Review of: Bramel, D. (August 1981). Hawthorne, the Myth of the Docile Worker
A review of : Bramel, D. (August 1981). Hawthorne, the Myth of the Docile Worker, and Class Bias in
Psychology. American Psychologist, Volume 36(8) pp. 867-878.
A review of:
Bramel, D. (August 1981). Hawthorne, the Myth of the Docile Worker, and Class Bias in Psychology. American Psychologist, Volume 36(8) pp. 867-878.
ANDREA LIM MEI CHEN
University of Newcastle
Contact: c3171812@uon.edu.au
A review of : Bramel, D. (August 1981). Hawthorne, the Myth of the Docile Worker, and Class Bias in
Psychology. American Psychologist, Volume 36(8) pp. 867-878.
Review
This journal begins with an introduction to the infamous Hawthorne experiments led by Elton Mayo and Fritiz J. Roethlisberger. These experiments were based on Mayo’s belief in the need to shift the focus of management from a scientific approach to one that valued human relations. The Hawthorne experiments surfaced as the pioneer studies of it’s time in human management psychology. The results developed a theory known as the
“Hawthorne effect” in which many have incorporated to form the fundamentals of modern day human relations in commerce.
Roethlisberger described the “Hawthorne effect” as an awareness from the working class when special attention is given by their managements thus bringing about a positive change in productivity. Today, the “Hawthorne effect” is even equated as simply treating employees well.
Bramel is critical when pin-pointing the flaws of the theory. Being unconcerned over the methodology and accuracy of the experiments, he gives Mayo the benefit of the doubt and instead questions in particular two aspects of the theory.
The first of which is the assumption that workers are easily manipulated by their higher managements to become constructive and cohesive with their fellow workers thus increasing productivity regardless of the working environment or economy.
The second assumption being, conflict between management and it’s workers are due to external
Psychology. American Psychologist, Volume 36(8) pp. 867-878.
A review of:
Bramel, D. (August 1981). Hawthorne, the Myth of the Docile Worker, and Class Bias in Psychology. American Psychologist, Volume 36(8) pp. 867-878.
ANDREA LIM MEI CHEN
University of Newcastle
Contact: c3171812@uon.edu.au
A review of : Bramel, D. (August 1981). Hawthorne, the Myth of the Docile Worker, and Class Bias in
Psychology. American Psychologist, Volume 36(8) pp. 867-878.
Review
This journal begins with an introduction to the infamous Hawthorne experiments led by Elton Mayo and Fritiz J. Roethlisberger. These experiments were based on Mayo’s belief in the need to shift the focus of management from a scientific approach to one that valued human relations. The Hawthorne experiments surfaced as the pioneer studies of it’s time in human management psychology. The results developed a theory known as the
“Hawthorne effect” in which many have incorporated to form the fundamentals of modern day human relations in commerce.
Roethlisberger described the “Hawthorne effect” as an awareness from the working class when special attention is given by their managements thus bringing about a positive change in productivity. Today, the “Hawthorne effect” is even equated as simply treating employees well.
Bramel is critical when pin-pointing the flaws of the theory. Being unconcerned over the methodology and accuracy of the experiments, he gives Mayo the benefit of the doubt and instead questions in particular two aspects of the theory.
The first of which is the assumption that workers are easily manipulated by their higher managements to become constructive and cohesive with their fellow workers thus increasing productivity regardless of the working environment or economy.
The second assumption being, conflict between management and it’s workers are due to external