Human Relations Model


introduction
The difference is based on the workers thoughts and viewpoints that differs from individual to individual. The differences also depends on the way that how they control the workforce so that they can accomplish their task accordingly. If there is availability of proper coordination and effective on job relations then individuals can work even under high pressure. It is always believed that an organization always depends on mutual cooperation and coordination; there must be a two way interaction present in the organization. It is also necessary for the management to stay alert about the psychological needs of individuals. There should not be any dominancy by the higher authority (Bauer, 2015:
Human Relations Model emerged in the social era on where there is involvement of government and the economy and the classical management theory of Taylor was developed to lower the efficiencies of large scale production which had availability of presence of immigrant workforce who were not so qualified.
 The human relations approach had a stable environment while the classical management theory had mostly implicit assumptions. Human approach forwarded their work by building cooperative systems for efficiency. While the scientific management administrative theory had the control for efficiency.
 The human relations school had informal relations with their workers while the scientific school of management had structural organization design and job enrichment for workers were provided (Nature Of management, 2015).
Conclusion:
The early approaches to study management such as the scientific approach and human relations are said to be important sources of modern school of management. Scientific management theory states how efficient the workers should be in terms of the production process. It also focused to achieve employee satisfaction and other behavioral aspects of the employees in the organization. Modern school of management also provides insights to help them to be more effective and relevant in terms of the day to day work.
The scientific school of thought also allowed a leader to perform all the duties under him itself. It also focused to maintain coordination and cooperation to assist in developing the personal development of employees in an organization. Whereas in the human relations, Mayo depicted that workers were more comfortable with greater acceptance of work and that helped employees to attain motivation. The scientific school of thought also supported the organizational growth keeping view not to hamper individual growth as well. It provided more importance to the workers.


A


  Human relations theory
The human relations theory (HRT) has evolved in the 1920s and 1930s (Grey, 2009, p.44). Studies by Elton Mayo at the Hawthorne plants of the Western Electric Company were the activator of HRT (Morgan, 1986, p.41).
 With the help of these studies the enterprise was able to analyze in which way the output of employees change due to diversifying the conditions of employment. Therefor, they established two focus groups which were exposed to different illumination levels. However, analysts noticed that the output in those test groups increased independently from lighting conditions (Pugh, 1990, p.345).
 Employees felt rather motivated by the particular attention they received. They got the feeling of being something special and not just a factor of producing products (Grey, 2009, p.45).
 In other words, only the actuality that workers were observed was the reason for this increased productivity. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the workforce can also be motivated by non-economic factors. These non-economic factors were the basic idea of the HRT (Thompson and McHugh, 2009, p.45).
 The HRT concerns with the aims, wishes and interests of the employees. Moreover, it supported measures to improve team work, cooperation between management and the workforce, internal communication and social relationships (Slattery, 2003, p.128).
 The idea was to create a social and friendly business environment to motivate the whole crew. Furthermore the employees should get in contact with each other to achieve a feeling of harmony in the organization. Development and integration of the workforce instead of oppression were further key elements principle of “developing a science for each element of work” (Thompson and McHugh, 2009, p.30).
                              WHILE
                             Scientific management theory
Within this principle Taylor summarizes the whole accumulated knowledge of the workers and the company. Hence, he creates rules and norms for each process. Furthermore, he divided the processes in small parts and analyzed them concerning their lead time and course of movement. As a result Taylor could identify and eliminate interference factors (Taylor, 1911, p.24).
After these processes the second principle follows referring to the workers. Before Taylor developed this principle there was no selection or training of the workforce. Employees worked on their own and improved their skills and routines as good as possible. Now, a scientific based selection took place. Furthermore, the staff was exactly informed what they had to do and in which kind of way they had to do it (Taylor, 1911, p.36).
 Nevertheless, one problem was left and this was about motivation. Taylor named a number of different reasons, why the men worked very slowly and not as quickly as possible. This behavior was called “soldering”. One of Taylor’s explanations is the assumption of those men that if they work faster and maximize their output that this would finally lead to a reduction of the workforce (Taylor, 1911, p.13).
 However, the opposite is the case. Working faster means that the same number of people produce more goods. As a result unit costs decrease and the company can sell the merchandises to lower prices. Accordingly demand and also the profit rises and thereby the enterprise can pay higher wages to their employees. Resulting from this, Taylor implemented an incentive payment system to reward these workers who work more than others. Thus, he motivated the men in an economical way and reduced the might of the work-teams (Littler, 1982, p.55).
The third principle is about “cooperation between management and the workers to ensure that the work is done according to the science” (Thompson and McHugh, 2009, p.30).
This principle has two aims. On the one hand Taylor wants to achieve that the whole workforce follows the defined processes. On the other hand management and workers should work together. It is essential that both parties realize that it is more profitable for the company and their selves when they work hand in hand. Furthermore this is a key determinant to translate scientific management from theory into practice (Taylor, 1911, p.26).



                                   WHILE
                            Administrative management theory
General administrative theory is a set of 14 principles of management, as set forth by Henri Fayol, a French mining engineer and executive. He believed that the following principles could be applied to any business:
Division of work. By having employees specialize in just a few tasks, they can become much more efficient than having employees engage in every possible task. Though quite correct, this principle resulted in deeply uninteresting jobs; employers have subsequently added back tasks to make jobs more interesting.
Authority. Managers must be vested with authority, which gives them the right to give orders. This principle has held up, though a general trend toward pushing decision making deep down in the organization has shifted authority to more and more people.
·         Discipline. Employees must obey the governing rules of the organization. This principle is still true and remains relevant.
·         Unity of command. Each employee should only receive orders from one supervisor. This principle has largely held up, though matrix organizations involve the use of two supervisors. Also, teams are more likely to operate with reduced levels of supervision, instead tackling issues as a group.
·         Unity of direction. There should be one plan of action to guide employees. This principle is inherently obvious; there cannot be multiple, possibly conflicting plans tugging employees in different directions.
·         Subordination of individuals to the group. The interests of a single employee do not override those of the entire organization. If this principle were to be violated, employees could refuse to work on essential but uninteresting tasks.
·         Remuneration. Employees must be paid a fair wage. Though obvious, this principle points out that employees will work harder if they are properly compensated for their work. Subsequent research has found that remuneration only forms a part of the rewards that employees tend to value.
Centralization. The amount of decision making should be properly balanced throughout the organization, and not just at the top. This was a quite forward-thinking principle, and
                             Conclusion
Therefore the above explain about the difference between between scientific, administrative human relation theories












References:
Accel-team.com, (2015). Human relations school of management approach to improve productivity. . [online] Available at: https://www.accel-team.com/human_relations/INDEX.html [Accessed 20 Feb. 2015].
Bauer, M. (2015). GRIN - Compare and contrast scientific management and human relations theory . [online] Grin.com. Available at: https://www.grin.com/en/e-book/205705/compare-and-contrast-scientific-management-and-human-relations-theory [Accessed 20 Feb. 2015].
Cliffsnotes.com, (2015). Classical Schools of Management . [online] Available at: https://www.cliffsnotes.com/more-subjects/principles-of-management/the-evolution-of-management-thought/classical-schools-of-management [Accessed 20 Feb. 2015].
Darwish, T. (2013). Strategic HRM and performance. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Pub.
David, F. (2005). Strategic management. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Grandori, A. (2001). Organization and Economic Behaviour . New York: Routledge.
INTRODUCTION TO ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR. (2015). 1st ed. [ebook] Available at: https://www.b-u.ac.in/sde_book/msc_organ.pdf [Accessed 20 Feb. 2015].
NATURE OF MANAGEMENT. (2015). 1st ed. [ebook] Available at: https://www.mu.ac.in/myweb_test



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

International Law

KATIBA YA KIKUNDI