Motivating Staff: A Comparison of Scientific Management Theory and Human Relation Theory

This article discusses the comparison of scientific management theory and human relation theory and recommends ways to adopt these theories in the organization to motivate staff.

Running Head: Motivating 0
Motivating Staff
1/28/2019

Motivating 1
Introduction
The organization success is based on how well the manager applies diverse approaches to
effectively manage their employee. The employee is considered as the main resource of the
organization in respect to their capabilities and productivity, which is valuable to the
organization. So, Taylor and Mayo have initiated a ‘scientific management theory and
Human relation theory to assist the manager to improve the productivity of the organization
(Witzel and Warner, 2015). In the following, an effort has been made to compare and contrast
these two theories and recommend ways in which an employer can apply the theories in the
organization.
Compare Scientific Management theory and Human Relation theory
The Scientific Management theory was imitated by Frederick Winslow Taylor with the
objective of decreasing lower cost and enhancing productivity. As per Taylor, it describes the
scientific theory as what you want men to do and then sees in that they do it in the effective
and efficient manner. Managing personnel is a significant task to the employer, as they will
try to direct the employee in the day-to-day operation of the organization. On the other hand,
the Human Relations theory was initiated by Elton Mayo with the objective of delivering the
significance of personnel for productivity but not machines. This theory was executed to
address the concern by scientific management theory. Human relation theory concentrates
personnel as a human being and should not be treated as machines. It is stated that Taylor
believes that incentives are utilized to induce employees while on the other hand, Mayo belief
that organizational productivity is achieved by the human relations and not by the
technological and economic condition in the organization (Waring, 2016).
In their perspective, if relationship and teamwork were effective then the personnel will be
more encouraged to their work and achieve productivity. The scientific management theory
connects employees to follow regulations while human relation theory motivates personnel to
engage in the decision making and safeguard relationship in the organization. The scientific
management theory is more close to the personnel while human relation theory is very open
to them incorporating in decision making. Taylor theory indicates to motivate personnel
individually, where they are allocated to achieve a particular task while Mayo theory
motivates working as a group to maintain an effective relationship in the organization.
However, this two theory i.e. human relation and scientific management theory were

Motivating 2
contradicting with each other as human relation theory is making effort to cover the issue
faced from scientific management (Uddin and Hossain, 2015).
Recommendation ways to adopt the theories
They should assign a task to an individual and permitting them to complete the task in an
adequate time. They should delegate the responsibilities in an effective way to achieve
success in the organization. They should manage productivity and reward the performance of
every person so that they can offer quality work and contribute to the growth and profitability
of the organization (O’Neill, 2017).
Conclusion
In conclusion, the success of the organization was based on employee productivity and
commitment. There are two theories that are discussed above, which are human relation
theory which stated that employees should be treated as human being and encourage them to
work cooperatively. The other one is Scientific Management theory describes as improving
the productivity of personnel and cutting the cost of labour. Therefore, there are some
differences between these two theories, which depend on motivating and apply these two
theories in the organization.

Motivating 3
References
O’Neill, C. (2017) Taylorism, the European science of work, and the quantified self at
work. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 42(4), pp.600-621.
Uddin, N. and Hossain, F. (2015) Evolution of modern management through Taylorism: An
adjustment of scientific management comprising behavioral science. Procedia Computer
Science, 62, pp.578-584.
Waring, S.P. (2016) Taylorism transformed: Scientific management theory since 1945.
U.S.A: UNC Press Books.
Witzel, M. and Warner, M. (2015) Taylorism revisited: Culture, management theory and
paradigm-shift. Journal of General Management, 40(3), pp.55-70.