In order to assess the contribution of the Hawthorne Studies, we must look at how behaviour at work was understood before them, and the theories that were utilised by management. Scientific management was born in the early 1900’s by Frederick W Taylor. Taylor’s theories were very different to those born out of the Hawthorn Studies. Tony J. Watson (1980, p44) ‘Taylorism sees the worker basically as an economic animal, a self-seeking non-social individual who prefers managers to do their job- related thinking for them’. Using this model of the motivation to work of employees, management simply needed to organize the work and offer monetary incentives which would increase production. Many large organizations such as Ford adopted this strategy, and scientific management was the accepted management theory. Taylor was the first to write on the subject of scientific management, but it was Henry Ford who famously implemented it. Fordism treated workers as another machine and had very simplistic assumptions regarding motivation to work. Taking scientific management on board, these companies were also accepting that their employee’s behaviour was dependent on pay and conditions. It was not that these companies dismissed other factors, more that they were as yet undiscovered. There were however many critics of Scientific Management and some problems associated with it. Many union leaders were concerned by the practises of introducing this system, not by the higher rates of pay and security offered by some practises. It was the practises where employers introduced piece-rate wages then cut the rates as soon as higher production was reached. Other practises which had introduced correct rates, found production did not meet targets set, and punitive action was then taken. Because Scientific Management did not take into account groups and social behaviour, if targets were not met there was no other explanation other than the workers were not trying their best. It was not until the conclusions of the Hawthorne Studies that other factors were taken into account, and more explanations of workers behaviour could be made.
It is widely recognized that the Hawthorne Studies were key in the development of HR (Human Relations) concept. Buchanan, D. and Huczynski, A (1985, p186) ‘Companies concluded that the employee’s receptivity to management’s goals depended on the extent to which the boss could meet employee’s social needs, such as that for acceptance. In this sense, the human relations approach to management was born’. This approach is widely used today and takes into account the factors such as groups and social variables, which were documented during the Hawthorn Studies. To Human Relations theorists, management need to provide a work environment, within which employees can fulfil their social needs. These social needs were identified from the Hawthorn studies, and have since been used in many HR models. Management can use this information to introduce modern techniques such as team building, communication and supportive supervision. All of these techniques, as with scientific management are implemented to managerial needs, and ultimately to increase productivity. Other studies have since been carried out in the wake of the Hawthorne observations. The Luton studies conducted by Goldthorpe et al (1962) were carried out to establish the workers orientation to work. Workers there were well paid and perceived their work as a means to secure pay and security. The employee’s orientation to work was formed independently from their current employment. It was of little intrinsic value to them, their motivation came from class, community and family background. These studies opened up new areas of debate, and posed questions to management. How could they motivate workers, who gained little or no motivation from work, but only from personal backgrounds? This forced management theorists to think about the employee’s life outside the organization as well as within work.
The obvious contribution of the Hawthorne Studies to behavioural understanding was that it was the first study to recognise social factors effecting production. These ideas however were not born from the studies. Dutton, P, D (1920’s) When writing on the needs of a worker ‘Security, the sense of advancement, the sense of control of environment, of counting for something’. These were ideas written in textbooks in the early 1920’s, before the Hawthorne Studies had been carried out. Showing that people were exploring ideas that workers behaviour was affected by more than just money or conditions. Ideas that are associated with the Hawthorne Studies were not conceived there, however it could be argued that it is where they were first proven. It is widely believed that the studies changed social science thinking, it is more accurate to say that the results confirmed and popularised fringe thinking. The fact that the studies were initially carried out by scientists also helped to add weight to their arguments. The observations were never intended to uncover behaviour theories in the workplace; they were intended to add more weight to the scientific management argument. A major critique of the Hawthorne Studies that as many other studies, they suffered from a self-biasing factor. When workers know that they are being studied their performance may alter, even subconsciously. This makes it extremely difficult to identify the factors that are actually having an effect on the workers performance.
The findings of the Hawthorne studies were not the definitive beginning to the progression of the Human Relations movement, and there fore an approach to understanding behaviour in the workplace. They did play a significant part it adding value to an approach of investigation into behaviour at work. It could be said that more questions were posed than answered by the studies, but it was posing those questions that opened the door to more research. Buchanan, D. and Huczynski, A (1985, p179) ‘The Hawthorne Studies revolutionized social science thinking’. It was this revolutionary thinking that led to the demise of Scientific Management theories, and the growth in popularity of the Human Resource movement. Without the advent of the Hawthorne Studies, it is probable that behaviour in the workplace would still have been investigated, and understood as much as it is today. However it was the catalyst of the time, to develop work behavioural ideas, when scientific management and its behavioural assumptions were dominant. History of the understanding of behaviour of workers has evolved from early scientific management, into modern HR theories. The Hawthorn Studies were a stepping stone on the way, which helped give theorists more understanding and direction to their studies. Our understanding of behaviour at work is constantly increasing, and more studies of the ilk of Hawthorne will speed up this process.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Buchanan, D. and Huczynski, 1997. Organizational Behaviour, an introductory text. 3rd ed, Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall (uk)
Tony J. Watson, 1995. Sociology, Work and Industry. 3rd ed, London: Routledge
Stephen P. Robbins, 2000. Essentials of Organizational Behaviour. London: Prentice Hall
Morgan Witzel, 2000. ‘Introduction’, Human Resource Management. Bristol:Thoemmes Press
