Analyzing Contributions: Scientific Management and Human Relations

This essay compares and contrasts the contributions of scientific management, founded by Frederick Winslow Taylor, and the human relations movement, pioneered by Elton Mayo, to modern management theory and practice. Scientific management emphasizes work optimization through scientific approaches, standardization, and incentives, while the human relations movement focuses on the importance of human relationships, teamwork, and social factors in enhancing productivity. The essay identifies the principles of each theory, highlights their similarities and differences, and argues that both theories contribute significantly to contemporary management by providing critical frameworks for improving work culture, employee motivation, and organizational effectiveness. The essay concludes that the choice between the two approaches depends on the specific situation and organizational needs, with scientific management being more suitable for systematic alignment and human relations being more beneficial for fostering positive employee relations.

P a g e | 1
‘Compare and contrast the contributions of scientific management and the human
relations movement to modern management theory and practice’.
In present epoch, there are various management theories and practices applied by
modern management to provide with effective business practices. Management practices
follows emerging trends in organisations which results in industrial revolution through which
people belonging to rural as well as urban places benefits through it. As said by F.W Taylor,
“Management is the art of knowing what you want to do and then seeing that it is done in the
best and cheapest way.” (Ali, 2014) There are many theories that not only help management
in organising workplaces but also assist in creating effective ways to mange people. Mayo’s
Human relation movement and Taylor’s scientific management theory are the two most
popular theories that are practiced in today’s organisation as they consist of all the desired
elements required for successful operations (Tanuja, n.d.). This essay will identify the
importance of both theories by focussing upon their features and finding out the reasons
behind their growing popularity among cotemporary management’s. This essay will compare
and contrast both the theories to find out which theory proves better in managing business
environment efficiently.
Scientific management was founded by Fredrick Winslow Taylor in nineteenth
century which instantly brought a revolution in labour market. Businesses and its
management were transferred immediately however, following it many criticisms were also
recognised in early twentieth century regarding inflexibility and inhuman work principles.
After it, many modern operational theories were developed who wanted to drop Taylors from
management practices (Taylor, 1911). However, Taylor’s principles still provide
management with strong base that makes scientific management theory indispensible part of

P a g e | 2
management practices. Taylor’s primary intention behind development of this theory was to
enhance work productivity through human for which he adopted scientific approach.
According to Taylor, work can be optimised by making regular inspection from management
side and adoption of technologies to achieve work efficiency (Su, 2017).
Human management, in earlier years were done through experiences gained by former
generations or with own knowledge. Work efficiency and control were maintained
improperly since there was no fixed principle to be followed. These made management
practices distorted and thus revolution was required extensively. In order to make things more
organised, Taylor introduced scientific management theory that made organisations realise
enhanced profits in shorter time period. Four major principles were laid in his theory in which
first principle stated that development of work related science is necessary and therefore,
Taylor summarised employee and work-related knowledge. According to his second
principle, referencing is required to be done for finding appropriate people for particular work
(Taylor, 1911). Under this principle, he developed training programs to bring development
among workers. Taylor also made staff recruitment layouts and made management’s clear
about delegation processes. Taylor believed in motivational factors that bring work efficiency
among employees and thus he introduced incentive in the form of payments and reward
structure. According to the third principle, cooperation between management and employees
shall be made to ensure that the work is carried according to the mentioned criteria. With his
third principle, organisations are able to recognise effective work models through which
organisational goals are considered by both, employers as well as workers. His fourth
principle specified that change shall be done according to business needs and employees as
well as management needs to participate in change process to bring effective transformation
from traditional practise to scientific approach. Previously people were responsible for their
part of duty but after implementing scientific management in their work practices, the duty of

P a g e | 3
individual’s were combined with each other and thus more integrated form of work place was
created (Dogan, 2011).
Human relation movement of Elton Mayo was commenced during 1930’s in
Hawthorne plant. Under this theory, more emphasis was given upon human working
conditions to bring work efficiency. Mayo made two classified groups according to their
work levels that made clarification for working groups. Many authors further criticised
Mayo’s principle as his theory lacked mentioning the process of group classification and
conditions in which clarifications shall be made. According to human relation movement,
work force simulation can be increased by other non economical factors also and thus his
theory focused more on human relationships rather than evaluating them in terms of money.
Mayo also supported team work and cooperation between management and workers through
building of socially developed relations (Worren et al., 2002). External as well as internal
communications affects social relationships for which businesses needs to maintain friendly
relation with outside world also. Through it, entire workforce gets motivated as employees
get inter connected to achieve organisational effectiveness and peace in workplace.
Developed and integrated team formation was main motive of human relation movement that
protested against dictatorial relationship between workers and employers. Through human
activities and humanitarian atmosphere, organisations could gain advantage by enhanced
work productivity. However, this theory also came with a drawback as this theory made
organisations change its work principle entirely. This theory focussed more on human and
workers whereas industrial productivity was made tributary. Since it was a new concept then,
managers needed to be trained according to new business practice and thus became time
consuming process during its application (Rose, 2005).
There are few differences between two theories. Scientific management theory treated
people in more robotic manner while Mayo’s entire focus was made in building human

P a g e | 4
relationship. Taylor introduced incentive and reward programs to bring motivation among
employees but Mayo’s theory believed that organisational productivity is determined by
building human relation and not by other economical or technological innovations. Mayo
believed that employee relation is the sole reason behind increased productivity and
motivation in them and thus relationships shall be given more preference. Another difference
identified is that scientific management theory made workers work under certain parameter
and human resource departments are supposed to monitor and ensure that the work is carried
in scientific manner. However Taylor encouraged employee participation here for providing
work related information to other seniors in work place and thus allowed involvement of
HRM with employees in decision making. Last difference identified is that scientific
management encouraged on working as an individual in which they are made responsible for
particular work whereas human relation movement totally depends on team performance and
sound relationship among human (Dam & Marcus, 2012).
Both scientific management and human relation movement is extensively used in
today’s contemporary management as they contributes management practices with critical
work frames. Both theories have got few similarities also as both the theories primary
consideration is to increase work productivity. Both theories also focus of workers
improvement and provides with best suited ways. Again, motivational and integration
principles in theories also shows similarity between them that makes difficult for present
organisation in making choices between them. The principles laid in both theories made
employees more dedicated towards their duty and workplace due to which utmost output can
be realised. While Taylor assigned duties to employees according to their capabilities, Mayo
encouraged working in groups. Under motivational principle, Taylor made incentive and
reward system while Mayo believed more on making human relationship and other non-
economical factors. However, the basic fundamental behind both theories is to deliver

P a g e | 5
effective workforce along with making employees motivated and dedicated towards firm.
Therefore, it can be said that both the theories contribute equally for bringing effectiveness in
outputs for which modern management adopts them in their work practices (Laegaard &
Bindslev, 2006).
Since management of firms are responsible for bringing success of in it, making a
choice between scientific and human relation movement can be done as per situation. Both
the theories verify to be applicable in contemporary management practice as they enhance
work culture of organisations along with fulfilling the desired guidelines for effective
management. Since scientific management is based more on strict regulations, it can make
management more systematic. The amputation of traditional management practice can
improve work culture by applying scientific approach in management practices. On the other
hand, human relation movement highlights more upon workers relation with management and
improving work environment through employee participation with management. The basic
dissimilarity between both theories is that their work principles differ from each other along
with ensuing different styles in motivation among employees of organisations.
According to present business needs, employees’ satisfaction does not remain limited
in gaining motivation through relationships only but, providing them with other social needs
also becomes crucial for companies. Living standards of people have changed and thus
organisations have started focussing more on providing them with necessary elements so that
workers does not get restrained from their job. The above mentioned theories contains all the
necessary principles applicable in present business management’s and therefore are
considered by management schools for its application. Since scientific management
concentrates more on systematic alignment of work rules, it can be applied in higher levels of
organisational managements whereas human relation movement can prove beneficial in those
areas where dealing with factory workers and other petty works is pertinent. Moreover, after

P a g e | 6
classifying similarities and differences between both the theories it can be said that they
contribute equally to modern management theory and practices and shall remain reliable
management practices in future also.

P a g e | 7
References
Ali, S.M.S.A., 2014. Management Theory and Practice. Mumbai.
Dam, N.v. & Marcus, J., 2012. Organisation and Management; An International Approach.
Netherlands.
Dogan, M.C.a.E., 2011. A Theoretical Approach to the Science of Management.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 01(03), pp.65-69. Available at:
http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol._1_No._3;_March_2011/10.pdf [Accessed 25 May
2018].
Laegaard, J. & Bindslev, M., 2006. Organisational Theory. Ventus Publisher.
Rose, N., 2005. Human Relations Theory and People Management. [Online] Available at:
https://www.corwin.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/9805_039184ch02.pdf [Accessed 25
May 2018].
Su, Y., 2017. Taylor Scientific Management Theory Carding and Significance of
Organization Management. Social Sciences, 06(04), pp.102-07.
Tanuja, n.d. Classification of Management Theories: 4 Schools of Thought. [Online]
Available at: http://www.businessmanagementideas.com/management/theories-
management/classification-of-management-theories-4-schools-of-thought/4679 [Accessed 25
May 2018].
Taylor, F.W., 1911. The Principles of Scientific Management. [Online] Available at:
http://la.utexas.edu/users/hcleaver/330T/350kPEETaylorSciManTable.pdf [Accessed 25 May
2018].

P a g e | 8
Worren, N., Moore, K. & Elliot, R., 2002. Human Relations. [Online] Available at:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.137.9041&rep=rep1&type=pdf
[Accessed 25 May 2018].