The purpose of this essay is to go over the two management philosophies from Taylor's and Henri Fayol's. One management theory is concentrate on activity while another is give attention to people. Both theories have made efforts in modern management procedures. We will discuss the theories and put together their efficiency and effectiveness in today's firms.
FW Taylor Philosophy
Taylor's management theory targets activity management. This theory is called "scientific management" or "Taylorism". He found that two different personnel performing the same task will have different outcome and the amount of output. He grouped them as first class employee and average employee (Sheldrake J, 2003a). The first class personnel are highly encouraged and work efficiently rather than losing time or restricting end result. They may be ideal works for most industries, but not all workers are first class workers, almost all of them are average staff. They only work slow-moving and easy before wages they receives a commission. As the result, it drives down the development efficiency, because staff are not motivated. Thus, Tayloer's process management develops the theory to show how to motivate workers toward a larger work performance and efficiency.
This theory is important to numerous industries firms; it can help those to using less time to increase more development efficiency. This management benefits firms create more end result while still paying reasonable wage to the employees. The aim because of this theory is to lessen inefficiency toward the output performance. Taylor recommended the income levels predicated on output which means the workers is only going to be paid by the amount of their productivity. The greater end result they produced, the more wage they can be paid. Thus, it drives their desire toward a better standard. It generally does not just increase the efficiency, but also reduce the working hours. You can find seven methods to improve the production in this theory. Choose the appreciated employees and observe them to execute the responsibilities. Then record the time taken for each activity and identify the quickest method. The last three are providing training, supervise employees to ensure the "easiest way" is completed and pay workers on the basis of results (Stimpson P & F. A, 2010).
In order to use Taylor's approaches, the duty has to be specialized, so staff don't have to be trained at all times and always under-supervised. However, Taylor's process management has two advantages and two drawbacks. Whenever we look at work specialization, it can raise the efficiency by using the minimal resources such as time or labor. This means that it's not helpful if the productivity is produced at the maximum outcome while waste many resources. Using minimum resources to create the maximum result escalates the work efficiency and also creation efficiency. The other edge from Taylor's theory, a special work means a profession. The problems will be fixed easily, because staff are obviously known what went wrong and how to solve the issues. Workers are always familiar with what they do, so they don't waste time on finding out the answer for specific problem. Therefore, the work specialization doesn't just clarify the efficiency in final result, but also improve the efficiency in process.
On the other side, there are two drawbacks on work specialization. The first one is a professional work always make employees feel board, because they are doing a similar thing at the same time for 40 time a week, 365 days per annum. As the result, It can cause many problems such as workers feel tired at their work. In addition, they won't be careful on each and every task which leads faults. Hence, work specialization is only beneficial in the short-run, because in the long-run, the work can become inefficient when employees making a great deal of flaws. The other downside is high cost if the workers are resigned, retired or anything that makes them to avoid work in the firm. The expenses are included organizations spending money to look for another new personnel and it takes time to allow them to familiarize the duty. In addition, the abilities that were educated in the training, workers could reveal the skills to other competitor firms. It can be a cost as well. Thus, we can easily see that work specialty area doesn't invariably exact management. Despite the fact that the efficiency in result results rises, but other factors will drive the efficiency down.
Henri Fayol's Philosophy
In the Henri Fayol's theory, he focuses on the administration and learning experience from people in the management. In his school of thought, he thinks that to manage people (worker), a firm should have a good control. He has found out 14 approaches and only few will be described in this article (Sheldrake J, 2003b).
The first one is department of work; it doesn't mean work specialty area, but workers show different job to different activities. It is slightly unique of Taylor's, the work here specialized the activities or departments alternatively than work specialized. Consequently, it is specialist, a firm should decide who gets the power to command or give order to employees. The energy circulation is important, because without a clear power, it is difficult to make the ultimate decision inside the businesses. A clear discipline is essential, because it is the arrangement between firm and employees. The self-discipline can keep employees provide an appreciate patterns. The self-discipline also shows a specific warnings, fines, suspensions, demotions and dismissals if employees are from the brand (Sheldrake J, 2003b)
The third approach is unity of command, it is similar with expert, but it shows a definite command of requests. This means that workers will only listen to only one command and no-one else. Without the chain of order, the workers are always perplexed who should they listen to. Another methodology is centralization this means whether the decision is made by top administrator or in the lower managers. There are some departments in a firm, centralized decision means only 1 person; the very best manager makes the ultimate decision. On the other hand, decentralized is the decisions can be produced by lower professionals when it's related to their field of activities. The past some may be equality; a firm should treat every staff the same no matter their performance. Everyone should be identical and have certain power to speak or have a say (Sheldrake J, 2003b).
There are again two benefits and drawbacks in Henri Fayol's idea. It really is difficult to identify them in the general management, however, many approaches are of help and also have limitations. We can see them from centralization framework. The benefit from centralization is small control. The top manager always knows what's happening inside the firm. However, the drawback is time inefficiency. Alternatively, a decentralized composition can likewise have advantage and downside. If your choice is manufactured in the low management department, it could save lots of time to process the info to the very best manager. The reason is the decision is made immediately by the low manager; it is time effective, because the problems/issues will be resolved immediately rather than ask the authorization. However, because the information is limited in the low management department, as the result, the decision can be erroneous. Hence, if your choice is manufactured by the whole lower departments, those decisions are not consistent to each other.
The other strategy from Henri Fayol's will also have advantage and drawback. For example, the expert, a grant permission to all the power to one director. It's rather a disaster, because he could not listen to other people's viewpoints or ideas. It can cause the firms have removed terribly because he has made a huge mistakes. Alternatively, it is time efficiency and a dependable person if there are small blunders. For an example, way too many ideas in the discourse, it takes a lot of times to process and choose the final decision. However, if one individual has expert, he could make the decision immediately without another phrase.
Efficiency and effectiveness
In the present day management methods, Taylor's management can only just be helpful in a few situation. We have seen that the task focuses have overlooked many individuals requirements. Unlike the employees in the past, the workers these days demand more their personal needs, wants and rights. They can not stand doing the same work with everyday in their life. It really is not merely about emotional if they feel uninterested. However, also they want to do more other works that doesn't have to stay there all day or cannot have oxygen. This type of management requires staff psychologically easily fit into the position. For example, some old or retired people, because they can not do too much physical works, but are patient at specialized works which is more interesting than doing nothing. To be able to solve the issues, workers should swap the works between one another frequently. This means this month they specialized this part of components and doing the other within the next month. As the result, it can avoid to ignore human being requirements.
However, this management theory is the better concept to demonstrate the work efficiency. If a company wants to increase the task efficiency immediately in the short-run without caring other issues, this is probably the best and the best option ways. Moreover, job specialization creates a clear work duties for workers and the dog owner. In the company's administration, the administrator knows who in charge to which activities, so that it can lessen the conflicts inside the organization. Associated with a definite administrative, shirk or thrust away their duties which is simpler for the manager and personnel.
In the modern's management, Fayol's theory is trusted, since it concerns many factors in employees such as power, chain of control or centralization. Without these approaches, even although productivity is reliable, but it could cause many problems inside the environment and makes workers unwilling to stay with the company. Fayol's theory makes management practice less complicated. For instance, without authority, it'll cause many issues that nobody is listening to anyone. Associated with they think they may have power to make the decision so when it decision is manufactured differently, the firm will not doing the same job toward the same reason for it.
Subsequently, without the machine of command, workers are lost who as long as they listen to. Whose order is right for these people and who should hold the responsibilities for his or her works? It is not easy to blame or reward everybody because one task did great. The person who gives purchases or command word also represents the team to receive the submission from the dog owner or the organization. As the result, he/she would arrange the routine or assign the works individually to the workers. If the machine of command word is successes, it can raise the efficiency of internal communication as well. Therefore, with the present day management procedures, there are so many personnel and my works in the firm, Fayol's management theory is extremely popular and trusted in current management practice.
In conclusion, the two management theories have made certain contribution in current management work force. They remain un-forgettable nowadays.
Sheldrake J, (2003a), Management Theory, Section 2 F. W. Taylor and scientific management, pg 14 - 26, 2nd ed, Thomson learning, Retrieved 25 Feb 2015
Sheldrake J, (2003b), Management Theory, Section 5 Henri Fayol and administration, pg 46 - 55, 2nd ed, Thomson learning, Retrieved 26 Feb 2015
Stimpson P & Farquharson A, (2010), Business Studies, Section 9 Determination, Pg 156, 2nd ed, Cambridge School Press, Retrieved 25 February 2015