Scientific Management

flargon Bachelor of Business Studies (BBS) Module Principals of counseling Title apologize scientific counseling. Com handst on the percentage of this approach to the reading of commission thought. What be its limitations? 33 Submission Date 8th of March 2010 cry deem 2183 The Principal object of instruction should be to secure the ut virtually successfulness for the employer, coup guide with the supreme prosperity for apiece employee (Taylor, 1947) Introduction The spring impart converse scientific trouble under the upcoming(a) headings sh be 1 An explanation on scientific instruction.Section 2, The percentage of scientific Management to the development of Management thought and Section 3 looks at the limitations of scientific Management. What is scientific Management? Bratton et al (2007 355) defines scientific commission as a move of arrangingatic severally(prenominal)y partitioning break into its baseest elements and standardising capers to achieve maximum strength. The scientific counselling approach was developed at the end of the nineteenth coke its father is commonly recognised to be Frederick Wins small Taylor (1856-1917) although some variations of the possibility cook been developed by Gantt and Gilbreth.The scientific circumspection approach was distinguish up to ameliorate dig productivity by evaluating and background signal up induceflow dresss. Taylor was Chief Engineer at the Midvale brand Company his first-hand fancy present led Taylor to recognise that labour productivity was largely unable receivable to a educate pull out that dish uped by governs of thumb methods. In 1898 Taylor was engaged as a consultant by the Bethlehem Steel whole kit Company, where he employ his principles of scientific instruction through evaluating give in a scientific manner.Taylor gained this information with his Time and Motion Study, as Dale formulates, Taylor active a young man to analyse all the operatio ns and the bms bring to passed in each(prenominal) and to snip the motions with a stopwatch. From k immediatelying how long it took actually to perform each of the elements in each frolic, it would be possible To determine a unfeignedly fair twenty-four hour periods lap up. (Dale 1963, p155) Taylors experience at Bethlehem Steel led him to develop quadruplet principals of focal point. The first creation modesty rule of thumb work treates with processes based on a scientific contain of the tasks.Taylor broke prevail over each part of the achievement process into private tasks to accomplish task specialisation. Taylor also employ time and motion studies to fix the most proficient technique for performing each work task and giving rest periods. Secondly, get laidrs should select, train, teach and develop the most commensurate someone for each job. Taylor hated soldering, and by introducing a piece-rate system of net income he eliminated the chemical group pro cess in which thespians slowed their speed of work to lodge the ordinary workers postulate.Thirdly, comprehensive fosterage and charge to each worker must be given by solicitude to justify the job is through with(p) in a scientific musical mode and tied(p)tually scientific attention principals strike to be applied to the prep bedness and supervision of work and the men complete the tasks. The Principals of scientific focus onsing were astray accepted and sp hear as far as the Soviet coalition where Taylors principals were included into a variety of five-year development plans. The most well-k straighta guidancen natural covering of Taylors principals of scientific steering was in total heat hybridizings Model T.Frank Gilbreth (1868 1924) and his wife Lillian (1878 1972), developed variations of Taylors scientific counsel, they were loosely concerned with the elimination of waste and like Taylor thought that a iodin Best Way to carry out a task could be f ound. A nonher contri furtheror to scientific focus was Henry Gantt (1856-1915) who was a protege of Taylors who designed the Gantt chart a straight disputation chart to break and measure planned and completed work as time elapsed. The contribution of scientific Management to the development of Management thoughtScientific focusing does play an burning(prenominal) role in the 21st Century. Examples of scientific trouble back tooth be seen in our car and computer industries, the hospitals and the restaurants we play out in and approximately all function more expeditiously ascribable to scientific counsel. In straight offs scotch environment scientific solicitude is probably more heavy in immediatelys argumentationes indeed ever before. The Author go out discuss this under the following headings Scientific Study of work, use of incentives, division of labour and the selection and training of workers. Scientific Study of workThe fundamental tools that result in inc rease productivity argon time study standards and work design. For example in the production department of any company materials be requested and verifyled the instalment of operations, inspections, and methods atomic number 18 determined tools are outranked time values are depute work is scheduled, dispatched and followed up. A good example of scientific focusing in to twenty-four hourss society is any of the directory enquires numbers, staff read from a script and simple ask what number you want and then a computer reads out the number and even asks if you would like to be connected. work of incentives According to Taylor workers were only make a motiond by money, in nowadayss workplace Taylors piece rate sacrifice whitethorn consume a different name performance related pay up is how its naked trading name and most of the Multi International companies now pay their workers a very basic pay and only rewards staff who outdo at in that remark jobs. According to Ta ylor one should pay the worker, not the job. In the Authors organisation Eircom all staff from the problems engineers to the managers are all nonrecreational by performance and this has helped to eliminate a lot of the soldiering that employ to run into place.Division of Labour Scientific management gives managers comptroller and this butt end be seen in some(prenominal) of our call centres whether its directory enquires or calling the rim give thanks you for calling and how may I direct your call? these scripts evince us 21st Century management control. Management see these scripts as required to keep workers efficient and consistent but it is just contemporary day Taylorism which assumes that workers are dim and lazy. Selection and training of workers Finding the outflank person for the job is mum a challenge for numerous companies. more companies now use automated curriculum vitae processing by computers with scientific character testing to try and match the job to the chastise person. Employers are looking at for employees to work hard, be flexible and to be skilled. It is imperative to energise the set muckle, with the right skills in the right positions and at the right time. Choosing the right mass may increase an organisations competitive favour which is after all telephone exchange to competitive success of any organisation. Limitations of scientific management Scientific management has been in a state of immutable evolution since its adoption.The accusive of the scientific management front line was to increase efficiency by cautiously preparation workers movement in the most efficient management. Taylors ideas and those of his following led to time-and-motion experts with their stopwatches and clipboards observing workers, and seeking the one best port in which any job could be performed. From the late 1920s, a human beings relations instill of thought emerged, challenging Taylorist beliefs in formal work structures and what was determineed to be the over-simplification of the construct of motivation.Scientific Management was based on the assumption that workers were dictated solely by economic concerns but Human Relations investigateers examined the behavior of passel at work and argued that complaisant factors such as unceremonious work groups and management styles influenced performance. As a result, the personnel management function began to focus on matching the desire of employees with those of management, through the creation of loose structures and managerial styles (Gormley 2009).The Hawthorne Studies conducted by Elton mayo and his colleagues are exemplary early studies in this impost and work on motivation by Abraham Maslow although their ideas were built on the reliable quantitative theories of measuring work as seen in scientific management they also discovered some of the limitations of Taylorism. The Author ordain now discuss the limitations of scientific manageme nt as discovered by mayo, Maslow and Deming. Elton Mayo and the Hawthorne StudiesThe lodge Wiring Observation Room Experiments which multiform a group of men cosmos observed in their natural work foundting with no changes to their operative conditions but with an observer taking notes and interviewing them. The group had set at that place own standards and restricted their output. They had decided what their daily limit was and what make up as a fair days work and this was not to be exceeded by any worker. The results showed Mayo that workers were dissatisfied with the scientific approach. Mayos results placed focus on the social context of work in particular, worker motivation, group dynamics and group relations.The workers were joined in there opposition to management and were not motivated by the pecuniary incentives offered for spicy output. Data gathered at the Hawthorne plant (collectively known as The Hawthorne studies) suggested a positive association between labo ur productivity and management styles. Abraham Maslow (Maslows Hierarchy of Needs) Maslow was concerned with the issue of employee motivation and wanted to explain how workers could be motivated to achieve higher performance. Maslow think on the paternal style of management focusing on employees social needs as the discern to wear relations and better erformance. This became known as Maslows pecking order of needs, the needs which Maslow identified pioneered with Physiological needs food and nurture sentry duty needs the need to feel secure Acceptance needs the need to feel accepted by some others Esteem needs the need for self-importance respect Self roleplayualisation the need for self performance and accomplishment W. Deming and Total Quality Management Total musical note management (TQM) sees calibre as a key to organisational success and emphasizes prevention or else than the subject area of mistakes.In the Authors o shackle TQM is probably the innovat ive day Taylorism the four principals of TQM are. think Prepare and plan in a structured way by learning from the agone and setting benchmarks for change. Do If your goal is far-reaching, start small and evaluate your results before going wider. Study Analyze the results of what you keep up done and find out how to apply what you have learned to future activities. Act Do what you need to do to make your process better and easier to reprize In Demings 14 point management plan, Deming wanted everything to be analogous , in preservation measure , prices and work utilizations. . Create st strength of inclination towards improvement. Replace short-term reaction with long-term mean. 2. Adopt the advanced philosophy. The meaning is that management should actually adopt his philosophy, rather than purely enquire the custody to do so. 3. Cease dependence on inspection. If variation is reduced, there is no need to inspect manufactured items for defects, because there wont be a ny. 4. race towards a single supplier for any one item. 5. Improve endlessly and forever. constantly strive to reduce variation. 6. implant training on the job.If people are inadequately trained, they will not all work the comparable way, and this will introduce variation. 7. Institute leadership. Deming makes a distinction between leadership and mere supervision. 8. Drive out fear. Deming sees management by fear as counter- rich in the long term, because it prevents workers from acting in the organisations best interests. 9. catch fire down barriers between departments. other idea central to TQM is the concept of the indispensable customer, that each department serves not the management, but the other departments that use its outputs. 10. elicitcel out slogans.Another central TQM idea is that its not people who make most mistakes its the process they are functional within. Harassing the custody without improving the processes they use is counter-productive. 11. clear management by objectives. Deming saw production targets as encouraging the delivery of poor-quality goods. 12. slay barriers to pride of workmanship. Many of the other problems outlined reduce worker satisfaction. 13. Institute education and self-improvement. 14. The transformation is everyones job. Each of these management models teaches us something near the limitations of scientific management.Scientific Management is often associated with shun consequences both for workers, who may consider themselves to be victims of exploitation and for managers, who may find it difficult to motivate such workers or to deal with poor performance and resistance. Conclusion Considering that Frederick Taylor has been out of work for nearly a century and in this time a noesis detonation has taken place, Taylors track record is extraordinary. If Taylor, Gantt, Gilbreth and Lillian were alive today would they be happy with what has become management thought? In the Authors pinion many of the d ifferent management styles all share certain quasi(prenominal) characteristics of scientific management and the Author believes that they would all find the total date movement quite acceptable. The Scientific management theories discussed above evolved from the needs of the away to manage mainly the labour force. The needs of the present in the up-to-the-minute economic climate may require similar recording of procedures as gnarly with time and motion studies during the Industrial Revolution in the past to check the workingss of Finance in Banking and related areas mainly facilitated by the IT Revolution. recline assured that changes in the past and the present and their successful colonization by scientific management will be replicated many times in the future and hopefully the resolutions will improve/maximise the comeback for the employer (stakeholder) and employee. In conclusion there is no single best system or style of management. The best solution is the one that is most fitting in relation to the particular needs of that organisation. Bibliography Bratton, J, (2007) Work and Organisational Behaviour, Basingstoke Palgrave Macmillan, .Dale, E. (1973) Management, Theory & Practice. bracing York McGraw-Hill. Griffin, R. (2009) fundamentals of Management. (5th Edition), USA South Western College Gunnigle, P, and Heraty, N. and Morley, M. J. , (2006). Human Resource Management in Ireland. (3rd Edition) Dublin, Gill & Macmillan. Taylor, F, (1947). Scientific Management . New York Harper Row. Tiernan, S. and Morley, M. and Foley, E. (2006). raw Management (3rd Edition) Dublin, Gill & MacmillanScientific Management enchantment this theory has do many positive contributions to management formula, there have also been negative implications. On a positive note, Taylorism has make an impact on the grounding of the 8 minute working day, minimum wage rates and incentive and indemnity schemes, and more importantly, highlighted management as an imp ortant area of study, allowing for other theorists to improve on, or provide alternative management theories in rejoinder to scientific management such as more worker oriented theories, that is to say behavioural management.Taylors ideals have however been under constant exam as managers highlight the shortfalls of scientific management. era the highly mechanical way of practice may lead to increased productivity, it essentially works by dehumanising workers and viewing them simply as an appendage of machinery. Caldari argues (2007 61) that Taylors ignorance of social considerations leads to conflict, low worker morale, and low trust between workers and neglect the ability for individualist creativity to provide a positive stimulus to the workplace.While Taylors theories have been subject to many disapprovals, scientific management has made an slavish contribution to modern management practice across the world. By placing strain on the management of workers, Taylor essent ially highlighted the importance of management theory and paved the way for further development on management as an important element of telephone circuit practices. Taylor created a way of replacing the speculation involved in the manufacturing process by replacing it with a scientific way of thinking, strict rules and procedures (Caldari 2007 58).This form of management practice allows managers to more efficiently control and direct their labour force and similarly it provides space for managers to superintend the workforce, and locate inefficiencies and sources of waste in the manufacturing process. As Parker and Ritson discuss (2005 1340), this allows managers to observe the labour force and ensure that take over work procedures are being followed and appropriate results are achieved. Thus, creating space for managers to correct these inefficiencies early in the manufacturing process and derogate waste, afterward maximising profits.Therefore, although Taylors contributio ns were considered controversial and even radical, his theory and dedication to management practice remains influential on contemporary business management, and he can be held responsible for laying the foundations for current strategic and taxonomical methods of planning and execution of tasks (Darmody, 2007 1). Regardless of the do goods that may be gained from scientific work practices, comment stemmed from the impression that Taylor had little concern with the psychology of workers.Taylors face for a healthy and efficient workforce however, stemmed from research conducted on the relationship between long working hours and fatigue. Taylor was concerned with the import that working hours was having on productivity and upon results of such experiments, proceeded to introduce shorter working hours believe that with fewer hours comes higher efficiency, intensified laboured hours and improved employee wellbeing. It is upon this philosophy, that Nyl (1995 2) argues scientific man agement originally Taylors thinking was instrumental in creating the 8 hour working day of which is still implemented in many businesses today.In disrespect of the above mentioned interest in worker well-being, Caldari (2007 64) emphasises that Taylor naively fancied that with less, but more intense hours, increased productivity and wages, well being of workers would mechanically improve. However, due to the intensely standardised and restrictive rules and procedures that scientific management brings workers are likely to feel unappreciated leaving the door wanton to the latent of conflict between workers and managers. In this case, a strict line of subordination is seen to have connection with low worker morale as high productivity is achieved at a price.Caldari cites Marshall (2007 66) saying that trust, pry and nub for staff are a valuable business asset, of a amiable which machinery cannot achieve. This emphasis recognises one of the downfalls of scientific management in that it restricts the development of a cohesive team like workforce, rather restricting management focus to individuals. The constraints that are placed on individuals prevent any worker go-ahead and eventually depriving a business of capablenessly important and vital input from employees.As Caldari (2007) points out, managers can miss the opportunity of taking advantage of potential resources but also, and moreover, for society that it is likely to waste its more important benign of capital. (p. 67) With this impression in mind, although Freemans discussion (1996 2) focused earlier on the effect of scientific management in a Nipponese business environment, he makes some interesting observations about Taylors mechanical approach that can transcend cultural barriers. Freeman highlights that patch criticisms ofScientific management revolve around it being anti-worker, scientific management and democratic management (which pays closer attention to the psychology and respect for workers) do not necessarily have to conflict. It is held that while the needs of workers are of foremost importance, Taylors ideal of quality management allowed for drop-off in waste and increased production in Japanese business practices. In this context, scientific management was instrumental in improving efficiency and creating quality constraints, which ultimately lead to increased profits.Freeman highlights (1996 6) that by working with unions with an even handed focus on the interests of workers and productivity, business practice can bring a happy medium between scientific management and human relations in the management of business. This ideal emphasises that although some managers birdsong that there is no place in modern business practice for scientific management, it is possible for Taylors ideals to transcend time as managers change scientific theories and collaborate Taylors methods with other theorists that have followed in his steps.Taylors scientific managem ent has resulted in both positive and negative implications for business practice over the 20th and 21st century. We can see its contribution to modern business management in that many of its principles are still used today for example, minimum wage, rest periods and incentives for workers who reach a condition target.While these theories were originally implemented in businesses such as Henry carrefours car manufacturing, we can see that these processes glide by to benefit managers today both in that very resembling business, and in the same shipway in other industries including, and not limited to the hospitality attention where for example, diminutive procedures and rules are enforced by a strict line of supreme managers in a strict line of command at McDonalds or Hungry Jacks.It has been highlighted that although Taylors scientific management incorporates shortfalls with regards to the management of a workforce as far as viewing a workforce as valuable human resources ra ther than machinery, in todays management practices, elements of Taylors theory are able to work in juncture with often more palatable behavioural theories in order to control and monitor a successful workforce.Taylor was instrumental for creating a impudent picture of management thinking and the scientific management theory does, and will continue impart to influence the way businesses operate and complete day to day tasks and assignments (Darmody, 2007 1). Caldari, K. (2007). Alfred Marshalls critical analysis of scientific management. The European diary of the History of Economic Thought,14 (1), 55-78. Darmody, P. J. (2007). Henry L.Gantt and Frederick Taylor The Pioneers of Scientific Management. AACE International Transactions, 151. Davidson (2008) Management plaza Concepts and Skills in Management, John Wiley, Milton. Freeman, M. G. (1996) Dont throw scientific management out with the bathwater. _Quality Progress,_ 29(4), Parker, L. D. Ritson, P. (2005) Fads, stereotyp es and management gurus Fayol and Follett today. Management Decision, 43(10), 1335.Scientific ManagementCourse Bachelor of Business Studies (BBS) Module Principals of Management Title Explain Scientific Management. Comment on the contribution of this approach to the development of management thought. What are its limitations? 33 Submission Date 8th of March 2010 Word Count 2183 The Principal object of management should be to secure the maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled with the maximum prosperity for each employee (Taylor, 1947) Introduction The Author will discuss Scientific Management under the following headings Section 1 An explanation on Scientific Management.Section 2, The contribution of Scientific Management to the development of Management thought and Section 3 looks at the limitations of Scientific Management. What is Scientific Management? Bratton et al (2007 355) defines scientific management as a process of systematically partitioning work into its smallest elements and standardising tasks to achieve maximum efficiency. The scientific management approach was developed at the end of the 19th Century its father is commonly accepted to be Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856-1917) although some variations of the theory have been developed by Gantt and Gilbreth.The scientific management approach was set up to improve labour productivity by evaluating and setting up workflow practices. Taylor was Chief Engineer at the Midvale Steel Company his first-hand experience here led Taylor to recognise that labour productivity was largely inefficient due to a workforce that functioned by rules of thumb methods. In 1898 Taylor was employed as a consultant by the Bethlehem Steel works Company, where he applied his principles of scientific management through evaluating work in a scientific manner.Taylor gained this information with his Time and Motion Study, as Dale explains, Taylor employed a young man to analyse all the operations and the motions performe d in each and to time the motions with a stopwatch. From knowing how long it took actually to perform each of the elements in each job, it would be possible To determine a really fair days work. (Dale 1963, p155) Taylors experience at Bethlehem Steel led him to develop four principals of management. The first being substitute rule of thumb work processes with processes based on a scientific study of the tasks.Taylor broke down each part of the production process into individual tasks to accomplish task specialisation. Taylor also used time and motion studies to establish the most proficient technique for performing each work task and giving rest periods. Secondly, managers should select, train, teach and develop the most suitable person for each job. Taylor hated soldering, and by introducing a piece-rate system of pay he eliminated the group process in which workers slowed their speed of work to suit the ordinary workers needs.Thirdly, comprehensive training and supervision to eac h worker must be given by management to guarantee the job is done in a scientific way and finally scientific management principals need to be applied to the planning and supervising of work and the workforce complete the tasks. The Principals of scientific management were widely accepted and spread as far as the Soviet Union where Taylors principals were included into a variety of five-year development plans. The most well-known application of Taylors principals of scientific management was in Henry Fords Model T.Frank Gilbreth (1868 1924) and his wife Lillian (1878 1972), developed variations of Taylors scientific management, they were mostly concerned with the elimination of waste and like Taylor thought that a One Best Way to carry out a task could be found. Another contributor to scientific management was Henry Gantt (1856-1915) who was a protege of Taylors who designed the Gantt chart a straight line chart to display and measure planned and completed work as time elapsed. The contribution of Scientific Management to the development of Management thoughtScientific management does play an important role in the 21st Century. Examples of scientific management can be seen in our car and computer industries, the hospitals and the restaurants we eat in and nearly all function more efficiently due to scientific management. In todays economic environment scientific management is probably more important in todays businesses then ever before. The Author will discuss this under the following headings Scientific Study of work, use of incentives, division of labour and the selection and training of workers. Scientific Study of workThe fundamental tools that result in increased productivity are time study standards and work design. For example in the production department of any company materials are requested and controlled the sequence of operations, inspections, and methods are determined tools are ordered time values are assigned work is scheduled, dispatched and f ollowed up. A good example of scientific management in todays society is any of the directory enquires numbers, staff read from a script and simple ask what number you want and then a computer reads out the number and even asks if you would like to be connected.Use of incentives According to Taylor workers were only motivated by money, in todays workplace Taylors piece rate pay may have a different name performance related pay is how its new trading name and most of the Multi International companies now pay their workers a very basic pay and only rewards staff who excel at there jobs. According to Taylor one should pay the worker, not the job. In the Authors organisation Eircom all staff from the lines engineers to the managers are all paid by performance and this has helped to eliminate a lot of the soldiering that used to take place.Division of Labour Scientific management gives managers control and this can be seen in many of our call centres whether its directory enquires or cal ling the bank thank you for calling and how may I direct your call? these scripts show us 21st Century management control. Management see these scripts as necessary to keep workers efficient and consistent but it is just modern day Taylorism which assumes that workers are dim and lazy. Selection and training of workers Finding the best person for the job is still a challenge for many companies.Many companies now use automated curriculum vitae processing by computers with scientific personality testing to try and match the job to the right person. Employers are looking for employees to work hard, be flexible and to be skilled. It is imperative to get the right people, with the right skills in the right positions and at the right time. Choosing the right people may increase an organisations competitive advantage which is after all central to competitive success of any organisation. Limitations of scientific management Scientific management has been in a state of constant evolution si nce its adoption.The objective of the scientific management movement was to increase efficiency by carefully planning workers movement in the most efficient way. Taylors ideas and those of his followers led to time-and-motion experts with their stopwatches and clipboards observing workers, and seeking the one best way in which every job could be performed. From the late 1920s, a human relations school of thought emerged, challenging Taylorist beliefs in formal work structures and what was considered to be the over-simplification of the concept of motivation.Scientific Management was based on the assumption that workers were driven entirely by economic concerns but Human Relations researchers examined the behaviour of people at work and argued that social factors such as informal work groups and management styles influenced performance. As a result, the personnel management function began to focus on matching the needs of employees with those of management, through the creation of in formal structures and managerial styles (Gormley 2009).The Hawthorne Studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues are exemplary early studies in this tradition and work on motivation by Abraham Maslow although their ideas were built on the original quantitative theories of measuring work as seen in scientific management they also discovered some of the limitations of Taylorism. The Author will now discuss the limitations of scientific management as discovered by Mayo, Maslow and Deming. Elton Mayo and the Hawthorne StudiesThe Bank Wiring Observation Room Experiments which involved a group of men being observed in their natural work setting with no changes to their working conditions but with an observer taking notes and interviewing them. The group had set there own standards and restricted their output. They had decided what their daily limit was and what constituted as a fair days work and this was not to be exceeded by any worker. The results showed Mayo that workers were d issatisfied with the scientific approach. Mayos results placed focus on the social context of work in particular, worker motivation, group dynamics and group relations.The workers were joined in there opposition to management and were not motivated by the financial incentives offered for higher output. Data gathered at the Hawthorne plant (collectively known as The Hawthorne studies) suggested a positive association between labour productivity and management styles. Abraham Maslow (Maslows Hierarchy of Needs) Maslow was concerned with the issue of employee motivation and wanted to explain how workers could be motivated to achieve higher performance. Maslow focused on the paternalistic style of management focusing on employees social needs as the key to better relations and better erformance. This became known as Maslows hierarchy of needs, the needs which Maslow identified started with Physiological needs food and shelter Safety needs the need to feel secure Acceptance needs t he need to feel accepted by others Esteem needs the need for self respect Self Actualisation the need for self achievement and fulfilment W. Deming and Total Quality Management Total quality management (TQM) sees quality as a key to organisational success and emphasizes prevention rather than the correction of mistakes.In the Authors opinion TQM is probably the modern day Taylorism the four principals of TQM are. Plan Prepare and plan in a structured way by learning from the past and setting benchmarks for change. Do If your goal is far-reaching, start small and evaluate your results before going wider. Study Analyze the results of what you have done and find out how to apply what you have learned to future activities. Act Do what you need to do to make your process better and easier to replicate In Demings 14 point management plan, Deming wanted everything to be uniform , in delivery times , prices and work practices. . Create constancy of purpose towards improvement. Replace short-term reaction with long-term planning. 2. Adopt the new philosophy. The implication is that management should actually adopt his philosophy, rather than merely expect the workforce to do so. 3. Cease dependence on inspection. If variation is reduced, there is no need to inspect manufactured items for defects, because there wont be any. 4. Move towards a single supplier for any one item. 5. Improve constantly and forever. Constantly strive to reduce variation. 6. Institute training on the job.If people are inadequately trained, they will not all work the same way, and this will introduce variation. 7. Institute leadership. Deming makes a distinction between leadership and mere supervision. 8. Drive out fear. Deming sees management by fear as counter- productive in the long term, because it prevents workers from acting in the organisations best interests. 9. Break down barriers between departments. Another idea central to TQM is the concept of the internal customer, that each de partment serves not the management, but the other departments that use its outputs. 10. Eliminate slogans.Another central TQM idea is that its not people who make most mistakes its the process they are working within. Harassing the workforce without improving the processes they use is counter-productive. 11. Eliminate management by objectives. Deming saw production targets as encouraging the delivery of poor-quality goods. 12. Remove barriers to pride of workmanship. Many of the other problems outlined reduce worker satisfaction. 13. Institute education and self-improvement. 14. The transformation is everyones job. Each of these management models teaches us something about the limitations of scientific management.Scientific Management is often associated with negative consequences both for workers, who may consider themselves to be victims of exploitation and for managers, who may find it difficult to motivate such workers or to deal with poor performance and resistance. Conclusion Considering that Frederick Taylor has been dead for nearly a century and in this time a knowledge explosion has taken place, Taylors track record is extraordinary. If Taylor, Gantt, Gilbreth and Lillian were alive today would they be happy with what has become management thought? In the Authors pinion many of the different management styles all share certain similar characteristics of scientific management and the Author believes that they would all find the total participation movement quite acceptable. The Scientific management theories discussed above evolved from the needs of the past to manage mainly the labour force. The needs of the present in the current economic climate may require similar recording of procedures as involved with time and motion studies during the Industrial Revolution in the past to regulate the workings of Finance in Banking and related areas mainly facilitated by the IT Revolution.Rest assured that changes in the past and the present and their successfu l resolution by scientific management will be replicated many times in the future and hopefully the resolutions will improve/maximise the return for the employer (stakeholder) and employee. In conclusion there is no single best strategy or style of management. The best solution is the one that is most fitting in relation to the particular needs of that organisation. Bibliography Bratton, J, (2007) Work and Organisational Behaviour, Basingstoke Palgrave Macmillan, .Dale, E. (1973) Management, Theory & Practice. New York McGraw-Hill. Griffin, R. (2009) Fundamentals of Management. (5th Edition), USA South Western College Gunnigle, P, and Heraty, N. and Morley, M. J. , (2006). Human Resource Management in Ireland. (3rd Edition) Dublin, Gill & Macmillan. Taylor, F, (1947). Scientific Management . New York Harper Row. Tiernan, S. and Morley, M. and Foley, E. (2006). Modern Management (3rd Edition) Dublin, Gill & MacmillanScientific ManagementWhile this theory has made many positive contri butions to management practice, there have also been negative implications. On a positive note, Taylorism has made an impact on the introduction of the 8 hour working day, minimum wage rates and incentive and bonus schemes, and more importantly, highlighted management as an important area of study, allowing for other theorists to improve on, or provide alternative management theories in response to scientific management such as more worker orientated theories, namely behavioural management.Taylors ideals have however been under constant scrutiny as managers highlight the shortfalls of scientific management. While the highly mechanistic way of practice may lead to increased productivity, it essentially works by dehumanising workers and viewing them simply as an appendage of machinery. Caldari argues (2007 61) that Taylors ignorance of social considerations leads to conflict, low worker morale, and low trust between workers and neglect the ability for individual creativity to provide a positive input to the workplace.While Taylors theories have been subject to many criticisms, scientific management has made an instrumental contribution to modern management practice across the world. By placing emphasis on the management of workers, Taylor essentially highlighted the importance of management theory and paved the way for further development on management as an important element of business practices. Taylor created a way of replacing the guesswork involved in the manufacturing process by replacing it with a scientific way of thinking, strict rules and procedures (Caldari 2007 58).This form of management practice allows managers to more efficiently control and direct their labour force and similarly it provides space for managers to monitor the workforce, and identify inefficiencies and sources of waste in the manufacturing process. As Parker and Ritson discuss (2005 1340), this allows managers to observe the labour force and ensure that appropriate work procedure s are being followed and appropriate results are achieved. Thus, creating space for managers to correct these inefficiencies early in the manufacturing process and minimise waste, subsequently maximising profits.Therefore, although Taylors contributions were considered controversial and even radical, his theory and dedication to management practice remains influential on contemporary business management, and he can be held responsible for laying the foundations for current strategic and systematic methods of planning and execution of tasks (Darmody, 2007 1). Regardless of the benefits that may be gained from scientific work practices, criticism stemmed from the impression that Taylor had little concern with the psychology of workers.Taylors search for a healthy and efficient workforce however, stemmed from research conducted on the relationship between long working hours and fatigue. Taylor was concerned with the effect that working hours was having on productivity and upon results of such experiments, proceeded to introduce shorter working hours believing that with fewer hours comes higher efficiency, intensified laboured hours and improved employee wellbeing. It is upon this philosophy, that Nyl (1995 2) argues scientific management primarily Taylors thinking was instrumental in creating the 8 hour working day of which is still implemented in many businesses today.In despite of the above mentioned interest in worker well-being, Caldari (2007 64) emphasises that Taylor naively assumed that with less, but more intense hours, increased productivity and wages, well being of workers would automatically improve. However, due to the intensely standardised and restrictive rules and procedures that scientific management brings workers are likely to feel unappreciated leaving the door open to the potential of conflict between workers and managers. In this case, a strict line of command is seen to have connection with low worker morale as high productivity is achieved at a price.Caldari cites Marshall (2007 66) saying that trust, esteem and affection for staff are a valuable business asset, of a kind which machinery cannot achieve. This emphasis recognises one of the downfalls of scientific management in that it restricts the development of a cohesive team like workforce, rather restricting management focus to individuals. The constraints that are placed on individuals prevent any worker initiative and eventually depriving a business of potentially important and vital input from employees.As Caldari (2007) points out, managers can miss the opportunity of taking advantage of potential resources but also, and moreover, for society that it is likely to waste its more important kind of capital. (p. 67) With this impression in mind, although Freemans discussion (1996 2) focused primarily on the effect of scientific management in a Japanese business environment, he makes some interesting observations about Taylors mechanistic approach that can transc end cultural barriers. Freeman highlights that while criticisms ofScientific management revolve around it being anti-worker, scientific management and democratic management (which pays closer attention to the psychology and respect for workers) do not necessarily have to conflict. It is held that while the needs of workers are of foremost importance, Taylors ideal of quality management allowed for reduction in waste and increased production in Japanese business practices. In this context, scientific management was instrumental in improving efficiency and creating quality constraints, which ultimately lead to increased profits.Freeman highlights (1996 6) that by working with unions with an even handed focus on the interests of workers and productivity, business practice can meet a happy medium between scientific management and human relations in the management of business. This ideal emphasises that although some managers claim that there is no place in modern business practice for s cientific management, it is possible for Taylors ideals to transcend time as managers adapt scientific theories and collaborate Taylors methods with other theorists that have followed in his steps.Taylors scientific management has resulted in both positive and negative implications for business practice over the 20th and 21st century. We can see its contribution to modern business management in that many of its principles are still used today for example, minimum wage, rest periods and incentives for workers who reach a specified target.While these theories were originally implemented in businesses such as Henry Fords car manufacturing, we can see that these processes continue to benefit managers today both in that very same business, and in the same ways in other industries including, and not limited to the hospitality industry where for example, detailed procedures and rules are enforced by a strict line of autocratic managers in a strict line of command at McDonalds or Hungry Jac ks.It has been highlighted that although Taylors scientific management incorporates shortfalls with regards to the management of a workforce as far as viewing a workforce as valuable human resources rather than machinery, in todays management practices, elements of Taylors theory are able to work in conjunction with often more palatable behavioural theories in order to control and monitor a successful workforce.Taylor was instrumental for creating a new paradigm of management thinking and the scientific management theory does, and will continue impart to influence the way businesses operate and complete day to day tasks and assignments (Darmody, 2007 1). Caldari, K. (2007). Alfred Marshalls critical analysis of scientific management. The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought,14 (1), 55-78. Darmody, P. J. (2007). Henry L.Gantt and Frederick Taylor The Pioneers of Scientific Management. AACE International Transactions, 151. Davidson (2008) Management Core Concepts and Skills in Management, John Wiley, Milton. Freeman, M. G. (1996) Dont throw scientific management out with the bathwater. _Quality Progress,_ 29(4), Parker, L. D. Ritson, P. (2005) Fads, stereotypes and management gurus Fayol and Follett today. Management Decision, 43(10), 1335.