Introduction

The society we live in consists of all types of organisations, both large and small, and these
range from for-profit-businesses, non-profits, schools, hospitals, sports clubs, churches, political
parties, to mention but a few, and all these need to be managed, and managed well, if they are to
be successful and achieve their pre-set goals and objectives. The success of any organisation
will therefore depend almost entirely on how it is managed. If poorly managed, the organisation
may fold, on the other hand, if well managed, its chances of survival and success increase.
In this regard, this paper will discuss the relevance of F. W. Taylors Scientific Management
Theory and its relevance in todays business. The scientific management theory also called
Taylorism or the Taylor system is a theory of management that analyzes and synthesizes
workflows and improving labour productivity in the modern workplace. Taylor started the era of
modern management in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century; he was decrying the
awkward, inefficient, or ill-directed movements of men as national loss. Taylor developed his
theory through observations and experience as a mechanical engineer, he noticed that the
environment lacked work standards, bred inefficient workers and jobs were allocated to people
without matching the job to the workers skill and ability. In addition to this the relationship of the
workers with the managers included many confrontations
.
Management, according to Griffin (2001), is a set of activities which include planning, and
decision making, organizing, leading and controlling, carried out with the aim of achieving
organizational goals in an efficient and effective manner. Robbins & Coulter (2012) concur and
add that management involves coordinating and overseeing the work activities of others so that
their activities are completed efficiently and effectively, while Koontz & Weihrich (1990) suggested
that management is concerned with designing and maintaining an environment in which
individuals, working together in groups, efficiently accomplish selected organisational goals and
objectives
The modern world has been marked by specialized management that is characterized by
effective planning methods in order to attain certain objectives, division of labor which has served
to increase specializations and innovations in work places, and a formalized interaction between
the employees and their managers in their work places. These formal manifestations can be
attributed to the works of Frederic Winslow Taylor, in the early 20 th Century. His was the first
theory of management, and he effectively named it The Scientific Management Theory.
According to Taylor (1911), the purpose of scientific management is to pursue the highest working
efficiency.

HISTORICAL ORIGINS OF TAYLORS SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT THEORY.

The late 19th century factory system manifested itself in lack of formal management, unofficial
relations among the workers and even with their employers and casual jobs with no formal
arrangements where the leader just hired a group of men in the industries and could fire them if
he deemed it fit, due to their inability to work or for not following his directions. A need arose by
the late decade of the 19th century as competition between different factories went into the rise,
emergence of improved technologies in the factories and formation of trade unions that
pressurized the factories to improve the working conditions of workers in the factories or risk
industrial actions against them. The government had also realized the efforts in the factories and
wanted to reap maximum benefits (Taylor, 1911, p.12). This and other various factors, therefore,

called for improvements in the organization and management of these institutions. This was the
period that Taylor established himself with his new ideas of organizational management and
various practical innovations.
Taylor observed that workers were not operating at anything close to maximum efficiency and
that there was a lot of wasted effort, thus productivity was greatly affected. He observed that
workers would deliberately slow down the pace of work, and this he termed soldiering. This,
according to Taylor, was one of the major causes of inefficiency. The reasons for soldiering were,
firstly, men, who at that time made up the entire workforce, would slow down their work in order to
avoid abuse from their co-workers, who didnt want management finding out that productivity
could be increased. They feared that, if one worker would increase their output, management
would then require the same from all the workers as the new norm. Also, since all workers were
uniformly paid a fair days wage, determined by managers after observing and deciding on what
was a fair days work, there was no strong incentive for increasing individual output and
productivity.
Taylor also observed that workers developed their skill by observing other seasoned employees
and further honing and perfecting their trade. As a result of this, workers themselves were more
knowledgeable at their work that management were. Another observation was that managers
allowed workers to determine how best to perform individual tasks required to complete their
individual assignments and this led to an emergence of various possible ways of performing
certain tasks, hence, there was no uniformity and consistency.
It is against this background that Taylor vigorously advocated the application of systematic
management by the factory managers (Taylor, 1911, p.17). He introduced time studies to
measure the worker's performance, piece-rate systems that served to instill obedience in the
workers and other production systems that provided the managers with the capability of knowing
what was happening on the ground.
TAYLOR'S PRINCIPLES OF SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT
After systematic analysis of his experimental works, Taylor came up with four principles which
became the foundation for scientific management, and they are outlined below.
PRINCIPLE 1: JOB REDESIGN AND SPECIALISATION
Taylor suggested that in order to achieve maximum efficiency, Managers had to replace working
by rule of thumb, or simple habit and common sense, and instead use the scientific method of
studying work and determining the most efficient way to perform specific tasks or what is termed
One-Best-Way. To achieve this, Taylor suggested that management should identify workers who
were particularly well skilled at performing a job and study the series of basic operations,
motions/movements and tools that these workers used in performing the job. After this,
management should then measure with a stop watch the time the worker spent performing each
basic operation or motion, then select the fastest method, and after that, the selected method
would be further refined by removing any unneeded and slow movements and finally establish
the one-best-way using the optimal movements and tools. Furthermore, the broad task would be
broken down into smaller simpler segments, so that each worker would concentrate on a smaller
task and by doing this task over and over, workers would get knowledge and experience on that
smaller task alone (specialisation and division of labor), thus improving on efficiency.

On the focus on efficiency improvement, Taylors first principle is still largely deployed in modern
organizations (Freeman 1996). In the process of finding one best way, managers realize that the
intensified division of labor is the key. It entails analyzing a production process and breaking it
down into a multitude of simple and routine tasks performed by different workers. This reduces
labor cost, eliminates unnecessary tasks and increases productivity (Rhodes, 2005; Miller, 2010).
Hence, Taylorism is a method for the efficient production. With the aid of information technology,
the means of finding the one-best way becomes more effective nowadays. In particular,
manufacturing companies, such as Toyota, apply division of labor; break down the assembly lines
into steps, conducts technological research to find the best way, such as minimizing the waiting
period. Miller (2010) suggests that these measures maximize the efficiency and prevent
inconsistencies in work.
Nevertheless, Taylorism is inhumane and often has a negative effect on the workforce (Robbins
2002). Although division of labor streamlines work process and peaks efficiency, it causes
degradation of work. That is, the breakup of the simplified, repetitive and monotonous tasks leads
to the low commitment to work and low degree of job satisfaction for workers. Robbins (2002)
also argued that Taylorism causes the deskilling of work as fewer skills are required to complete
the simple tasks. It also greatly diminishes the knowledge of workers, which results in unskilled
labor (Robbins 2002). This is detrimental to modern organizations as they become functionally
inflexible (The ability of managers to reorganize workers and redeploy them between different
tasks) and become rigid structures in the long run. It can be a burdensome barrier for
organizations as flexibility is critical for modern businesses and there is a possibility of business
failure (Miller, 2010). It is, therefore, essential for effective contemporary organizations to strike a
balance between efficiency and flexibility under Taylorism

PRINCIPLE 2: MATCH WORKERS TO JOBS (SCIENTIFICALLY SELECT, TRAIN &

DEVELOP)
The second principle of scientific management is that managers should carefully select workers,
train them and develop their skills rather than passively leaving them to learn the trade and train
themselves (Priestley 2005). Taylor noted that in his day, anyone was hired to work without any
particular criteria taken into consideration. That on its own, he stated, had a detrimental effect on
efficiency. To remedy this, Taylor suggested that, equally as important as scientific task study,
was the selection of workers for certain jobs to match their personality, skill and experience,
rather than haphazardly placing people to do any task. He went on to suggest that, these
selected workers had to be taught and trained the job/ tasks according to the scientifically
developed methods/ standards previously developed in his first principle. By application of this
principle, Taylor noted that the highly qualified person will occupy the top positions in the
organizations and thus will lead the others in a systematic and efficient manner. This would
ensure that workers wasted no time and increased efficiency and ultimately, productivity.
Fast forward to the modern day industry, Taylors second principle is visible almost all over the
world. Employees are selected for a particular job because they have or possess a certain skills
set or certain qualifications. After they have been hired, they undergo job orientation and are
taught how certain tasks are done, and over the course of their employment, they occasionally
attend refresher courses and sometimes receiver further training. This is done so that employees
perform the jobs and tasks that they are trained for and it reduces the inefficiency, since one will
be doing a job / task that they are trained for and it keeps the workers sharp.

Workers nowadays not only should attain certain education qualifications, but also gain relevant
experiences. Google puts candidates through up to seven rounds of interviews as it senses that
"having the right person with the right skills in the right job" could improve its competitiveness
(Miller; 2010). Once suitable employees are selected, modern organizations make use of training
programmes such as "real-life" role plays and simulations to develop employees' skills and make
feasible production strategies. For instance, flight attendants learn the emergency procedures in
the role plays. Further elaborating Taylor's idea, modern organizations under present business
climate and the impact of globalization, view training as a means to add-value to workers and
increase flexibility within a business, enabling them to respond quickly to changes in technology
or competitors' actions. (Marcourse 2008)
However, critics believe that training can be a waste of money, time-consuming and become
companies' biggest liability if the desired results do not occur (Marcourse 2008). Therefore, the
cost effectiveness of training should be evaluated. Business should match training directly with
the needs of employees of the organization to make training more effective, as training has a
long-term positive impact on the quality, productivity, and motivation of the workforce, and laying
a good foundation for a business to succeed (Marcourse; 2008).

PRINCIPLE 3: CLOSE COOPERATION BETWEEN MANAGEMENT AND WORKERS

As Taylors major concern was inefficiency, He suggested that management should heartily and
closely cooperate with the workers, and have a mutually beneficial relationship (as opposed to
the common norm in those days that workers and management were adversaries), monitor
workers' behavior so as to ensure that all work was done efficiently (Freeman, 1996), in
accordance with the principles of the science of job redesign.
Taylor argued that the one-best-way, or standard, would be much more efficient than were the
multiple different procedures previously used by the individual workers. So, for adherence
purposes, Taylor suggested that employees be monitored. This had the effect of making sure that
workers followed the set standard of procedure (SOP), and that the constant interaction of
management and workers bred healthy working relationships, better working conditions, and a
common ground between the working and managing classes was established.
Thus, the managers of the factories started considering the social welfare of their workers while
in work stations and eventually relations strengthened in the factories. This brought about team
spirit and reliance on one another to attain a common objective. Several welfare organizations
that were involved in fighting for the rights of the workers were formed and which are still there in
the 21st century world.
Taylor sought to breakdown the prevailing distinction of "us "and "them" between the workforce
and employers and it is evident in modern day organisations, there is little or no divide between
management and employee. The two parties work together to achieve common organizational
goals and there is constant interaction, thus making the workers job easier. In modern world, this
principle has been expounded and applied resulting into increased performance and enhanced
efficiency in doing work. The social aspects of a human being are catered for like the need to
effectively communicate ones feelings about a certain procedure in any institution. Management
has changed to democratic type where various views of each individual are incorporated into the

institution's planning. The institutions frequently hold meetings where each and everyone is given
a chance to air their views concerning anything that may be affecting them or even to commend a
certain process being used by their organization. This has served well to increase communication
in the organizations.
Communication is an important process to any organization. It serves to pass important
messages from managers down the organizational hierarchy up to the subordinates.
Communication as a process serves to hold the organization together. It builds team work across
the various departments in an organization and leads to attainment of strategic objectives and
hence meeting their mission and vision.. Effective communication in an organization boosts
employee's morale and increases their productivity (Busch, 1980), and it is because of Taylors
Scientific methods that cooperation, effective communication and understanding were introduced
in organizations
PRINCIPLE 4: INITIATIVE AND INCENTIVE
The last principle of Taylors Scientific Management states that work should be divided between
managers and workers. Taylor suggested that management apply management principles of
planning and supervising the work, and the workers do what they do best, that is, to carry out
tasks. This is achieved by the separation of conception from execution. Historically, workers were
responsible for determining how the work and tasks should be performed, and this according to
Taylor was unscientific. Taylor argued that, in the pursuit of efficiency and maximum prosperity,
management were far better placed to determine the best and most efficient and optimal method
and they should be left to do that part. Workers then would perform the tasks/duties in a timely
manner, and an incentive given, should the employee finish the given task within a stipulated
time, or should he do more work than was required.
So, Taylor also suggested management should pay the employees according to their working
performance and come up with come up with a reward system that would link performance/ effort
to rewards at the end of the day, because any mismatch would cause employee demotivation and
dissatisfaction. Taylor also suggested that rewards/remuneration should be fair and mutually
acceptable across the field. This, according to Taylor, would motivate the workers to pursue
productivity, knowing that more work would result in more wages and more importantly, pay
"induces conformity" which aligns workers' effort more closely with the aims of the organizations,
thereby "undermining potential worker solidarity derived from joint action for joint benefits."
(Robbins, 2002).
Due to the importance of remuneration, Taylor's incentive pay scheme or the performance-related
pay scheme (a financial reward to staff whose work is considered above average), is still being
used in a majority of organisation in our modern society, for example, bankers make much effort
to find clients because they can receive huge bonuses, and also in the Trucking and transport
business, where truck drivers are paid according to the number of trips they make in a given
month and in the service industry, salespeople are paid a commission, depending on the volume
of their sales for that particular trading period. This indirectly increases productivity as efficient
workers will self-monitor themselves, reinforcing the competitiveness and raising the profit
margins of organizations.
Although Taylor's incentive system is useful to some extent, it is only realistic and applicable
when the goals of both the workers and the management are the same: profitability. If their goals

are conflicting, employees will prefer working for their own interest instead of working towards the
companies' goals (Whetten: 2008). In that case, business ethics may be sacrificed, resulting in
poor quality products and a dishonest culture. For example, in 2007, an investigation, conducted
by the BBC, suggested that staff at a high-street bank were encouraged by their superiors to lie
to the bank's customers in order to hit their personal sales targets (Marcourse 2008). This
dishonest behavior, though boosts revenue in the short-term, loses valuable reputation in the
long-term. Implementing a monitoring scheme could ensure the quality theoretically, but it cannot
ensure the best possible quality in practice. Therefore, it is important for managers to strike a
balance between pay motivation, product quality and the companies' goals. To achieve this,
managers, on one hand, should "track employees' behavior and employees' attitude regularly
and Moreover, Taylors notion that workers are motivated by money, is a demeaning view of the
workers.
CONCLUSION
In Conclusion, Taylors Scientific Management approach is still one of the classic theories being
applied to modern organizations. It proposes a scientific approach to task and job analysis, the
separation of tasks from conception to completion, the scientific selection and training of workers
and the provision of an incentive-pay scheme. These ideas are widely adopted in almost every
sector in business as they boost efficiency and productivity.
Although critics argue that Taylors Scientific Management approach is in decline due to its
drawbacks, such as inflexibility, labor resistance and de-humanization of working conditions,
Taylorism still sets the norm for how organizations are managed and has a continual impact on
job design. However, it is now modified, updated and usually combined with other management
methods, such as Human Relations Movement, to offset its shortcomings.

REFERENCES:
Busch, P., (1980). The Sales Managers bases of social power and Influence upon the sales
force. in The Journal of Marketing, pp91-101
Freeman, M. (1996) Scientific Management: 100 years old; Poised for the next century. S.A.M.
Advanced Management Journal. Vol. 61, Issue 02, pp35
Mahoney, D., Trigg, M., Griffin, R. & Pustay, M., (2001). International business: A managerial
Perspective. Sydney: Pearson Education Australia
Koontz, H. & Weihrich, H. (1990) Essentials of Management (5thed). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Marcourse, I. (2008) Business Studies for A Level. London; Hodder Education
Miller, B. (2010), Frederick Winslow Taylors Principles of Scientific Management Still Valid
in Todays Workplace?
Priestley S. (2005). Scientific Management in 21st Century.
Fincham, R. & Rhodes, P. (2005) Principles of organizational behavior. New York, Oxford
University Press
Robbins, S.P., & Barnwell, N. (2002).Organisational Theory (4th ed.) Upper Saddle River:
Prentice-Hall
Robbins, S. P. & Coulter, M. (2012). Management. 11th Edition. Upper Saddle River: PrenticeHall
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York
Whetten, D.A. (2005) Developing management skills. USA; Pearson Prentice Hall