Management Theories - Taylor's Scientific Management Theory And Fayol's Management Theory

Taylor’s Scientific Management Theory

Part A: Individual Reflective Learning (15%)

1. Choose a specific incident from your life where you have used the four primary management functions of Planning, Organising, Leadership and Controlling.
2. Analyse the incident and describe the main areas where you used each of these 4 management functions. Reflect on how effective your management of this task/incident was and which areas you would change if you had the opportunity to manage the same thing again and why

You should draw on concepts covered in the course and use the following headings to present your review:

Selected Incident: Provide a very brief description of a specific incident that you have managed using the 4 primary POLC functions. Outline the problem clearly so that you set the scene for your reader and provide a basis for your analysis, but don’t go into excessive detail. It is important to have a clearly focused starting point for any analytical piece of work.

Analysis: Break down the task and identify elements of it that fit into each of the management functions (POLC). Clearly explain what those elements are and why you believe they belong to a particular management function.

Critical Evaluation: Reflect on your analysis and determine whether your approach was effective. Identify possible alternative actions or strategies that you could have taken and why and whether or not you think they would have been more effective.

You should draw on concepts covered in the course and use the following headings to present your review:

Selected Incident: Provide a very brief description of a specific incident that you have managed using the 4 primary POLC functions. Outline the problem clearly so that you set the scene for your reader and provide a basis for your analysis, but don’t go into excessive detail. It is important to have a clearly focused starting point for any analytical piece of work.

Analysis: Break down the task and identify elements of it that fit into each of the management functions (POLC). Clearly explain what those elements are and why you believe they belong to a particular management function.

Critical Evaluation: Reflect on your analysis and determine whether your approach was effective. Identify possible alternative actions or strategies that you could have taken and why and whether or not you think they would have been more effective.

PART B:

Choose 2 of the management theories covered in lecture 2 “Evolution of Management Thinking”. Briefly describe the theory and identify its strengths and limitations.
1. For each of the theories you have selected, either

a) choose a well-known organisation for whom the theory is still relevant and utilised to some extent today, providing evidence to support your selection.
OR
b) choose a well-known organisation which contradicts the theory and provide evidence to explain why you believe this to be the case.
 

Taylor’s Scientific Management Theory

Contribution from Student 1

Management theories are generally the set of rules required by the leader or mangers to guide the organization (Bird and Mendenhall 2016). Theories helps in assisting the employees to relate with the business goals effectively and furthermore implementing various effective means to achieve the desired result. The two management theories are as follows:

Taylor’s scientific management theory is related with the management that is utilized for investigating and blending workflow of the organization. The major function of scientific management theory is to increase the labor productivity and furthermore enhance the economic efficiency and labor productivity (Meyers and van Woerkom 2014).  The techniques of this theory are applied in the organization, where repetitive tasks are achieved.

Taylor management theory was incorporated by Henry Ford, for his world reputed automobile industry popularly known as Fords and based on the principles the workers proved to be more productive in their assigned tasks as it suited their strengths and capabilities.

Enhanced production: scientific management theory leads to the enhanced production responsible for the improvement of the business operations. This leads in maintaining harmonious relationship between workers and manager of Ford.

Quick decision making- this management theory helps in making quick decision for the organization.

Pay system- in this theory piece work pay system is followed, to provide maximum wages to the employees with higher productivity (Ranjan 2017). This incentives plan also provides maximum wages to the efficient workers in Ford Company.

Efficient use of resources:the scientific techniques provide better utilization of resources and lead to raising the productivity through technological developments.

Requires huge capital: this theory is costly and requires huge capital for standardization and training their employees in the organization.

No bargaining: the scientific approach generally follows piece work system; hence there is no scope for bargaining.

Time consuming: scientific management theory is time consuming as the theory when adopted in an organization needs more time for specialization and standardization. 

Contribution from student 2

The assembly line process following the management theory helped Ford in producing cars at a more affordable rate and very quickly. The change in the assembly line through Taylor’s management techniques resulted in a huge market demand for their automobiles in the industry (Ford.com 2018). Taylor’s management theory has gain recognition all across the world.  The managers present in the factories are now considering the relevance of social welfare of their factory workers. This has thus strengthened the employee relationship in the factory. Moreover, this has also brought reliance and team spirit within the workers for gaining common objectives. Organizations are applying the scientific methods to solve any arising issues through rule of thumbs. In the current scenario, Taylor’s management theory is applied by various organizations as the principles have enabled to integrate social aspects for the workers into the principles.  

Advantages of Taylor’s Scientific Management Theory

As the theory follows piece rate system, therefore the workers are under unnecessary pressures to perform their work faster, which is leading to the exploitation of the factory workers (Gafiyatullina et al. 2015). Taylor has put more emphasis in separating the planning from actions. It is recommended that the managers should plan and contribute engaging in doing. The manager will be able to make more realistic plans for their factory.

Henry Fayol’s Management theory: this model of management describes how the organization interacts with their personnel. In the current scenario, the business communities regard Fayol’s classical management theory as an important guide for productively managing the staff (Carraher 2015). This theory involves with the interactions of the public through its 14 main principle that includes Planning, organizing, coordinating and controlling. . KFC, which is one of the fast food chain restaurants, follows the Fayol principles of management.

In the recent times, where the analysis has this theory helps in increasing the efficiency within the organizational structure. The primary managerial functions includes discipline, authority, division of work, centralization, equity and stability KFC changes their organizational structure after practicing the Fayol management principles to increase their efficiency. Fayol’s principle of management lays more emphasis on the management of organizational structure through forecasting, planning, controlling and monitoring (Kapur 2016). Monitoring helps the manager of the KFC to provide feedback so that necessary changes are made for its better application in future.

The control and command coming from the Fayol’s theory made by the higher authority is director in the organization but the information should reach all the parts of the organization so that the employees in KFCs can perform their task efficiently. The theory is still based on humans and it is natural for them to make mistakes to form unity which is based on the strong management team.  This theory gives emphasis on creating harmony in the workplace for creating a strong workforce so when mistakes is caused or any error occurs in the organization the whole organizations gets affected.

According to the Fayol principle of management, authority and responsibility goes side by side. It is seen that the employees have both authority and responsibility for the work entrusted to them and the principle is implemented properly in the organization. The KFCs employees’ commitment is violated as they are not practicing business ethics and not conducting their job honestly. The customers are bad mouthing giving a negative review for the company (Benjamin et al. 2104). Moreover, the shift manager of the KFC responded that they are commanded by more than one boss and unity of command is not being followed in the organization (Kfc.com 2018). Through the company’s analysis it is also known that Fayol principle are practiced as employee’s opinion were given importance to an extent increasing their confidence level.

As the technology and globalization is increasing at a rapid rate, the organization has more uncertainties and very low stability. The values related to these principles of Fayol should be a stabilizing force in the modern workplace.  KFC employees should give more emphasis on the general interest of the company over the individual interest for the organization. Though the organization practices the Fayol principle of management major emphasis should be given on the maximization of labour productivity as the rate of labour turnover is increasing at a rapid rate that would affect the growth of KFCs in the long run. 

References:

Benjamin, M., Sharma, S., Tawiah, V.K., Chandok, A. and John, M., 2014. Analytical Study of Management Skills for Peak Performance in Organizations. International Journal of Innovative Research and Development, 3(10).

Bird, A. and Mendenhall, M.E., 2016. From cross-cultural management to global leadership: Evolution and adaptation. Journal of World Business, 51(1), pp.115-126.

Carraher, S., 2015. Signaling intelligence, signaling theory, Project A, and excellent management history research. Journal of Management History, 21(2).

Ford.com 2018. Ford – New Cars, Trucks, SUVs, Crossovers & Hybrids | Vehicles Built Just for You‎ | Ford.com. [online] Ford.com. Available at: https://www.ford.com/ [Accessed 15 Jan. 2018].

Gafiyatullina, A.Z., Nikonova, T.V., Vagin, S.G., Kharisova, R.R., Pavlova, E.I., Khayrutdinov, R.R. and Ishmuradova, I.I., 2015. Organization of controlling the intellectual potential of company personnel. Review of European Studies, 7(4), p.13.

Gnanamkonda, V., 2015. Cases in Marketing Management. South Asian Journal of Management, 22(4), p.204.

Kapur, R., 2016. Managerial functions and job satisfaction within an organization. International Journal of Information, Business and Management, 8(4), p.317.

Kfc.com 2018. KFC: Finger Lickin’ Good. [online] KFC®: Finger Lickin’ Good®. Available at: https://www.kfc.com/ [Accessed 15 Jan. 2018].

Meyers, M.C. and van Woerkom, M., 2014. The influence of underlying philosophies on talent management: Theory, implications for practice, and research agenda. Journal of World Business, 49(2), pp.192-203.

Powers, E.L., 2014. Innovating our thinking about management: A new model. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 79(1), p.40.

Ranjan, P., 2017. Human Resource Management and Organizational Behaviour. Journal of HR, Organizational Behaviour & Entrepreneurship Development, 1(1), pp.8-12.

Samuel, D., Found, P. and Williams, S.J., 2015. How did the publication of the book The Machine That Changed The World change management thinking? Exploring 25 years of lean literature. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 35(10), pp.1386-1407.

Strand, R., 2015. Scandinavian stakeholder thinking: Seminal offerings from the late Juha Näsi. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(1), pp.89-105.