Taylor and management
The traditional model of administration was fully formed by the 1920s and continued with remarkably little change for at least fifty years. The bureaucracy was supposed to be permanent and neutral; it was not engaged in policy or politics, but was an instrument of great power to be wielded by the politicians.
Although the theoretical foundations of bureaucracy and political control were firmly established and essentially unchanged, there were public sector adaptations of management theory.
All that was needed for a complete theory was a way of working, of organizing, to be added to the bureaucratic model of Weber, the political control of Wilson and the merit appointments and political neutrality of Northcote-Trevelyan.
The addition of scientific management ideas led to a complete model of administration and the twin ideas of the politics/administration dichotomy and Scientific Management, gave a form and purpose, a self-confidence to both the practice and the study of administration in the 1920s and 1930s .
Scientific management
Frederick Taylor is usually credited with formulating scientific management. There were two main points to Taylors theory: standardizing work, which meant finding the one best way of working and controlling so extensively and intensively as to provide for the maintenance of all these standards .
Scientific management involved:
(i) time-and-motion studies to decide a standard for working;
(ii) a wage-incentive system that was a modification of the piecework method already in existence;
(iii) changing the functional organization.
What Taylor sought was a fundamental change as efficiency and science replaced ad hoc decision-making, even a societal change as, through scientific management, the interests of employees and employers could be shown to be the same.
The factory assembly line was the main area influenced by Taylors ideas, but it was not long before scientific management was applied to governments. Enthusiasts thought the ideas could be applied to the public sector.
It is easy to see why the bureaucracy adopted scientific management. It offered a way of operationalizing the bureaucratic form of organization within government and it was Taylor and his followers who were major carriers of the bureaucratic model .
Scientific management fits very well with the theory of bureaucracy: the skills of the administrator, the compilation of manuals to cover every contingency, the advance of rationality, and impersonality are aspects of both.
The ideas of one best way and systematic control were a perfect fit with rigid hierarchy, process and precedent. Standardization of tasks and fitting workers to them was perfect for the traditional model of administration.
Taylor remains important for public administration, as his theory of scientific management became a key influence on what followed in the management of public and private sectors. Although particular points could be disputed – the crude theory of personal motivation, time-and-motion studies - the idea that management could be systematic remained important in the public sector and clearly fitted very well with the theory of bureaucracy.
Human relations
Another theory, human relations, is often contrasted with scientific management. The focus of human relations is more on the social context at work rather than regarding the worker as an automaton responsive only to financial incentives. The human relations school had its roots in social psychology, and although quite different in some respects, became as much of a continuing tradition in public administration as did scientific management.
Although the human relations idea has many theorists, the real founder was Elton Mayo. In a series of experiments during the 1930s, Mayo found that the social context of the work group was the most important factor in management.
In what became known as the Hawthorne experiments, Mayo found that productivity increased most by taking an interest in the workers, and other factors, including financial incentives, were much less important.
Mayo and his followers had substantial impact on the management of the public sector, Consideration of the psychological context of the organization was responsible for a major school of thought in theories of organizational behavior. The idea that individuals responded to other than financial motives led to an improvement in working conditions.
Mayo influenced those who thought management should be kinder to their workers and provide some kind of social interaction, including in government. Human relations theory has been important in the public context and its influence continues in the debate over managerialism.
Human relations theory was applied to a greater extent in the public sector. Public organizations had fewer competitive constraints than the private sector and, arguably, went further in introducing human relations, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s.
A continuing debate
The debate between scientific management and human relations is a continuing one. to regard the theories of Taylor and Mayo as mutually exclusive would be misleading. Like Taylor, Mayo did not favor unions or industrial democracy. Like Mayo, Taylor suggested the importance of cooperation in the work-place. The goal of both-increased productivity -was the same.
It was stated earlier that for most of the century Taylorism was a major influence on the public sector as it was on the private sector.
Taylor undoubtedly influenced job design. His
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
英语译文共 4 页，剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
资料编号：[254040]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word
原文和译文剩余内容已隐藏，您需要先支付 30元 才能查看原文和译文全部内容！立即支付
以上是毕业论文外文翻译，课题毕业论文、任务书、文献综述、开题报告、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。
