Claims that management’s pursuit of efficiency and effectiveness have been at the expense of labour’s welfare are not valid
Claims that management’s pursuit of efficiency and effectiveness have been at the expense of labour’s welfare are not valid
This essay will argue that claims management’s pursuit of efficiency and effectiveness is at the expense of labour’s welfare is not true. There are lots of theories and concepts that has explained how the traditional management theory or the contemporary management theory showed that management’s in the same time of pursuit efficiency and effectiveness and they do care about their labour. It will expand into three areas of how theorist and managers think about the labour’s welfare. The first section will define what scientific management theory is and the criticisms of this theory. And then it will expand this theory to the showing that Taylor’s focus was to maximize the prosperity of both employers and employees. The second section will focus on the theory of behavioral management to see how theorist suggests how managers behave to motivate employees to help the organization to achieve effectiveness and efficiency but still satisfy their employees. In the last section this will base on the information of Sikula, Olmosk, Kim and Cupps (2001) and Phipps (2011) to present the views of business ethic of management theory and discuss how businesses focus on treating their labour in a new better way in terms of ethic influence. A conclusion will provide a summation of the arguments in support of the claim that management’s pursuit of efficiency and effective are not at the expense of labour’s welfare.
Many theorist and manager are interested in studying scientific management and they all based on Taylor’s theory and develop their own views. Waddell, Jones and George (2011,p.40) has defined Scientific Management is the systematic study of relationships between people and tasks for the purpose of redesigning the work process to increase efficiency.’ In more detail, the central theme of Taylor’s theory is dividing tasks to
This essay will argue that claims management’s pursuit of efficiency and effectiveness is at the expense of labour’s welfare is not true. There are lots of theories and concepts that has explained how the traditional management theory or the contemporary management theory showed that management’s in the same time of pursuit efficiency and effectiveness and they do care about their labour. It will expand into three areas of how theorist and managers think about the labour’s welfare. The first section will define what scientific management theory is and the criticisms of this theory. And then it will expand this theory to the showing that Taylor’s focus was to maximize the prosperity of both employers and employees. The second section will focus on the theory of behavioral management to see how theorist suggests how managers behave to motivate employees to help the organization to achieve effectiveness and efficiency but still satisfy their employees. In the last section this will base on the information of Sikula, Olmosk, Kim and Cupps (2001) and Phipps (2011) to present the views of business ethic of management theory and discuss how businesses focus on treating their labour in a new better way in terms of ethic influence. A conclusion will provide a summation of the arguments in support of the claim that management’s pursuit of efficiency and effective are not at the expense of labour’s welfare.
Many theorist and manager are interested in studying scientific management and they all based on Taylor’s theory and develop their own views. Waddell, Jones and George (2011,p.40) has defined Scientific Management is the systematic study of relationships between people and tasks for the purpose of redesigning the work process to increase efficiency.’ In more detail, the central theme of Taylor’s theory is dividing tasks to
References: Bowey, A 2005, ‘Motivation: the art of putting theory into practice’, European Business Forum, issue 20, Winter, pp 17-20. Caldari, K 2007, ‘Alfred Marshall’s critical analysis of scientific management’, The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 14:1, March, pp 55-78. Phipps, STA 2011, ‘Mary, Mary, quite contrary: In a male-dominated field, women contributed by bringing a touch of spirituality to early management theory and practice’, Journal of Management History, vol. 17, no. 3, pp 270-281. Schwartz, M 2007, ‘The “business ethics” of management theory’, Journal of Management History, vol. 13, no. 1, pp 43-54. Sikula Sr, A, Olmosk, K, Kim, CW & Cupps, S 2001, ‘A “New” Theory of Management’, Ethics & Behaviour, 11(1), pp 3-21. Waddell, D, Jones, GR, George, JM 2011, Contemporary Management, 2nd edn, McGraw-Hill Australia Pty Limited, Sydney.