A

TAYLORISM AND SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT

Principles of Taylorism

Named after its creator, Frederick Taylor, Taylorism is the complete rationalization of all processes involved in the production of a product. The discipline is also referred to as scientific management, since it attempted to make a science out of the management of production processes by defining the "one best way" to do a job. Though the theory evolved through time, there were only a few simple principles in achieving scientific management: shift the responsibility of work organization to management, use scientific methods to establish the one best way to do the work, scientifically select and train workers, and monitor workers to ensure that they are doing their jobs properly and efficiently. The net result was that scientific management required laborers to match the speed of the machinery they used. Scientific management had both good and bad results. The positive side was that production rose by as much as 200 percent, which allowed for more profits and established the United States as a nation with efficient production.

Publication and Spread of the Theory

The theory behind scientific management was first publicly introduced by Taylor in a presentation titled "Shop Management" in 1903 before the American Academy of Mechanical Engineers. The theory essentially exalted production as a moral act that should not waste products or time and engineers as being responsible for the moral good of efficient designs. Scientific management was refined during the next several years, culminating in a landmark work in Taylor's The Principles of Scientific Management (1911). Advocates of scientific management such as Frank and Lillian Gilbreth and Henry Gantt expanded the concept in later years through the Taylor Society. Taylorism caught on during a time when America was fascinated by the technological advances of the Industrial Revolution and the emphasis on standardization and mechanization, but the degree to which Americans' lives became scientifically managed at work and at home remains surprising to many social critics. The popularity of Taylorism also fits in with the industrial boom that began in the early 1900s. As markets expanded and productivity demands increased, the need for larger workforces also increased. Scientifically managed work allowed new employees, many of whom were immigrants and women, to be trained quickly, often displacing more skilled labor that was becoming increasingly organized or unionized.

Pig Iron Experiment

One of the most famous applications of scientific management was the pig iron experiment at Bethlehem Steel. After scientifically selecting a worker named Schmidt, analysts examined all aspects of his pig iron loading job. Factors such as bending, lifting, walking, reaching, and rest periods were altered to determine the effects of each on the level of production. Additionally, Schmidt was cajoled into working harder by challenging him to live up to his selection as a "high priced man." The experiment was deemed successful since the training enabled Schmidt, who received only a marginal increase in pay, to load forty-seven tons per day when the standard production was only twelve tons in a day. However, much of the literature on the experiment failed to mention that several people dropped out of the experiment before Schmidt was found as a willing, albeit "mentally sluggish," subject.

Shovel Experiments

Equipment also faced scientific analysis. In another famous experiment shovel sizes were analyzed for their optimum output according to the weight of the material being used. Smaller shovels were used for heavier materials and larger shovels were used for lighter materials. An important caveat was that the manager should determine which shovel an employee should use.

Critiques of Taylorism

Scientifically managed work was criticized for having a dehumanizing effect on labor. Before scientific management much of labor remained skilled in spite of the use of machinery, and thus labor exerted considerable influence over the methods of work and levels of production. The time and motion studies required of scientific management routinized all jobs and effectively split off the minds of workers from the labor performed by their hands and backs. Management became thinkers and labor became doers. This division of labor resulted in management's absolute control of employees, easily replaceable workers, fewer skilled workers, and reduced pay for workers.

Specialization

In the scientifically designed system, laborers controlled only the portion of the work that did not require knowledge of production. For example, a job that had required knowledge to perform four separate tasks to set up a piece of machinery, operate it, clean it, and repair it would now be assigned to four separate workers, all of whom would be measured against a time standard. Organized labor vehemently protested the deskilling and displacement of skilled workers, but business owners continued to employ the technique. For the increases in regimented production, labor was given financial incentives, though many thought the trade-off was an uneven one in management's favor. Financial penalties were also put into place for those who could not maintain the benchmark pace established for the scientifically managed job.

Legacy of Taylorism

Although organized labor has protested against scientific management from its inception, the concept's influence has endured. Despite the emphasis in the 1960s placed on job enrichment and job rotation to relieve worker alienation, fatigue, and boredom and the promotion in the 1980s of "quality management" and team building, the principles of Taylorism are still applied, especially in lower-level jobs that are easily routinized. Day in and day out, these repetitive jobs had taken their toll mentally and physically on the workforce of industrial America. One recently noticed effect of scientifically managed work is the occupational hazard of repetitive motion injuries that cost organizations millions of dollars annually in medical bills and lost workdays.