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 increase job specialization, distribution of the suitable job to suitable worker, training and monitor the working environment (Caladri 2007). In Taylor’s mind, this new system is the ‘one best way’ for business to achieve effectiveness and efficiency, but some other theorists are doubt disagree about it. According to Caladri, the biggest issue of Taylor’s new system is the dissatisfying employees. Many employees who work under the system are all treated like a robot and the employees do not have the chance to express themselves because of the inflexibility work process (Caladri 2007). The only thing that the employees need to do everyday is to repeat the same job role in which are arranged by the managers and they don’t have the right to think, choose and decide (Caladri 2007). The bonus reward system is another idea from Taylor’s. It is a system for managers to analyze the daily productivity rate of the employees’ performance. If the particular employee performs well, reward will be given. Therefore this system is set up for the managers to use money as a reward for the employees’ and also it has helped in developing of motivation to them. But Bowey explained under the modern work environment, the bonus reward system is outdated and many employees are feeling anger and frustrated of this system. The reason for this being is because some managers are not giving out the equal reward to everyone and they found that they couldn’t really been involved in the business (Bowey 2005). This according Taylor’ theory nominate the words of coldness and impersonality (Schwartz 2007). Even though there are criticisms of Taylor’s idea, but on the other hand Taylor actually did focus on maximizing the prosperity of both employers and employees. Mark Schwartz’s, the person who support Taylor’s idea, he pointed out several views showing that Taylor in fact did think about labour’s welfare (Schwartz 2007). ‘Taylor indicated that there were some basic limits to the optimum daily...
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.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document