Taylor’s Scientific Management theory

Centre for English Language Education 2020-21
1
UG-ESAC Arts & Social Sciences
Coursework
2020-2021 Semester 2
Independent Writing Assignment
International Business
Critically evaluate Taylor’s Scientific Management
theory.
Student Name: Huanxin Ying
ID 20320208
Module code: CELEN051

Centre for English Language Education 2020-21
2
Scientific Management theory, proposed by Frederick Taylor, is a managing method
that aims at maximizing benefit. According to Taylor (1911), the fundamental
purpose of management is to improve efficiency. Taylor put forward five principles:
the work quota principle, the ability to adapt to the work principle, the
standardization principle, the differential piecework pay system, the planning and
execution separation principle (Taylor, 1911). Taylor's appeal was his promise that
management could become a science and workers could become cogs in the
industrial machine (Stefanova, 2015). The theory has been applied in some
factories at that time and has a profound influence today. It can be observed that
Taylor’s theory is still applied in managing organizations. This essay will critically
evaluate Taylor’s scientific management theory and argue that while it may be
applicable in some labor-intensive industry, it can still bring many problems in
terms of worker satisfaction, workers’ mental health and organization efficiency.
This essay will first explore the argument which supports that Taylor’s theory could
increase efficiency to some degree. Then it will demonstrate three main problems
that Taylor’s scientific management can bring about, which is the neglect of
humanity, the stress caused by shortening working hours and the chaos from the
organization structure-system of functional foreman.
It has been claimed that Taylor’s Scientific Management theory can improve
efficiency and productivity. Taylor (1911) claims that the fundamental reason for
the waste of human resources is unscientific management. Too much attention
was paid to the output of work instead of the process (Freedman, 1992).
Therefore, Taylor made research on each step of the task. He brought with
notebooks and stopwatches to find some more suitable methods as well as
machines, which could significantly increase efficiency by increase output per
hour (O’Connor, 2017). At the same time, this effective way also changed the
original method of production based on experience. For example, Taylor once did
some experiences to find that with so many different-sized shovels, which one
could be the most productive that can lift 21 pounds of weight (O’Connor, 2017).
This experience was made in the Bethlehem Steel Company with 600 labourers
(O’Connor, 2017). It is undeniable that Taylorism can to some degree improve
efficiency and increase output by choosing some effective working methods and

Centre for English Language Education 2020-21
3
it provides a valuable management model for some enterprises. However, it is
partly wrong because Taylorism could only be applied in some specific industries.
According to Wright (1993), these techniques are limited to be applied in some
large companies in specific industries, such as the labor-intensive textile, clothing
and footwear industries. Taylorism could be applied to labor-intensive, semi-
skilled jobs which had already experienced substantial job fragmentation or were
initially organized on a semi-skilled basis (Wright, 1993). Taylorism may not be
suitable for the industries in today’s society because many labor-intensive jobs
have been replaced by robots. In other words, the scope of Taylorism's
application could be limited.
In addition to the usage limitation of Taylor’s Scientific Management theory,
another problem that it may bring about is the neglect of humanity. Taylor's
scheme is based on a tacit division of labor and the repetition of basic acts
(Caldari, 2007). Each operator must adhere to their orders and perform the
same task for many hours. Therefore, it is difficult to take advantage of their
initiative. Furthermore, the operator is reduced to a cog in the process, unable to
have decisions and choices (Marsgall, 1919, cited in Caldari, 2007). In Taylor's
plan, workers were highly likely to be appendages to the machine, designed to
maximize the employer's income (Caldari, 2007). Physical and mental activity
are isolated, resulting in monotonous work that lacks motivating self-expression
(Stefanova, 2015). Meanwhile, Taylor's scientific management theory treats
people as robots, simply focusing on technology instead of human factors and
ignoring human nature's needs, which is not conducive to improving employee
motivation and imaginative play. It is highly likely to have a serious impact on
society in the long run and obstructs the long-term growth of workers and
businesses. Taylor’s Scientific Management theory does not suit many of today's
companies. Stern (2015) claimed that some innovative and profitable firms have
stepped away from crude Taylorism and become more mature, allowing their
smart workers to think by themselves. The neglect of humanity may lead to the
difficult progress and development of enterprises. In conclusion, Taylor’s
scientific management theory neglect humanity and increase worker