writings, they used movie cameras and micro-chronometers, thanks to which they managed to create practical recommendations for increasing labor productivity by reducing the amount of effort expended. Taylor's ideas about recruiting were also common: Lily Gilbert is now considered the creator of the discipline of personnel management.
Although the Taylor school was purely concerned with improving production efficiency at the lower levels, leaving aside the problem of intensifying the work of managers themselves, its activities became a turning point. The main provisions of Taylor's theory were quickly adopted by foreign manufacturers who introduced it at their enterprises. The most important thing, perhaps, was that by his activities, Taylor was the first to raise the issue of improving management methodology. Since the publication of his book, this problem has been sorted out by numerous scientific trends and schools, and new approaches to the organization of work appear to this day.
Introduction
Taylor F.W. - the founder of the theory of modern management
1 General prerequisites for the emergence of F.U. Taylor
2 The essence of F.U. Taylor, her basic principles
Management model concept
Development of control theory, its impact on the present
1 Taylor's followers in his theory
2 The influence of management theory on modern management
Supporters of F.W. Taylor and her opponents
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
The topic of this term paper- “The concept of scientific management by F.U. Taylor: theory and practice ". This topic is very interesting to study. This is due to the fact that it is during its study that one can understand for oneself the reasons and prerequisites for the emergence of management as we see it at the present time.
Considering the issues that relate to the topic we are studying, we will also consider issues that relate to the direct creator of modern management - Taylor. The name of this person is the cornerstone in management theory. Most of the concepts that exist in modern science were written under the influence or based on the work of Taylor - "Principles of Scientific Management".
This is precisely the relevance of the topic of this course work. Without studying this topic, it is impossible to study management as a whole.
The purpose of this course work is to review the basic concepts of Taylor's scientific management.
This goal sets before us certain tasks that we will need to complete during work. These tasks include:
.Consideration of the personality of F.W. Taylor and the prerequisites for the emergence of his concept.
.Consideration of the basic principles of this concept.
.Consideration of the essence of the concept.
.Consideration of the evolutionary process of Taylor's ideas.
.Consideration of the development process of this theory by the followers of F.U. Taylor.
.Consideration of the impact of this concept on management at the present stage.
The object of consideration is the main provisions of the concept of F.U. Taylor.
The subject of research is the very concept of Taylor's scientific management.
At the end of the work, the main conclusions will be formulated on the issues that we will consider in it.
When writing this work, literature sources will be used, in which the questions related to this topic are highlighted in the most clear and understandable way. The works of outstanding scientists who have studied this topic will also be used.
1. Taylor F.W. - the founder of the theory of modern management
.1 General prerequisites for the emergence of F.U. Taylor
Frederick Winslow Taylor is rightfully called the ancestor of modern management. But if it weren't for Taylor, Fayol would have become the founder of management, or someone else, because by the time of origin schools of scientific management , new idea the scientific organization of labor was practically in the air. Technological progress and machine production required the standardization and standardization of the entire process. Further growth in production efficiency has become inconceivable without its comprehensive rationalization of resources.
Unlike many professionals who created management doctrines, Taylor was not a scholarly researcher or a business school professor, he was a practitioner and later a principal engineer at a steel company.
Taylor gained fame in 1912 after his speech at a meeting of a special committee of the House of Representatives of the US Senate for the study of general management systems.
Before Taylor, the most unexpected phenomena were comprehended under management. He was the first to give this concept a certainty, calling it organization of production.
Taylor's system received a more concrete form in 1903 in his work Cycle Control and took further development in the book Principles of Scientific Management , where Taylor formulated a number of postulates, after which they were called Taylorism .
Instead of vague and rather contradictory principles of management, Taylor proposed a scientific system of ideas about the laws of the expedient organization of labor, the complex types of which should be the mathematical method of calculating cost and displacement, a method of division, and rationalization labor practices, and much more, which was later adopted into the so-called mechanism of scientific management.
1.2 The essence of F.U. Taylor, her basic principles
Taylorism is based on 4 scientific principles: rules of management, replacing past rules and managers, based on scientific parameters, and prof. Training, and fair distribution of responsibilities between workers and managers.
The first phase of the scientific management methodology is the analysis of the content of the work and the diagnosis of its main operations. Then, based on the information taken, the work steps are changed in order to remove redundant data. Further, standard techniques for their implementation are developed to increase work efficiency. The provision allocated for the execution of tasks must be real and take into account the possibility of rest and breaks in work. This gave the management the opportunity to introduce norms that would be achievable, and pay additional payments to those workers who exceeded the established norms.
Taylorism is a classical geometry of labor, the most important theorems of which are coordination harmony and macroeconomic and psychotherapeutic expediency. Its main provisions are still controversial.
The concept of scientific management, which was formulated by Taylor, was a major turning point, thanks to which management began to be recognized everywhere as an independent field. scientific knowledge... For the first time, practice leaders and academics are convinced that science and technology approaches can be effective for organizational goals.
Principles of the FU Taylor concept.
At first glance, Taylor's principles are very simple.
The first principle of multiplying productivity manual labor states that it is necessary to study the problem and analyze the movement process.
The second principle: it is necessary to develop each movement and its constituent parts, to measure the time for which it is made.
The third principle: to eliminate all unnecessary movements, starting to study physical labor, we show that most of the time-honored procedures turn out to be a waste of time and prevent the multiplication of labor productivity.
The fourth principle: any of the remaining movements that are necessary to complete the task are re-linked together - so that the worker spends less physical and mental strength and minimum time on its execution. Then all movements are re-linked into a single logical chain.
Finally, the last principle says: it is necessary to appropriately change the design of all the tools that are used in this work. Taylor's principles are clearly very effective methods. But to forge them, Taylor experimented for 20 years.
Over the past hundred years, Taylor's methodology has undergone countless changes and improvements. Even its title has changed. Taylor himself called his methodology analysis of tasks or scientific task management ... Twenty years later, this methodology received a new name - scientific concept of labor or management ... After another 20 years and Japan, she began to be called scientific management , and in Germany - rationalization of production.
Taylor demonstrated that there are simple, repetitive actions. What makes them useful is the representation and the totality of ordinary monotonous displacements. Specifically, Taylor was the first to link experience and work.
2. The concept of a management model
Category management model represents one of the main categories in the science and practice of management. This can be explained by the fact that any manager ponders the most burning questions: how to manage the entrusted object and apply all developments in order to effectively solve the tasks facing him.
The management model was formed for many years by F.W. Taylor and his colleagues, as well as their predecessors. She must not alien , but only native and corresponding to the culture and spirit of the country, its people.
Under model generally comprehend the prototype for mass production any product or structure, as well as a structure that imitates the structure and operation of any other device for scientific or other purposes.
A model is, in other words, part of a process in which are involved the subject of prototyping and the subject, that is, those persons who specifically carry out this modeling. Both management and macroeconomic models are no exception. Depending on the parameters and economic preferences and tasks that the author is guided by, the models may differ from each other or less correspond to the original.
Whose model is better is revealed when comparing it with a really existing original and how correctly it understands and interprets real-life events, and how effectively it affects the controlled object.
Very often a situation arises when there is no really existing original at all, but it is only in the imagination of the author. Here, based on the accumulated experience and patterns of development, a forecast is created as to how the object of interest will look in the future.
Based on this, a new management model is being developed, and the current management system is being rebuilt for it.
Under management model you can understand an abstractly built integral chain of knowledge about how the management system looks and how it should look, how it acts and how it should influence the object of management, how it adapts and how it should do it to changes in external environment so that the managed organization has the ability to achieve its goals.
It includes the basic principles of management and tasks, jointly generated values and the order of interaction of its types, and control, driving forces of development and motivational policy.
In accordance with established practice, the model in the management team can be considered ideal or the most appropriate. It can also be taken ready-made. It is believed that the domestic experience of management has provided a considerable number of models that, under specific conditions, gave a positive result.
It is also possible to construct a model using assembly method from finished parts and blocks, which will be the most efficient working types of various management models.
It is necessary to choose a basic control model that would correspond to the required characteristics to the maximum extent, exclude undesirable types from it, create and build into it new types that are characterized by the specific features of the controlled object and the conditions of its functioning. You can also create and launch a fundamentally new model, which is based on a completely new paradigm, capable of capturing barely outlined changes in the external environment.
It is necessary to highlight the capacity, consistency and versatility of the concept itself. management model ... It has a complex structure, the types of which are different ability to influence the identification features of the model itself, but being interconnected and dependent, they cause not only direct, but also indirect effects on the effectiveness of a particular model.
The task of depicting a model of management, and even managerial education or a corporation and the breadth of external and endogenous relationships, is very difficult. Proceeding from this, a rather limited range of issues is most often taken into account in the study of management models.
The following most important parameters of the classification of these issues and the corresponding management models can be distinguished.
.by the type of predominant ownership of the means of production
.by the height of market influence on the economy, the model of centralized and regulatory management
.by the scale and level of management
.by the nature of the exercise of powers
.according to a person's place in the system of useful forces
.by regional origin and position of wide adaptation
.by belonging to the relevant management procedures
.by the role and position of a person in the control system (models based on "theory X" and "theory Y")
.on management grounds
.in relation to changes in the external and endogenous environment.
If we talk about enterprise management, then the following three models are dominant.
) solid (or formal)
) soft (or informal, socially psychological)
) a combined model, which, in a fairly balanced form, combines a hard and a soft model.
The proportion of types of each model may vary depending on the type of prevailing work and the level of management culture that are characteristic of of this enterprise.
The rigid model, as the historical predecessor of the soft model, is the most widespread in the world. As production becomes more complex, the mind of the hired labor grows, management experience accumulates and the management culture is strengthened, as complex labor of a higher order replaces complex labor of a lower order, the soft model slowly replaces the rigid one.
F. Taylor's book Principles of Scientific Management was the beginning of the recognition of management by science. F. Taylor considered management to be the correct science, which is built on the foundation of these laws. He viewed management as an event that requires continuous optimization. The system that Taylor proposed involved a demanding separation of management and voice functions.
F. Taylor formulated an important conclusion that management work is a specific profession, and that the organization as a whole will win if each group of workers concentrates on what it does most successfully. This contributed to the formation of a new meaning of industrial relations.
The main subject, in relation to which the speculative and methodological provisions of management in the Taylor system are formed, is the production staff. Taylor considered the most important task of a manager to find and achieve the highest productivity of workers who were in bright subordination this leader.
It was on the manager that all responsibility for the association of labor in the area of production entrusted to him was entrusted. At the same time, the strengthening of the workers had to be focused only on the fulfillment of production tasks in accordance with the established requirements, which concerned not only labor methods, but even specific movements. In this regard, this method of personnel management provided for:
in-depth study of the labor process in order to determine the most appropriate techniques and actions, as well as operating modes of equipment, if it was carried out in a given working position;
planning the most rational labor process, or procedures for performing specific individual work (group labor processes in the Taylor system were not designed);
selection and implementation of training for employees in rational work practices;
selection of a reference worker - good worker who has fully mastered lesson and owns the rational methods of performing the usual work for a given production area and for a given profession;
calculation of production rates based on a previously determined reference labor intensity of work execution good worker and the development of proposals for stimulating employees in order to overfulfill the established production standards.
But the essence of the ideal attitude of the employee to labor duties illustrated by the words: Initiative is punishable ... The employee is obliged to accurately, without initiative, perform the labor task.
Taylor's study of the productivity of people digging coal with shovels can be considered a classic in the field of industrial engineering (based on perfect research, he created optimal scapula).
In general, the activities of Frederick Taylor are attributed to the study of time and action.
His ideas were so revolutionary that the question of the admissibility of their practical application was raised at a meeting of the US Congress.
Taylor convincingly argued to Congressmen that by closely monitoring employees' performance, you can get more work done at the lowest cost.
F. Taylor's methodological methods of labor organization were further developed in the works of his students and followers, among them Henry L. Gantt, as well as Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, should be singled out.
In Taylor's system, all components of production and human resources were roughly equal and did not differ in importance for the implementation of production goals.
Drawing up principles at the beginning of the 20th century scientific organization of labor , founded the so-called technocratic state management . The most important features This approach was: orientation to a personal worker, similar to orientation in technology to a specific machine, the allocation of specialized personnel special forces.
3. Development of management theory, its impact on the present
.1 Taylor's followers in his theory
The organizational and technological approach to management took further development in the writings of Taylor's colleagues and students. A friend and colleague of F. Taylor, American engineer Henry Gantt did not experiment with individual operations and movements, but with production processes as a whole.
Gant found that to improve the way firms operate, it is necessary to act by updating systems, setting tasks, and distributing incentives and bonuses.
Gant was the first to create the system operational management and calendar design of the activities of enterprises, he also created a system of scheduled schedules that made it possible to control the planned and draw up calendar periods. Organizational inventions of Gantt must include his wage system with the types of time-based and piece-rate forms of payment.
This system quickly increased the involvement of workers in the implementation and overlapping of high production rates (if the planned rate was not fulfilled, workers were paid at the regular rate). Gant emphasized the enormous importance of the human factor in the industry and expressed the conviction that the worker should be given the opportunity to receive, through his work, not only a source of livelihood, but also a state of satisfaction. Many of Gant's ideas have received worldwide recognition and are used in our time.
The spouses Frank Gilbreth and Lillian Gilbreth made important contributions to the scientific theory of management, they persistently searched for the best methods of performing any work with specific actions. The elimination of all redundant movements helped to establish more correct production work rates.
F. Gilbreth was not only a scientific consultant, but also a talented construction contractor. An example of a successful application of the labor association system is the reduction in the number of movements of masons from 18 to 5. This was described in the example Clinker masonry from the book of F. Taylor Principles of Scientific Management ... F. Gilbreth was the first to use a camera and a movie camera in combination with a microchronometer, which recorded intervals of up to 1/200 s to determine the time. This allowed him to create maps of the cycle of carried out micro movements, which had a great influence on the development of scientific management.
L. Gilbreth, the first who began to take an interest in the issue of personnel management and training, since at the beginning of the 20th century there was already a need to establish a moral personnel management due to the concentration of production.
One of the famous followers of Taylor was the famous scientist Garrington Emerson. In 1912, the main work of his life was published Twelve principles of productivity.
In this work, he formulated the principles of management that ensure the growth of labor productivity, they have retained their values in our time. These principles include:
Discipline, which is ensured by clear regulation of people's activities and timely encouragement.
Treating employees fairly.
Rapid and constant accounting.
Normalization of working conditions.
Standardization of operations, which consists in standardizing the methods of their execution, and regulation of time.
Availability of written standard instructions.
Reward for useful work.
Emerson paid great attention to the issue of recruiting and considered it necessary to manage it.
3.2 The influence of management theory on modern management
The increasing complexity of the production management function in the twentieth century gives rise to an intensive search for ways and means of rationalizing this management. A huge amount of money is spent on researching the problems of the organization and the way of management.
The study of business, the practice of enterprise management is of fundamental importance. From an imperceptible peripheral discipline that management was at the beginning of the century, it is becoming the mainstream of social thought and a scientific institution in the United States. The country holds a leading position in the world in the study of governance problems.
Many books are devoted to management problems in the USA, in which more and more new concepts are put forward. Such a number of management theories and differences in concepts contributed to a comprehensive study of the management process and the continuous improvement of the development process of ideas in this area.
And yet this huge amount of American management theory is very difficult to navigate. That is why many authors are trying to highlight the main directions and find general principles for the interpretation of concepts and categories.
A new era of management science proclaims its task to introduce methods and monitoring of correct sciences in the study of management activities. Its representatives are mainly engaged in the study of the processes of making this class of decisions, which allows the use of the latest mathematical methods and technical means.
The goal of this strategy is formulated as increasing the rationality of decisions. Among the various streams of this strategy, one can single out such directions as "operations research" and so on. L. Bertalanffy, A. Rapoport, A. Goldberger and so on should be named as representatives of this strategy. The first steps new strategy were associated with the application of the operation research method in production management, which found its expression in the device of mathematical models.
A group of representatives of this strategy formulated another concept, the essence of which is quantitative assessment and mathematical modeling of economic processes. As a result, econometrics appeared as a method of analysis and programming. economic activity.
It should be noted that within new strategy an approach was developed that is associated with cybernetics and doctrine automatic control... This approach is called systemic, its main task is to increase the efficiency of production as a whole, which is not identical to the task of optimizing the efficiency of all types of organization. The essence of the systematic approach is as follows.
Formulation of goals and the establishment of their hierarchy prior to the start of any activity related to management;
Getting the maximum effect, success in the goals set, which is achieved through comparative analysis;
A quantitative assessment of the goals and means of their success, which is based on a comprehensive assessment of all probable and planned outcomes of activities.
Systems analysis, first used in the United States for military purposes, later became widespread in the practice of administrative activities in production.
Ultimately, the subsequent radical change in the macroeconomic strategy towards the development of market relations in the CIS countries led to a reorientation of research directions in the field of theory and practice of management in the post-Soviet republics that gained political independence.
Along with the increasing zeal to identify the advantages of scientific management, there is no need to refute the presence of certain shortcomings, and in the first place ignoring the human factor.
Taylorism treats a person not as a subject, but as a factor of production, the social needs of which are not taken into account at all. He demotes the worker to the mechanical executor of the prescribed scientifically based instructions.
Despite the fact that management forms a special system, it does not exist itself as a completely independent process, but is included in a wider system that determines the phylogenetic features of management.
The phylogenetic features of the control form are determined by what the control object is. This does not mean that there are no general principles that would apply to all its variations.
This group of regularities is considered by cybernetics, proceeding from the general concept of control, which has universal significance, and formulates principles.
An important issue in the doctrine of management is the ratio of general and specific features of management. Exaggeration of the role common features in enterprise management is not correct and leads to practical inaccuracies.
Determining the essence of enterprise management, one must understand that in it, as in any other system, general and specific lines of management are found, the latter more fully counter the essence of this management function.
General patterns of control are found in the action of the control mechanism, but the essence of control is always inextricably linked with the controlled system itself.
Thus, the essence of management can be discovered on the basis of the application of the achievements of various sciences that study individual aspects of management.
In objective reality, management is a very complex system.
Management involves the development of goals. In a microstructural sense, it includes controls.
In the process of action, management goes through certain stages. Bodies and management processes are recognized on different levels... In management, it is necessary to take into account and link up figurative issues - political and socio-psychological.
In the process of management, the unification of the moments of the activities of the organization and the participants is realized. The study of the processes of synthesis of all types into a single whole and a specific social event is the object of research management.
In control theory, a logical method is used, and logical laws are formulated. The process of making managerial decisions in macroeconomics is largely amenable to formalization.
4. Supporters of F.W. Taylor and her opponents
Assessing the theoretical foundations of Taylor, Peter Drucker reported: “Since Taylor began to introduce his principles, labor productivity in developed countries has increased fifty times. This unprecedented growth is the basis for increasing material well-being and improving the quality of life of the population of the forward countries ... "By 1930, Taylor's scientific management system, despite the resistance of trade unions and intellectuals, was widespread in all developed countries ... capitalism and industrial change brought benefits in the first it is the turn of the workers, not the capitalists. This fact explains the complete failure of Marxism in highly developed countries.
IN AND. Ulyanov called the Taylor system scientific sweat wringing system system of enslavement of man by machine. In addition, Lenin showed that this system combines the refined brutality of bourgeois exploitation and a number of the richest scientific achievements in the analysis of mechanical actions during labor and slow movements, the introduction of the best accounting and control systems, and so on. ... Pointing to the contradictory and dual nature of the Taylor system, Lenin advised to identify the expedient types contained in them and apply them in a new way, necessarily in combination with other measures of the Soviet state due to its social nature. Ulyanov demanded to associate them with the reduction of working hours and the association of labor without any damage to the labor force of the working population. ... The Bolshevik analysis and his advice on the application of this system were of great importance in the development of the foundations of the scientific organization of labor in the USSR.
. There is no reason to expect that the American economy will be a healthy organism, - said A. Chiron in 1948 - vice president and president of labor relations company Crown Zellerbach, - if we keep the old division into two completely separate groups - performers and thinkers ... You can’t count on the development of a sense of conscious community in 90% of the state, if we rest on what motivated them to work, and not think.
Many scientists of the bourgeoisie - physiologists and psychologists, reproached Taylor for not reckoning with the capabilities of the human body. Certain of them hesitated whether a system that destroys the main productive force of society - a person - has the right to be called a science.
Taylor's system takes away the human characteristic of work from the worker. The spiritual sphere of production is the boss's monopoly. It has been established that many workers in enterprises have no idea what exactly they are doing, what these parts are intended for, manufactured on the equipment they serve. The American social scientist Erich Fromm, condemning this side of the Taylor system, said that: As an economist, learned economists increasingly deprive workers of the right to freely think and act, work becomes more and more monotonous and thoughtless. The worker is denied life itself, any free thought is scrupulously banished - and now the worker is left with either flight or struggle, his lot is indifference or polydipsia of destruction.
. The great psychotherapeutic turn in the minds of businessmen, which Taylor, the social scientist, called for, did not happen. Their nature has not changed. Demagoguery about the identity of the macroeconomic interests of labor and capital, which will amicably share profits with the owners (Taylor claimed that too) were just words. The benefits of the Taylor system under capitalism were usurped and monopolized by capital tycoons. For the workers, progress in the scientific system of labor organization turned out to be a disaster.
Taylor is more condemned for electric power approach to the production process.
The heirs reproach Taylor for being too engineer and too little psychologist and social scientist ... In fact, he ignored the physiological properties of the human body.
He is also accused of the fact that his limited technicalism ultimately led to under-consumption. the whole person ... In other words, an additional development point - social organization in the production process, remained outside the scope of Taylor.
As many observations have shown, the formulation of the sufficiency of a financial incentive does not always work, and the worker for intangible prosperity is sometimes ready to sacrifice material prosperity ... The tycoons wonder why the worker would prefer to stay at the machine, instead of taking the chance and becoming a foreman.
One notable recent example took place in France in 1995: the weavers of a Parisian weaving factory shared their wages with the workers of their factory, whom they wanted to be fired due to staff cuts, thus saving their jobs and saving them from unemployment.
Most American industrial social scientists believe that wage incentives do not stimulate every person. - decided in his book Human Relations in Business ... N. Y. 1957 American social scientist K. Davis - in order to release the full potential of the party worker, other economic and psychological impulses are needed ... Wage systems must be viewed as part of a whole ensemble of activities that are aimed at multiplying the intensity of labor.
. Contrary to Taylor's point of view about the stupidity of the worker, - scribbles J. Knox in his book. J. Knox. The Sociology of Industrial Relations. N. Y, 1935. p. 38. - many modern entrepreneurs proceed from the assumption that workers are cultured enough to have ideas. This concept forms the basis for proposal collection systems that are successfully implemented by many industrial companies.
Taylor miscalculated by limiting workers to simply performing their functions, pushing them away from energetic participation in rationalization, not using everything they could give. Until now, entrepreneurs have limited themselves to using only superficial attention worker, and at the same time disappeared whole line his art and ideas.
Sociologists stress the danger - technical and moral - the theory of separation of the process of thinking from the performance of work.
Automation, which has been increasingly introduced into the US industry since the mid-1950s, is especially against Taylor's moral principles. Here the work cannot be divided into incomplete operations. It requires new thinking of workers, eliminates some of the differences between mental and physical labor, requires skill and nerves. And Taylorism leads to the displacement of skilled labor in production.
Many businessmen have decided, writes W. White and F. Miller, that work only aggravates the relationship between the administration and the workers, between the state and the administration. Sometimes the conflicts were so serious that one could doubt whether the piece-rate system pays off from the anguish of a narrow economic position.
One of the reasons entrepreneurs refused to work was the establishment of their own group norms by the workers themselves. Surveys have shown that most workers prefer hourly payment to piecework.
In practice, Taylor's horizons were limited to the shop. He ignored the outside social spheres behavior of workers, especially those who operate outside the enterprise.
It is difficult to display all the criticism of Taylor's ideas and actions for many reasons. And this task is not worth it. It was fundamentally important to demonstrate high inconsistency scientific management ... Perhaps the crown of this criticism was Taylor's own complaint in his declining years: Life is terrible when you cannot look any worker in the face so as not to see hatred in him.
Conclusion
scientific management taylor management
Based on the above material, certain conclusions should be drawn regarding the issues that were considered by us in the course of writing this course work.
As we understood, F.W. Taylor was very relevant and progressive for her time.
It is impossible to unambiguously understand the true meaning of this theory. Like any other theory, it has its flaws, its supporters and opponents.
Among the shortcomings of the "theory of management" is the fact that it practically did not take into account the interests and the very person of the employee. She did not take into account either social, material or physical needs.
This is a rather complex and controversial issue. It is impossible to deny Taylor's theory only because of this, however, it would be better to improve it and create a theory that would cover these issues.
This theory, as already mentioned, had its supporters and opponents.
Supporters based their teachings on the basis of this theory, which at times were much more progressive and better than the theory of F.W. Taylor.
As for the opponents, there were many of them. All of them built a system of claims to this theory based on various arguments.
Someone was against the fact that this theory did not take into account the position of the employee, someone did not like such a variety of forms of implementation of this theory, someone justified their non-perception of this system for some other reasons.
It's no secret that even F.W. Taylor, in his old age, also began to criticize his own theory in certain aspects.
What we can say with confidence is that it is Taylor with his "management concept" who is the founder of such a concept as modern management. It was he who was the first to formulate all these principles of organization. good governance organization.
It can also be said with confidence that, despite all the criticism of this management theory, it is still being applied, with a number of amendments and improvements, in virtually all developed countries.
Bibliography
1.Ashirov D.A. Personnel management. M. 2011.
2.Bazarov T. Yu. Personnel management. M. Norma. 2012.
.Bialiatskiy N.P. Personnel management. M. 2010.
.Valovoy D.V. Management history. M. BEK. 2009.
.Vikhansky O.S., Naumov A.I. Management. - M .: Gardariki, 2009.
.Gornakov E. I., Kostyukevich E. N., Metelskaya E. V. Personnel management. M. 2011.
.Deineka A. V. Personnel management. M. 2010.
.N.I. Kabushkin Fundamentals of Management: Textbook. Manual - Minsk: New knowledge, 2010.
.Kibanov A. Ya. Personnel management. M. BEK. 2010.
.Mikhailov A.V. Taylor system. Reissue. L., 2010.
.Orlova O.S. Human resource management of a modern organization . M. 2010.
.Tebekin A. V. Personnel management. Bookvoyed. Moscow. 2009.
.Travin V.V., Dyatlov V.A. Fundamentals of management. - M .: Delo, 2010.
.Utkin E.A. Management history. Reprinted-M .: Association of Authors and Publishers "Tandesh": EKMOS Publishing House, 2010.
.Fedorova N.V., Minchenkova O. Yu. Personnel management. M. 2012.
Tutoring
Need help exploring a topic?
Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Send a request with the indication of the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
F. Taylor is called the father of scientific management and the founder of the entire system of scientific organization of production, and for more than a hundred years all modern theory and practice in the field of scientific organization of labor has been using the "Taylor" heritage. And it is no coincidence that the theory of management was founded by an engineer who thoroughly knows the technology of an industrial enterprise and, from his own experience, learned all the features of the relationship between workers and managers.
Taylor became widely known after his speech at the hearings in the US Congress on the study of shop floor management. For the first time a semantic certainty was given to management - it was defined by Taylor as "organization of production".
The Taylor system is based on the provision that for the effective organization of the enterprise it is necessary to create a management system that would ensure maximum height labor productivity at the lowest cost.
Taylor formulated this idea as follows: "It is necessary to carry out such management of the enterprise so that the performer, with the most favorable use of all his forces, could perfectly perform the work that corresponds to the highest productivity of the equipment provided to him." Taylor F.W. Principles of scientific management / F.W. Taylor. Per. from English - M .: Controlling, 1991. - P.14.
Taylor suggested that the problem is primarily related to a lack of management practice. The subject of his research was the position of workers in the system of machine production. Taylor set himself the goal of identifying the principles that make it possible to maximize the "benefit" from any physical labor, movement. And based on the analysis of statistical data, he justified the need to replace the then dominant system of general management of management with the one based on the widespread use of narrow-profile specialists.
Among the most important principles of the scientific organization of Taylor's work, such as the specialization of work and the distribution of responsibility between workers and managers stand out. These principles formed the basis for the functional structure of the organization preached by Taylor, which was supposed to replace the then dominant linear structure.
Influenced by the ideas of Adam Smith regarding the division of work into the simplest tasks and assigning each of them to a low-skilled specialist, Taylor sought to assemble a single team and, thereby, he maximally reduced costs and increased labor productivity.
He was one of the first to use accurate calculation in the wage system (instead of intuition) and introduced a system of differentiated wages. He believed that the scientific organization of the enterprise's activity is based on the awakening of the initiative of workers, and that for a sharp increase in labor productivity it is necessary to study the psychology of employees and the administration should move from confrontation with them to cooperation.
Most people in the early days of capitalism believed that the basic interests of entrepreneurs and workers were opposed. Taylor, on the contrary, as his main premise, proceeded from the firm conviction that the true interests of both coincide, since "welfare for an entrepreneur cannot take place for a long number of years if it is not accompanied by the welfare of those employed in his enterprise. workers ". In the same place.
The piecework system, introduced long before Taylor, encouraged incentive and initiative by paying for output. Such systems completely failed before Taylor, as standards were poorly set, and employers cut workers' wages as soon as they started earning more. For the sake of protecting their interests, workers concealed new, more progressive methods and techniques of work and improvement.
Keeping in mind the past experience of cutting wages when they exceed a certain level, workers have come to an agreement on productivity and earnings. Taylor did not blame these people and even sympathized with them, since he felt that these were errors of the system.
The first attempts to change the system met with opposition from workers. He tried to convince them that they could do more. Taylor began by explaining to turners how he could get more output with less through his new ways of working. But he failed because they refused to follow his instructions. He decided on larger changes in labor standards and wages: now they had to work better for the same price. People responded by damaging and stopping cars. To which Taylor responded with a system of fines (the proceeds from the fines went in favor of the workers). Taylor did not win the battle with the machine tools, but he learned a useful lesson from the struggle. He will never use the system of fines again and will later create strict rules against salary cuts. Taylor concluded that a new industrial scheme had to be created to prevent such unpleasant clashes between workers and managers.
He believed that he could overcome the shirking by carefully researching the work in order to establish precise production rates. The challenge was to find complete and fair norms for each assignment. Taylor decided to establish scientifically what people should do with equipment and materials. To do this, he began to use methods of scientific data retrieval through empirical research. Taylor probably did not think about creating some kind of general theory applicable to other professions and industries, he simply proceeded from the need to overcome the enmity and antagonism of workers.
The study of the timing of operations became the foundation of the entire Taylor system. It formulated the basis of a scientific approach to work and had two phases: "analytical" and "constructive".
During the analysis, each work was divided into many elementary operations, some of which were discarded. Then the time spent on each elementary movement performed by the most skillful and qualified performer was measured and recorded. A percentage was added to this recorded time to cover unavoidable delays and interruptions, and other percentages reflecting the "novelty" of the job for the person and the necessary rest breaks were added. Most critics saw it in these allowances that Taylor's method was unscientific, since they were determined on the basis of the researcher's experience and intuition. The constructive phase included the creation of a card index of elementary operations and the time spent on performing individual operations or their groups. Moreover, this phase led to the search for improvements in devices, machines, materials, methods and the ultimate standardization of all elements surrounding and accompanying work.
In his article "Differentiated Pay System", Frederick Taylor first stated about new system, which included the study and analysis of the execution time of operations to establish norms or standards, "differential pay" for piecework, "pay for a person, not for a position." This early talk on incentives and proper relationships between workers and management anticipated his philosophy of mutual interest between these parties. Taylor proceeded from the admission that, by opposing workers' higher wages, the employer himself received less. He saw a mutual interest in cooperation, not conflict between workers and management. He criticized employers 'practices of hiring cheap labor and paying the lowest wages possible, as well as demanding workers' pay for their labor to the maximum. Taylor advocated higher wages for first-class workers, encouraging them to work to produce more standard through efficient conditions and less effort. The result was high labor productivity, which translates into lower unit costs for the employer and higher wages for the worker. Summarizing his pay system, Taylor outlined the goals that should be pursued by each enterprise:
Each worker must get the most difficult job for him;
Every worker should be encouraged to do the maximum work that a first-class worker is capable of;
Every worker, when he works at the speed of a first-class, is required to receive a bonus of 30% to 100% for work he does above average.
The challenge for management was to find the job for which a given worker was best suited, to help him become a first-class worker, and to provide him with the incentives for top productivity. He concluded that the main difference between people was not their intellect, but will, the desire to achieve.
Taylor also created a job management system. Today, after Drucker created management by objectives, Taylor's innovation could be called mission management. Taylor defined management as "knowing exactly what you want from a person and seeing how he does it in the best and cheapest way." Vasilevsky A.I. History of management: Course of lectures / A.I. Vasilevsky. - M .: RUDN, 2005 .-- P.64. He added that a succinct definition cannot fully capture the art of management, but stressed that "the relationship between employers and workers is undoubtedly the most important part of this art." Management, in his opinion, must create such a system of work that would ensure high productivity, and incentives for the employee would lead to even greater productivity.
Realizing that his system of work depends on careful planning, he founded the concept of "job management", which later became known as "scientific management". The assignment management consisted of 2 parts:
every day the worker received a specific task with detailed instructions and precise time indication for each stage of work;
a worker who completed the task at a certain time received more high salary while those who spent more time received regular earnings.
The assignment was based on a detailed study of time, methods, devices and materials. Once identified and assigned to first-class (exemplary) workers, these tasks in the future did not require the time and energy of a manager who could focus on the organization. common system work. The immediate challenge for the organization was directing management's efforts to plan work and guide its completion.
This division of the two functions is based on the specialization of labor of both managers and workers, and on a rational approach to the formation of the management hierarchy in organizations. At each level of the organization, there is a specialization of functions. Separating work planning and execution, production organizations form planning departments whose task is to develop precise daily prescriptions for managers. Taylor, however, went further and substantiated the need for specialization of the leaders of the lower levels - groups of performers.
The concept of functional group leadership is to divide the work of managers in such a way that each person (starting with the assistant manager and below) has as many functions as he can perform. Taylor believed that the traditional functions of the leader of the grassroots group are reduced to activities in planning and management (Fig. 1).
Figure 1 - Functional Leadership of the Taylor Group
Taylor noted that planning activities should be carried out in planning departments by employees who specialize in these matters. He identified four different subfunctions to be performed by four different individuals: order and direction clerk, instructions clerk, time and cost clerk, and shop discipline clerk. Management activities had to manifest itself at the workshop level and be carried out by four different persons: the shift supervisor, the acceptance officer, the repair shop manager, the rationing manager.
In order to cope with the increasing complexity of management, Taylor created a unique form of leadership that he called "functional leader". It was assumed that the production process will improve, since neither the worker himself nor one of the team leaders can be a specialist in all sub-functions. However, a worker who tries to follow the instructions of all specialized managers can hardly satisfy all of them. The cumbersomeness of such an organizational structure undoubtedly explains its low distribution in industry. However, it should be recognized that the functions of production planning already exist in other forms in modern industry, and in the functions of industrial design and staff you can find the functions of a leader for rationing and compliance with shop discipline.
Taylor identified 9 characteristics that determine a good low-level leader - a master: intelligence, education, special or technical knowledge, dexterity or strength, tact, energy, endurance, honesty, personal opinion and common sense, good health.
But, despite the importance of the personal and business qualities of a specialist, administrator, the main condition is the "system" of the organization, which must be established by the leader. Taylor draws attention to the need to ensure the correct selection, reasonable use of specialists, which he saw in the deepening of the specialization of the functions of employees, and the functions of the administration consist in such a distribution of management work, when each employee from the assistant director to the lowest positions is called upon to perform as few functions as possible.
The typical manager of those days did not know how and did not plan. His new management style began by separating work planning from execution, a notable achievement of his time. Taylor divided responsibility into two main areas: execution and planning responsibilities.
In the performing area, the master supervised all the preparatory work before feeding the material into the machine. "Master - speed worker" began his work from the moment when the materials were loaded and was responsible for setting up the machine and tools. The inspector was responsible for the quality of the work, and the maintenance mechanic was responsible for the repair and maintenance of the equipment. In the planning field, the technologist determined the sequence of operations and the transfer of the product from one performer or machine to the next performer or machine. The rationer (clerk for the technological map) compiled written information about tools, materials, production rates and other technological documents... The labor and cost rationer sent out cards to record the time spent on the operation and the cost of losses, and ensured the return of these cards. The personnel clerk, supervising the discipline, kept records of the merits and demerits of each employee, served as a "peacemaker", tk. resolved industrial conflicts and dealt with hiring and firing employees.
One of the most important management principles developed by Taylor was the principle of employee compliance with the position held. Taylor proposed a recruiting system, believing that every employee should be taught the basics of his profession. In his opinion, it is on the leaders that full responsibility is laid for all the work that his employees have performed, while each of them is personally responsible only for his part of the work.
Thus, Taylor formulated four fundamental principles of production management:
1) a scientific approach to the implementation of each element of the work;
2) cooperation of managers with workers;
3) a systematic approach to learning;
4) separation of responsibility.
These four provisions express the main idea of scientific management: for each type of human activity, a theoretical basis is developed, and then his training is carried out (in accordance with the approved regulations), during which he acquires the necessary work skills. This approach opposes the method of volitional decisions, when the tasks of managers and workers are not clearly separated. Taylor believed that through a more efficient organization of labor, the total amount of goods can be increased, and the share of each participant can increase without reducing the share of others. Therefore, if both managers and workers perform their tasks more efficiently, then the incomes of both will increase. Both groups need to experience what Taylor called a "mental revolution" before the widespread use of scientific management is possible. "Mental revolution" will consist in creating an atmosphere of mutual understanding between leaders and workers on the basis of satisfying common interests.
Taylor argued that "the art of scientific management is evolution, not an invention" and that market relations have their own laws and logic of development, for which there are no and cannot be unified solutions and approaches. Taylor showed that intra-industrial relations, and first of all, subordination, i.e. behavior and communication of ordinary workers and management personnel, has a direct impact on the growth rate of labor productivity.
Frederick Taylor and his associates represent the first wave of synthesis in scientific management. Scientific management is characterized as the process of connecting the physical resources or technical elements of an organization with human resources in order to achieve the goals of the organization. From the technological side, Taylor's scientific approach was aimed at analyzing existing practices in order to standardize and rationalize the use of resources. From the side human resources he sought the highest degree of individual development and reward by reducing fatigue, scientific selection, matching the worker's abilities to the work he does, and by incentivizing the worker. He did not ignore the human element, as is often noted, but emphasized the individual, not the social, group side of man.
Taylor was the center of the scientific management movement, but the people who surrounded and knew him also contributed to the formation and spread of scientific management.
The greatest effect from the introduction of his system was obtained at the enterprises of Henry Ford, who, thanks to the scientific organization of labor, achieved a revolutionary growth in productivity and already in 1922 produced every second car in the world at his factories.
As a talented mechanical engineer and inventor, Ford borrowed from Taylor the basic principles of the rational functioning of the enterprise and practically for the first time introduced them in full in its production.
Criticism of the School of Scientific Management
Critics attribute the underestimation of the human factor to the shortcomings of this school. F. Taylor was an industrial engineer, so he focused on the study of production technology, considered a person as an element of production technology (as a machine). In addition, this school did not investigate social aspects human behavior. Motivation and stimulation of labor, although they were considered as a factor of management efficiency, however, the idea of them was primitive and was reduced only to meeting the utilitarian needs of workers (i.e. physiological). However, it should be borne in mind that during this period of science - sociology and psychology, were not yet sufficiently developed, the development of these problems began to be carried out in the 1930-1950s).
In modern times, Taylorism is defined as a "sweatshop system" aimed at squeezing the maximum strength out of a person in the interests of the owner's profit.
“Scientifically developing every element of work instead of the old primitive empirical methods.
Scientific selection, training and development of workers; earlier, the workers chose their own work.
Collaborate with workers to ensure that work is carried out in accordance with established scientific principles.
Almost equal distribution of work and responsibilities between management and workers. The administration takes upon itself all the work to which it is more adapted than the workers, whereas before almost all the work and most of the responsibility lay with the latter. "
Based on the scientific study of the time spent on certain operations, an optimal sequence of actions and a methodology for their implementation are developed, the exact adherence to which is mandatory. Workers are recruited, trained and assigned to work to maximize the value they can bring. Payment for labor is carried out according to the results and in such a volume as to motivate the employee to productive work, which formed the basis of economic management methods. Functional managers are responsible for maintaining friendly relations in the team, without which it is impossible to effectively apply the ideas of scientific management, and exercise control. This is how Taylor represented the work of the organization, the result of the implementation of whose ideas was an increase in labor productivity by 3-4 times, and wages by 60%.
Taylor believed that rationalizing labor process also implies the separation of the functions of workers and managers. According to Taylor, workers must perform well-defined and regulated work, which must be formulated entirely by managers. Thus, Taylor substantiated the separation of management in independent view activities, considering the postulate of the eternal opposition of capital and labor and its insurmountability to be incorrect. Workers and managers of enterprises, in his opinion, have common interests, and only their mutually beneficial cooperation - an almost equal division of labor and responsibility between workers and management - can become the key to the successful operation of the enterprise and its economic growth. "The development of each worker to the highest degree of his ability to work and well-being" - this is how Taylor defined the task of management 6.
According to Taylor, the successful implementation of scientific management is possible only if a “mental revolution” occurs in the minds of an employee of any level, from a worker to a top manager, which will change his attitude to work, to comrades, and to employers. In his testimony given by a special commission of the US Congress to study the Taylor system and other systems of factory workshop management in 1912, he insisted on the idea of "mental revolution" and cooperation. Taylor argued that it is not only the system that is important, much depends on the people who implement it. As a result of the implementation of Taylor's ideas in American enterprises over several decades, a system of labor organization was formed, which almost immediately received the name - Taylorism. In the modern sense, the system of scientific management is characterized by a mechanistic attitude towards workers, aimed at the maximum intensification of labor, in other words, "Taylorism" has become synonymous with a tough attitude towards workers as a "tool for screwing nuts", "sweatshop" conveyor system, efficiency at any cost. As you can see, based on the methods of scientific management, "Taylorism" has little in common with the ideas of Taylor himself about harmony in the organization and in society. The transformation of scientific management ideas is impressive all the more since Taylor himself adopted Active participation in their implementation.
Despite serious public opposition to the introduction of scientific management methods, and in many respects thanks to him, the influence of Taylor's ideas gradually grew and spread to almost all countries of the world, starting with the USA, Japan (here they met them already in 1912), France and Great Britain. ... In the USSR, Taylor's work formed the basis of the scientific organization of labor (NOT). Organizational design modern companies is permeated with the ideas of the school of scientific management, and, although at present it seems that scientific management has receded far into the past, in practice the rational approach of scientific management and its techniques are not only often encountered, but even prevail.
- ^ Taylor F. W. Scientific Foundations of Organization industrial enterprises... - SPb, 1912, p. 28.
Fujifilm X-T1 - Full Review
Lenses sony sel. Sony lenses rating. Which Sony lens to buy
Canon PowerShot Pro1 - quality that ends quickly Canon PowerShot G5 X highlights