Comparative Analysis of Scientific Management, Human Relations, and Human Resource Approaches

The study of human resource management focuses on the maintenance of the workforce to increase productivity. The concept of human resource management has been evolved over time. Certain fundamental approaches have been designed for the better application of human resource management within the work culture. The evolution of human resource management has been pursued by three major approaches: scientific management approach, human relations approach, and human resource approach. In the subsequent studies, the paper critically evaluates the comparative concept of the three management approaches.  

Scientific Management Approach: 

The scientific approach plays the role of vitality for the management of the workplace. The origin of scientific management is traced to the early 1900s by Frederick Taylor. The practices of the scientific management approach are concentrated in the development of work efficiency. The theory objectifies the significance of profitability which is driven by employee productivity. The scientific management approach logically distinguishes the efficiency of labours based on knowledge and skill. To improvise the profitability margin, it allows termination of unskilled labours. It enhances the competitive rivalry approach within the workforce (Turan 2015). Though scientific management theory does not promote the growth of work culture compatibility, it strengthens the productivity of the organizations by incentivizing employees. In simplest diction, the scientific management approach considers employees as machines to be fueled by money to increase productivity.     

Human Relations Approach:

The scientific management approach has ignored the benefits of employee satisfaction which has triggered the innovation of the human relations approach. The framework of the human relations approach conserves the fact money does not play the role of a key motivator in employee satisfaction. Ceratin organizational and social factors, like recognition, collaboration, relationship with leaders, working hours flexibility, encourage employee involvement. The theory has been tailored during the prolongation of world War II by Elton Mayo, Mary Parker Follett, and Chester Barnard. The approach denies the dehumanistic aspect of the scientific management approach. The approach prominently focuses on the requirements of the employees. Unlike the competitive approach of scientific management, it enhances and fosters a supportive workplace culture (lardbucket.org 2012).    

Human Resource Approach: 

The modernistic approach of human resource management has aimed to prospect the concoction of organizational goals and individual goals. It nourishes the intellect and excellence of employees to captivate them as the core of the industry. The human resource approach enlists an array of benefits that increase the enthusiasm and working interest of the employees which eminently enrich the productive growth of the organization (Bratton and Gold 2017). Consideration of this approach reflects the progressive advancement of the organizational culture. Unlike, the robotic employment approach of scientific management is shattered by the flairs of human resource management. The approach designs a performative workplace that ensures that employees must learn regarding the objectives of the organization while working. Additionally, the approach sustains the virtue of external motivational factors of the human relations approach. The human resource approach provides recognition, health benefits, compensation, appraisal which motivate employees to improvise their performance and captivate profitability for the organization (Akafo and Boateng 2015).  

Conclusion: 

To sum up, it can be said that, the organizational perspective on the management of employees and utilization of them as resources have been transformed focusing on the basic requirements of human rights. While scientific management theory focuses on organizational achievement, the human resource approach cultivates the industrial goals as well as organizational goals. However, the scientific management theory captures the highest productivity which provides strength to the organization during the initial period. The emergence of the human relations approach shows the inclination of management theories towards employee involvement and satisfaction. The paper has coherently illustrated the comparative analysis of the approaches.

References: 

Akafo, V. and Boateng, P.A., 2015. Impact of reward and recognition on job satisfaction and motivation. European Journal of Business and Management, 7(24), pp.112-124.

Bratton, J. and Gold, J., 2017. Human resource management: theory and practice. Palgrave.

hbr.org , 2020 Human Relations or Human Resources https://hbr.org/1965/07/human-relations-or-human-resources  

lardbucket.org, 2012. Human Relations Theories  https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/an-introduction-to-organizational-communication/s05-02-human-relations-theories.html  

Turan, H., 2015. Taylor’s “scientific management principles”: Contemporary issues in personnel selection period. Journal of economics, business and management, 3(11), pp.1102-1105.