Managers today treat their staff more democratically and since the mid 70s which is a reason for the decrease in the use of the fordism model of organisation for comparison, due to ford’s belief that workers were simply assets of the company and not people. Since the mid 70s changes in markets and technology have encouraged managers to use greater product diversity and more flexible methods of production. Movements towards a more flexible organisation have become apparent. Examples of organisations as Nissan, NASA and Toyota serve as modern day examples of post-fordism and depict movement towards a modified scientific management.
A comparison that could be made is between fordism’s mechanisation of mass production and Taylor’s attempts at using employees as machines. Taylor designed this using his principles of management that included developing a science for each element of work and finding the quickest way the job could be done. Henry ford’s ideal types of fordist production system included using fixed and dedicated machines in individuals work, rather than turning the employee into a machine. With Taylor trying to prove to the world that there was a science to management and that the quickest way was the best way, he attacked the incompetence of managers for their inefficiencies in running the railroads and factories. Using time and motion studies, Taylor achieved productivity increases of up to 200%. His thoughts were echoed by others: during a 1910 interstate commerce commission hearing Louis D Brandeis argued that US railroads could save a million dollars a day if they introduced scientific management into their operations. Taylor showed the world that the methodical and scientific study of work could lead to improved efficiency. He believed that by defining clear guidelines for workers many improvements could be made to the production of goods.
One other theory to be compared with fordism is Marxism. Karl Marx was a German scholar who lived in the nineteenth century, who believed that he understood the reasons for unjust treatment in the world better than anyone else. He believed two classes were formed with regards to affluence. These classes were the people whom could afford to buy businesses and those who couldn’t and were therefore employees rather than employers. He defined this rift in society as a class struggle. As capitalists were out to exploit their staff to enable as high a profit margin as possible it would be impossible for progress towards equality.
Despite the growing belief that fordism had no place in the modern economy one company which successful exploited many of its traits was extremely successful. The company in question was McDonald’s. The company based its output on low skilled work and simple assembly lines although unlike ford costs were not reduced as much meaning know allowance for good wages. McDonald’s became probably the most famous food outlet of the last century giving rise to the theory of mcdonaldisation. Mcdonaldisation was described as an approach to work organisation based on efficiency, calculability, predictability and control using sophisticated technology to enhance these objectives by limiting employee discretion and creativity. Recently however McDonald’s have been struggling to keep their customers due to an increase in consumer dieting schemes. People no longer want to eat copious amounts of fat and this forced McDonald’s to provide healthier alternatives to their deep fried foods to reclaim some of their customers. In 1993 George Ritzer wrote a book based on the works of Harry Braverman called the mcdonaldisation of society. He believed that deskilling workers was having negative affects on social lives. Ritzer went on to claim that the mcdonaldisation of society had four key elements:-
- efficiency: high speed of product manufacture or service provision
- calcuability: high value and minimum waste
- predictability: of product or service irrespective of time or location
- control: staff perform a limited range of tasks in a precisely detailed way
(Huczynski A and Buchanan D 2001 p434)
The success of McDonalds only aided the theories of ford and may have caused some disagreement with the above statement as they proved that ford’s management techniques could be used to achieve goals in the modern market. However their recent decrease in profits may indicate that people no longer wish to speak to unskilled workers as sometimes poor quality service arises from the inability of staff to problem solve.
Although ford aimed his theory at industrial type work rather than that in the tertiary sector, many of his ideas will be used in all types of business for years to come. The idea of increasing consumption rather than concentrating on increasing production showed a completely new way of going about profit maximisation and has helped companies to realise the importance of consumer satisfaction and value for money. The main difference between the market today and that of the time of Henry Ford is the lowering importance of class boundaries. In ford’s day people were frightened too ask too many questions and accepted anything they were told by people of power, such as doctor’s without any query. Now people prefer to understand the processes behind matters which concern them. This means that instead of dehumanising staff the opposite most occur. People need to be more down to earth in their approach to business and be willing to accept the fact that consumers want explanation, before handing over their hard earned cash.
The` statement that ford’s theories may no longer therefore be appropriate in today’s market may in some respects be accepted, but the success of McDonalds in the last 50 years has proved that it is not wholly true.
Bibliography
Gordon J, Organizational Behaviour, A diagnostic approach, seventh edition, 2002
Handy C, Understanding organisations, Fourth edition, 1993
Huczynski A and Buchanan D, Organizational Behaviour, An introductory text 2001 p434 and p433
