Critically Outline Any One Perspective On the Management of Organisations That Has Been Developed Over the Last Century.
Critically Outline Any One Perspective On the Management of Organisations That Has Been Developed Over the Last Century.
Using One, Two or Three Named Organisations As Examples Show How This Has Been Applied, Together With Its Advantages and Disadvantages.
For the purposes of this assignment I have chosen to concentrate on scientific management, as it is a management technique, which has been developed in the last century. After immense thought and research, I felt that this management approach has a lot to offer, in a sense that there are many interesting principles surrounding it, and the fact that some of these principles are still being used in organisations today.
Scientific management was very dominant from the early 1900's to the mid 1940's, although some of the principles are still in use today. The basic principle was seen to be, to improve productivity and for all of an organisations employees to perform to their full potential. Rewards acted as incentives for workers, for their performances. F.W.Taylor (1856-1917) who was seen as the 'father' of scientific management outlined many principles during these industrialised years. Taylorism broke production down into its smallest component parts so that each worker became an expert in it. For example in the motoring industry, I examined Ford, where I found that there were specific workers that were given a job in the production line and were doing repetitive jobs such as tightening a given bolt. Tom Peters (1995) has identified this scientific approach more broadly as the 'nationalist approach'. There is a flaw with the term scientific management itself as science proceeds precisely by making mistakes.
Frederick Taylor saw the following major problems:
* Undefined worker/manager roles
* Conflict between management and workers
* Poor worker motivation
* Poor working conditions
* Over or under qualified workers.
He had some solutions to these points:
. Scientific design for each task
2. Scientific selection of workers - this would enable organisations to determine what skills are required and how important a task is. Also aqequate training and rewards for productivity should be given.
3. Division of labour and responsibilities.
4. Management and labour to be team members and share responsibilities and share rewards.
Industries that have embraced such scientific management methods today, have essentially deskilled the workforce, often by menial, repetitive tasks and have attempted to replace workers with machines wherever economical and technically feasible. A prime example of such an application is the principal of Ford's production line. In my opinion, the research I have read, has suggested that some of the principles of scientific management have been widely adopted throughout the industry. There is, however, evidence that there has been a rise in the manufacturing industries by employing some of the principals of scientific management.
Target (1995) has identified seven distinctive characteristics that highlight the limitations of applying scientific management principals and therefore raising doubts over the reliability of such management practises being used in service sectors. These included:
* Measurement of output and performances difficult.
Quality of service cannot be measured solely by quantitative data, such as revenue and sales volume alone. For example the performance of a health care organisation is a combination of, not only, financial results and patient throughput, but also the quality of care, the effectiveness of preventative measures and many other factors.
* The product is not tangible. Amongst the many effects of this, one major effect, is that quality control is not straight forward e.g. checking the quality of a car manufacturer is a lot clearer ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
* Measurement of output and performances difficult.
Quality of service cannot be measured solely by quantitative data, such as revenue and sales volume alone. For example the performance of a health care organisation is a combination of, not only, financial results and patient throughput, but also the quality of care, the effectiveness of preventative measures and many other factors.
* The product is not tangible. Amongst the many effects of this, one major effect, is that quality control is not straight forward e.g. checking the quality of a car manufacturer is a lot clearer task then checking the quality of service given at hotel reception desks.
* Production and consumption are usually simultaneous. An implication of this is that there can be no inventory of the service itself, therefore not allowing 'systematic observation', or measurement i.e. a shop assistants advice to a customer cannot be stored. Hales (1994) has suggested in his research, when the end product is tailored to specific wants, the option of the 'one best way' is even more difficult to sustain.
* If 'product' is time perishable, and the service is not used it is likely to be wasted, again making 'systematic organisation' very difficult.
* Sight selection is governed by customers demand. This means that operations tend to be decentralised, therefore, preventing the scientific management belief, that planning and controlling should be centralised.
* The industry is labour-intensive. This is a key characteristic and is especially important due to the consumer/employee contract in the delivery of a service. Consequently this makes it very difficult not to replace people with machines, in addition people tend to be a lot more unpredictable then machines.
In today's society I cannot find any one organisation that fully employs the principles on scientific management. However there are organisations, which successfully implement certain ideas/trends of scientific management.
I thought that MacDonalds would be a good organanisation to consider looking into for the purposes of this assignment, as I believe that this organisation employs some of the principles of scientific management, and their success demonstrates. However it is obvious that eventhough the organisation is not completely following scientific management, it has taken some of the best principles, and have accommodated them suit their own style. Mass production and employees on the production line make it repetitive job, albeit increases productivity, thus higher levels of profit. They meet their company goals of providing good quality fast-food, and also provide scope for their employees to be promoted. They provide good training schemes, which gives everyone at least the opportunity to develop their skills. McDonalds has successfully taken the rationalisation concept, down to the production line of producing burgers. McDonalds scientific management style is apparent, as we can see it offers:
* Efficiency
* Food and service that can be easily identified and calculated. Ritizer (1993) suggested that some McDonalds institutes have come to combine both emphasises on time, and money.
* Predictability of the food and service due to standardisation (people know what they are going to get if they have tried it once.).
The workers who are employed by fast food restaurants are trained to do a limited number of tasks in precisely the way they are told to do so. Managers impose their control by ensuring these tasks are carried out correctly. McDonalds has successfully employed/introduced mechanisation, to reduce the unpredictability of the human element. Ritizer argued that McDonalds "...has influenced a wide range of under ratings, indeed the way of life, of a significant proportion of the world. And that influence is destined to continue to expand in the foreseeable future."
In my opinion such a statement appears to add weight to the argument that applying certain philosophies from the scientific management theory is inevitable.
Scientific management is also being applied in the franchiser sector within the hospitality industry. Franchisers stress the importance in standardisation throughout all work methods, via centralised control, to ensure that each franchisee provides the same product and service. Some hotels, such as choice hostels, have installed front desk computers, which provide the receptionist with information that can be supplied to the guest, thereby standardising the service offered and reducing staff, ultimately reducing costs. This is especially useful in hotels whereby high turnover of labour often results in higher staff training costs. From such an example it can be seen that the 'technological revolution' has greatly aided, and indeed, encourages the application of scientific management in the service sector, implying that such management can be unavoidable.
McDonalds has become so entrenched in society that customer's expectations have risen to such high levels that certain sectors of the service industry, such as fast food outlets, could not be decentralised. An example of a flaw within MacDonalds is the fact that when I visited the shop for research purposes, I was not surprised to see that there was an immediate flaw in scientific management. I sw a prime example of this when I tried ordering a mixed flavour milk shake, as I went through the drive-through. It could be seen that the person taking the order was so used to just simply passing straight-forward orders from the mass production line. Albeit, I realised that the order was not completed properly due to not just bad communication, but just for the fact that there are not used to diversing from what they are usually doing. If it is not a straight order, there is bound to be a problem.
The other company that I looked into to a slight degree is Ford, the car manufacturer. Fordism stands as the model of mass society by giving workers enough time and money to consume their own production. The car, as the object in the perfected system of the assembly- line for large-scale manufacturing, is the icon of the Fordist method. In 1913 Henry Ford devised a model by combining the reorganisation of space in the factory. He called in Frederick Taylor, the creator of "scientific management", to determine the exact speed the work should proceed and the exact motions workers needed to accomplish their tasks. Taylorism was a system of determining the most efficient method of accomplishing each individual task in the labor process and with the division of all tasks on the shop floor into replicated units. Ultimately, the goal of Taylorism is to create a more efficient worker, greater production, and greater profits. This is still the situation for Ford, where mass production is still one of its main features. However, over time the colours have changed, and more various models are now available. The scientific management is not as apparent as it used to be, which goes to show that with advanced technological changes, there is less of a chance of employing a total scientific management level.
Henry Ford is credited with adapting the efficient restructure of the modern factory floor. Ford and his team found four principles: interchangeable parts, continuous flow, division of labor, and reducing wasted effort. It was crucial to have an even pace in production, since a glitch in one area would have a knock-on effect on the whole production line. Management required mechanically "timed labour" to successfully achieve highest output in the assembly-line, which in turn changed the population's concept of time and leisure. Increasing wages was necessary for Ford to exploit his workers as consumers of their own production. On the positive side, ability to purchase cheap cars resulted in urbanisation and secularisation. Division of labour permitted easier management of the work force. The fundamental change arose as farmers and craftsmen became capital-less wagers, controlled for the first time. They further depended on the factory and the government for benefits. Unions fought for the common good of the workers, but mainly they had to surrender to the system. The state not only became a supervisor through regulation, but also providor of welfare. Being the symbol of modern capitalistic massproduction, elements of Fordism were not new, but the integration of different contemporary methods.
The modern consumer society is commonly described as "McDonaldisation", but owes its basis to Fordism. It is a direct byproduct of Fordism's social paradigm shift. During it's peak of the 50's, car production was supported with the Federal High Way Aid Act of 1956, highway construction was under way. Decline in sales boomed after WW2 when factories converted back from military production. The Fordist model, where a knock-on effect effected the whole, reflected itself on the economy. Building more roads meant need of cement. More importantly, it transformed the product mix of petroleum, gasoline replacing kerosine, that is still the most important commodity in the world affecting prices of all other commodities. Many empires were built on providing services for the traveller, eg. hotel chains, restaurants, and gas stations, which needed catering. The chain reaction created even more demand for mass production in all industries. Cheap, suburbanian services attracted customers -now with higher incomes- and chains grew rapidly. The supervision of franchises faced the same need as the manufacturer. Managed chains became carbon copies of the factory; availability, calculated costs, standards, and simplified services or essentials. Hence, McDonald, Holiday Inn, and others were the followers of fordist mass consumerism and mass production, later becoming global monopolies. They were preferred for cheap pricing, cleanness, and speed. The society became deskilled from traditional and the popularisation of franchising. McDonald also continues to serve the same menu. Where Ford deskilled farmers into assemblers, McDonald eliminated cooks with standard methods of cooking.
But the process of manufacturing production remains typical Fordist. Apart from the technically skilled workforce, it still involves deskilling, boring assembly lines, social alienation, it still involves deskilling, boring assembly lines, social alienation.
Apart from these organisations, some industries have reversed scientific management principles to relieve monotomy, improve morale, improve job satisfaction and essentially increase efficiency. Hales has noted that there has been a growing trend in decentralisation via job rotation, enlargement and enrichment as well as more project teams being more widely established. These go on to illustrate such change would make it possible to reverse the application of scientific management principles.
CONCLUSION
To conclude, after my research, it can be suggested that scientific management, in its extreme form, applied in a hospitality context, would result in something of a McDonalds experience. For example receptionists dealing with guests enquires would be unable to treat them on a personal level as they would almost be reading from a pre-written script, written by central head office. My own belief is that this could not be applied to the higher end of the market, as this undermines the actual service that is expected. This therefore exposes the ideology that scientific management is inevitable to the service industry.
There is also a growing awareness of the dehumanising experience of a fast food restaurant or budget hotel. This has resulted in an increased desire for a more personalised service, which is an indication that some industries could be decentralised.
Furthermore the service sector, most notably hospitality, thrives on the multi-faceted individuals that are attracted to the industry. However the deskilling due to rationalisation means that such people are 'strait-jacketed, into one dimensional jobs.' Thus, such a sentiment tends to argue against the notion that scientific management principles still exist and are inevitable.
Summarising all of the research I have conducted, it can be argued that this scientific management theory is inevitable within the entire service industry, although certainly some areas of the industry could benefit from utilising such a management strategy, notably in the budget sector.
