The Hawthorne Studies Essay Example

that the entire research was called off. Over the years spent at Hawthorne, eventually, Mayo and his team drew four general management conclusions from the Hawthorne studies: (Frank, Karl, 1978), (Mayo, 1933) Firstly, the aptitudes of individuals are imperfect predictors of job performance; every individual is different. Although they give some indication of the physical and mental potential of the individual, the amount produced is strongly influenced by social factors.

The monetary incentives for the workers and the amount of welfare, benefits given to them at their workplace will influence the mindsets and the physical ability to perform up to their optimal levels. Secondly, Informal organization affects productivity; organizational design. The Hawthorne researchers discovered a group life among the workers: The studies showed that the relations that supervisors develop with workers tend to influence the manner in which the workers carry out directives. If workers only treat supervisors with corporate mentalities, then workers are only likely to perform until they are required to.

However, if supervisors adapt a friendlier approach to the workers, then the workers will be more than compelled to work even harder, so that the supervisor will be in a more favorable position. Overall, this will definitely increase the worker’s efficiency Thirdly, work-group norms affect productivity; influence of groups that the workers interact with. The Hawthorne researchers were not the first to recognize that work groups tend to arrive at norms of what is reasonable work done. However, they provided the best systematic description and interpretation of this definition.

The overall culture and norms of production for the industry is also important as they act as a level of gauge for the workers to evaluate

themselves and the level of work put in by the individual. More often than not, workers from the same and other organizations tend to meet up after working hours in social groups where they exchange information on the work done and the level of standards set by the respective managements. This leads to a two-way influence that can either motivate the workers to put in even more hard work, or decide that they have already been doing more than the average worker.

In some circumstances, individual workers might even feel pressure from the groups they mix with and can react in a different way as they themselves have the intention to. (Furnham, 1997) Lastly, the workplace is a social system: The Hawthorne researchers came to view the workplace as a social system made up of interdependent parts. This is reflected from the results of the tests from the women in the relay assembly test room. This is where a group of six women were singled out from the main assembly line and isolated in a room where the group of them assembled the products together.

After monitoring them, it was noted that productivity in the assembly room rose much higher than that of the main assembly department. Reason being the women felt happier, more intimate and developed a strong bond for each other while in the assembly room, and this resulted in wholehearted spontaneous working attitudes and relationships resulting in significant rise in the results for the assembly. (Sonnenfeld, 1985) Findings from the Hawthorne studies emerged at the time when Frederick Taylor’s Scientific Management theory was in place.

However, the findings from the Hawthorne studies, with some realistic

modifications to the individual scenarios and modernization, can still be applicable to the managers of today, when used to handle staff in the various fields, even more than the requirements of the initial industrial management. From the Hawthorne studies, we can identify three findings that can be applicable to the management practice of today. However, keeping the various contentions of the Hawthorne studies of the various shortcomings in mind, the findings of Hawthorne studies should not be copied whole-scale into the current forms of Management.

The first finding that would be applicable would be the informal organizations affecting the productivity. In the current management scenario, organizations are placing a bigger emphasis on the human resources as a key factor to the success of the organization. From this point of view, it is now even more important, to have staff that are self motivated and are able to link their individual performances to the performance of the organization. With the economic environment always changing, it would be very disadvantageous for an organization if the employees only do what they are required to do.

When supervisors and managers are able to have a good relationship with the employees, they not only can have a friendlier working environment, but also can use this relationship to encourage the employees to put in best efforts. (Richard, Greg, 1975) Therefore, it will be a useful approach not to be so tied up by the formal managerial structure of the organization and allow the management to have a closer relationship with the employees. Secondly, Hawthorne studies concluded that the aptitudes of individuals are imperfect predictors of job performance, social and organizational factors also play

an influential part.

Workers are often selected by the organizations for their respective abilities. However, the abilities of the workers and their actual performance may not always conform. This is true even in the modern context of organizations. Able work performers when given the motivation, in terms of environment and benefits will be able to surpass their old standards and perform even better, while vice versa when they are placed in a poor environment that is poorly managed, they will not be motivated to even perform by their usual standards, least improving their performance.

One good example will be the previous situation at Optus, an Australian Telecommunications company. A survey showed that employees there are not interested to engage in the commitment to the goals of the company. Employees felt that the management is uninspiring, outdated and did not layout their benefits and roles clearly. This hindered their progress and made working at Optus difficult. However, Optus were quick to realize this, and made a fast turnover, changing their management styles.

It proved very effective and for that year itself, employee turnover costs and profits for the company immediately rose. This reflects the employment of this form of Hawthorne studies to the contemporary management of modern organizations. However, it is important to note that every individual is different, and what is suitable for some may not be so for the rest. Therefore, individual differences are systematic and their traits and types are open for the organization to develop. The third finding applicable would be the looking at the workplace as a social system.

This finding emphasizes on the using the relationship between fellow workers working as a group to

act as a catalyst for workers to improve the performance in an organization. The relay assembly room test in the Hawthorne studies showed the positive effects from good relationships amongst fellow workers. However, when working in a group, it is not always harmonious and examples of conflicts are common. (Furnham, 1997) For performance to be improved in such a grouping, it is crucial for all members of the group to feel comfortable with each other and enjoy working together.

If modern management is to be able to efficiently exploit this method of work, it is important that besides following the Hawthorne studies, modification are done in the form of management of such groups. Conflict management is crucial. To minimize conflicts at work, the management must ensure that the following must be met. Firstly, rules and job scope must be clearly stated to avoid any ambiguity leading to conflicts. Workers of very different characteristics cannot be grouped together. The tasks of the workers in a group cannot be interdependent as that would cause workers to have varying directives.

Equal allocation of quality/quantity of resources must be available for all workers and finally, workers must be able to communicate effectively amongst themselves in a group. (Steven, Tony, 2007) This way, the initial findings from the Hawthorne studies can also be used for contemporary management. Conclusion The Hawthorn studies looked into the behaviors of the workers, and concluded some of the elements required for efficient performance. Despite criticisms saying that it is actually common understanding and no need for such categorization. Parsons, 1974) (Adair, 1984) Hawthorne studies effectively suggested the effective methods to inspire the good performance of workers especially

when in groups and these same methods can still be modified and used in today’s contemporary management. With human resource playing a greater role in today’s organizations, employee management as a whole and not only industrial management plays a crucial role to support employees to increase their performance levels thus directly improving the organization’s performance from the role of each individual employees.

References:

1. Wickstrom G, Bendix T, (2000), The Hawthorne effect: what did the original Hawthorne studies actually show? Vol. 26, No 4, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health, Helsinki, Finlande.
2. Carey Alex, (2000), Organizational Studies: Critical Perspectives on Business and Management, Routledge.
3. Bourke Helen, 'Mayo, George Elton (1880 - 1949)', (1986), Australian Dictionary of Biography, Volume 10, Melbourne University Press, pp 465-466.
4. Sonnenfeld Jeffrey A, (1985), "Shedding Light on the Hawthorne Studies," Journal of Occupational Behavior, Vol. 6.
5. Mayo Elton, (1933), The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization. New York: MacMillan.
6. Harvard Business School, (1928), Daily History Record, Relay Assembly Test Room, Western Electric Company, Hawthorne Studies Collection, Baker Library.
7. Franke R. H. , Kaul J. D, (1978), "The Hawthorne experiments: First statistical interpretation. " American Sociological Review.
8. Furnham Adrian, (1997), The Psychology of Behaviour at Work: The Individual in the Organization, Published by Psychology Press,
9. Fayol H, (1919), General and Industrial Management, London: Pitman
10. Steven Mc Shane and Tony Travaglione, (2007), Organisational Behaviour on the Pacific Rim, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill Irwin
11. Parsons, H. M. (1974). What happened at Hawthorne? Science, 183 (4128),
12. Gillespie, R. (1991). Manufacturing knowledge: a history of the Hawthorne experiments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Adair, G. (1984). The Hawthorne effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact. Journal of Applied Psychology,
    

69(2).