CRITICAL REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT

Taylor’s Scientific Management (Taylorism) is based on induction and adopts a pragmatic and empiricist method, and its “there has to be a best way to do a certain job” principle has advanced among the others. This principle has inevitably reached to the time and motion study, the equation of employees with machines and finally automation and robot science. Although Taylor made great contributions to the management as a science, he received harsh criticisms as well (Turan, 2015)

Scientific management eliminated the need for skilled labor by delegating each employee one simple task to repeat over and over. Although this method increased the productivity of factories, it stripped employees their freedom to choose their work, as well as how it should be done. (Ireh, 2016). Scientific management, although stressed people post match, more focus on jobs, rather than people, each post have standardized operation process and method, the workers have to do is training well according to the standard operation procedure to finish work, but in today's knowledge economy era, the staff engaged in mental labour, have no fixed standardization process, practice of this management mode. Therefore, we should pay more attention to the role of human beings, formulate corresponding incentives, maximize the potential of people, and enhance the competitiveness of organizations (Su, 2017)

However Taylorism could also be seen as a management theory that analyzes work flows to improve economic efficiency, especially labor productivity. This management theory was dominant in manufacturing industries in the 1880s and 1890s. (Ioana et al., 2014). One of the best examples is the adoption of this theory in Ford company in 20^th century. After the adoption, the assembly-line process enabled Ford to produce cars more quickly, and at more affordable rates and by 1924, as a result of this advanced production methods, Ford had sold 10 million Model Ts. (Saylor, 2005)

In conclusion, at a time when labor was cheap, supplies were plentiful, and manufacturing processes were relatively forgiving of quality control issues, scientific management was a tremendous improvement over the old factory systems with its tyrannical foremen and rules of thumb (Koumparoulis & Vlachopoulioti, 2012) . However, it is known that progress relates to man’s qualities and that scientific management could not be considered, as a means for human betterment, in the long run. Criticism of scientific management is justified by the opinion that it could be a dangerous hindrance to progress (Caldari, 2007).  Is scientific management a perfect system? No. However, one cannot deny its contributions to society and measurement of efficiency  (Koumparoulis & Vlachopoulioti, 2012)

Reference list

Caldari, K., 2007. Alfred Marshall’s critical analysis of scientific management. The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 14(1), pp.74-75.

Ioana, A., Marinică, A., Semenescu, A. & Preda, C.F., 2014. Elements of Administrative Management Decision. International Journal of Management Science, 1(1), p.27.

Ireh, M., 2016. Scientific Management. Winston Salem.

Koumparoulis, D.N. & Vlachopoulioti, A., 2012. The Evolution of Scientific Management. Academic Research International, 3(2), p.425.

Saylor, 2005. Scientific Management Theory and the Ford Motor Company. The Saylor Foundation, pp.3-4.

Su, Y., 2017. Taylor Scientific Management Theory Carding and Significance of Organization Management. Social Sciences, 6(4), p.106.

Turan, H., 2015. Taylor’s “Scientific Management Principles”: Contemporary Issues in Personnel Selection Period. Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 3(11), p.1102.