Frederick Taylor
Scientific Management
Frederick Taylor may be a founding father of organizational studies. His scientific management approach has surely touched many aspects of your business life, as you'll see. He was an engineer and an adviser. That meant that he was an outdoor person who would inherit organizations to undertake to assist them to make things better.
Factories at the time were arising everywhere and standardized ways didn't yet exist to manage large groups of individuals and handle increasingly complex work. Therefore, Taylor considered this need, and he recommended stepping in and make organizations more standardized, efficient, and productive by studying their work processes closely.
Scientific management is that the term he used. He did tons of studies and wrote books about it. This basically meant applying science to figure. Studying tasks carefully, systematically, at the micro-level to hurry work. He wanted to interrupt faraway from the sense rules of thumb that he saw as unproven and inefficient. So workers had their own self-styled ways of doing things they might pass around and he said, "Hey, there's really no thanks to know "if this is often the simplest thanks to do things so let's study it."
DIVISION OF LABOR.
Scientific management's also referred to as Taylorism, which in fact is known as after him. Division of labor may be a practice that he believed in. He was dividing the work process into tiny, small, simple, and separate steps. And that meant rather than doing an entire project where you probably did it from start to end, you'd only do one or two little steps, then a subsequent person performed the subsequent task. So this is often a really different thanks to working. He wanted to work out the one best way, a typical, to do every part, every task, to spice up productivity. That is what he's really known for, trying to find that one best thanks to solving the riddle.
HIERARCHY
He also believed in the hierarchy. He wanted a transparent chain of command that separated all the workers at the rock bottom of the organization from all the managerial people toward the highest. And therefore the reason he wanted to do this was that he wanted the managers to style the work process and enforce how that employment was performed.
Employees, as a result, would just follow directions. They only became doers and therefore the managers were then the thinkers. He believed in selection and training and compensation in a way that was a touch different. He wanted to pick and train high-performing workers, or what he called first-class employees, then match them to employment that was best fitted to them.
PRODUCTIVE WORKERS SHOULD BE PAID
He saw this because of the ideal. And he believed I should pay the foremost productive workers more. He thought, on average, that most employees weren't very hard workers and he did not have a really high opinion of employees, and he wanted to urge obviate those people and if they couldn't meet the upper standard he would fire them, and only the great people would be left.
TIME AND MOTION STUDIES
His method was called time and motion studies. That meant he wanted to work out the smallest amount of your time. On average, it took to perform each task and even each a part of each task. He really broke it down. What was the fewest number of motions required for every small task?
He wanted employees to basically work like they were machines. As I discussed, he was an engineer by training and background. Then that is what they are doing, they design and build machines. And he wanted people to act like that. His shovel experiments were an excellent example of the time and time and motion study.
The idea here is he said, "Hey, you recognize what? “Instead of just using whatever shovel, "why don't we find out the precise amount of poundage "a shovel should hold to formwork the fastest?" So he did experiments where he took 10 guys and he lined them up and gave all of them a pile of sand or coal. And he said, "I want you to require this shovel," which held about 26 pounds, "and move your piles from here, at about 10 feet, "over to there." then they worked at it all day and he kept track of everything with a clipboard and a timer, and at the top of the day, they went home.
And then overnight he stops a touching piece of metal off of every shovel in order that it had been a few pounds lighter. It held a few pounds less of coal or sand. Then they came back the subsequent morning, and he told the workers, “Okay, remember those piles that you simply moved?
TOUCH FRUSTRATING FOR THE WORKERS
"Now I would like you to maneuver 'em back "to where they were within the first place." Which was probably a touch frustrating for the workers, but they were getting paid then they did it. And he did this nightly and kept taking a touch bit off of the shovel until he saw the amount peak. And each time he took a touch bit off, the numbers went up.
Then he noticed he kept taking more and more off the shovel, then the numbers went down. They were actually finishing their piles later within the day, every day on average. Then he said, "Oh, maybe we've passed the midpoint."
So he went back to slightly larger shovels and, surely, the numbers went in the right direction again. And he settled on 21.5 pounds that were the right amount of sand or coal that you simply should slot in a shovel to maneuver the foremost amount during a day. In order that amount meant you'll move it faster, cause it had been a touch lighter, and it also meant that you simply could take fewer trips.
So if you were employing a tiny shovel, you'd need to use more motions, more trips to the pile. So he found out your perfect time and motion for shoveling. That's why if you enter any ironmongery shop, you're gonna see many various shovels, shapes, and sizes, and this is often all influenced by Frederick Taylor, his experiments, and his thinking, certainly by extension then.
But it isn't just shovels, you see this everywhere. Today, in fact, if you attend a sub shop and order a sub, at the top of the road they're gonna ask you if you would like anything thereon, like mustard, and that they devour their dispenser and that they do about three swipes across to place that mustard on.
Then they kind search at
your wish, "Is that enough?" And you opt whether you would like
more on there. There is a competitor, however, that features a nozzle with
three spouts thereon. This means they are doing one squeeze, one motion
across, and now the mustard or the ketchup has completed.
So they're saving two motions, they're saving just a few seconds thereon one little step, but they're ready to make that sub a touch faster. Now, if you break down the method of creating a sub into 20 or 30 steps and you work out how to hurry each of these tiny little steps, the way to cut the bread, the way to put the meat on, the way to put the lettuce on, the way to cook it, et cetera, now you'll grind out more sandwiches per hour with fewer employees, more sandwiches per day total, and you are making your company extra money.
And it's just not subbed. If you enter almost any nutriment restaurant, especially the franchises, you're gonna see they need to find out a really quick method, the one best way, to form almost every single product they create. If you are making one burger versus two burgers, for instance, you do not make it an equivalent way. You’ve got to extend your productivity.
FORD MOTOR COMPANY
So you see this almost everywhere. The guy who took this to a subsequent level was Ford. Of course, he's the founding father of the Ford Motor Company that's still alive today, still thriving today. When he first started making cars, the car stayed in one place.
And they did a touch little of time and motion studies thereon but it still took them about 12 hours to form a car from start to end. The workers were all working around the car. Then he said, "Hey, let's really go crazy "with the time and motion studies." then he said, "Let's also make a production line.”
He didn't invent the production line, as they assert, but he perfected it. Then they only kept studying the method the maximum amount as they might, and that they took a car from 12 hours, which is what it took to form it at the start, all the way right down to 93 minutes.
They got it good. They assert at its fastest, there was a replacement car rolling off the top of that production line every 11 seconds. It's just incredible.
Boeing recently changed over the way they made their 737s. They really want to make it in one place, like they originally did with the cars. Then they moved it into more assembly-line style, which they called a lean production, where the plane rolls alongside all the tools and even the workers inside, just a couple of feet an hour until it's done.
And from start to end, they were ready to almost triple their production rate. That's tons of savings for the corporate and tons of savings for the client. The outcomes of Taylor's work are mixed. On the plus side, he absolutely helped people boost productivity by 200, even 400% or more sometimes,
So that's an enormous win. More work accomplished with fewer people meant more profit for the businesses and a more consistent product of arguably higher quality. So for instance if you break something on your car, you'll get a particular duplicate that matches in perfectly, you do not need to have a homemade piece that might be incredibly expensive and not necessarily higher quality. On the opposite side of the coin, there are some outcomes that weren't so great. Companies often cannot pay employees more.
IMPORTANT PART OF Taylor's ADVICE
This is an important part of Taylor's advice, you've got to pay people more because you would like to hold on to the simplest people and you would like to stay them motivated. And he recommended they do this.
Ford had the advice, and he paid people to double the current rate which is one of the key reasons that Ford had such prominent people and thrived.
HARSH ATMOSPHERE
Most companies, however,
did not do that. Managers think employers do was a philosophy that became
normal. Separated workers from the greater meaning of work. So, if they're only
tightening a bolt to a painting, a screw, then they're not really connected to
that broader satisfaction of making the whole product anymore.
It deescalates employees; it made them expendable. You could find and replace somebody in only a couple of moments, you didn't really have tons of skill or time invested in everyone. Survival of the fittest philosophy really took over. That harsh atmosphere resulted where it was a very cruel and unfeeling atmosphere.
Employee burnout, that
dehumanization of being treated like a machine, and the mental anguish that
came along with this mundane and repetitive work were all part of this
experience. So, Frederick Taylor, one of the founding fathers of organizational
studies has clearly influenced many aspects of our work today and that's why
we study him.
إرسال تعليق