Review of Management Articles

Article assigned
ANALYSING the thinking of F.W. Taylor using cognitive mapping

Introduction
Scientific management is one of the three major branches within the classical approach to management. Although the concept was suggested approximately a century ago, it still makes a significantly important role in 21st century management with new conditions and a considerable number of challenges. Frederick Winslow Taylor who was regarded as the father of scientific management suggested his concepts in 1911. Scientific management is defined as a theory that emphasises careful selection and training of workers, and supervisory support (Taylor, 1911). Taylor (1911) believed that precise procedures that were developed after careful study of an individual at work should replace the tradition on decision-making. The purpose of this essay is to review three articles that analyses the Taylorism and present how Taylorism is applied in current management sphere.
Analysis of Assigned Article
Cossette, P. 2002. Analysing the thinking of F.W. Taylor using cognitive mapping. Management Decision, 40 (2): 168-182
The author of this article used the cognitive map and the Decision Explorer to present and analyse the thinking of F.W.Taylor to produce a more in-depth and detailed knowledge and understanding of his ideas.
Cossette (2002) demonstrated that the two key variables in Taylor’s scientific management were “Maintenance of a rapid pace…Loafing or soldiering” and “Harmonious relations between employers and men aware of their mutual interests”. As Taylor’s scientific management related to efficiency, the first concept that the author highlighted had completely reflected the Taylorism. Cossette (2002) concluded that “the maintenance of a rapid pace” was the most important concept for Taylor, since it was also by far the most important “consequence” of the cognitive map.
Taylor’s scientific management was always considered as the division of labour pushed to its logical extreme, with a consequent de-skilling of the worker and dehumanisation of the workplace (Kanigel, 1999). However, the author showed another aspect of Taylor’s idea which was related to harmony. In cognitive map, the concept of “Harmonious relations between employers and men aware of their mutual interests” had the second largest number of direct links and the third centrality score compared to other concepts (Cossette, 2002).
In addition, Cossette (2002) stated that “the prior conditions required to improve production and the results of this improvement for both employees and employers, are the two main dimensions that Taylor appears to use as a basis for his conception of the organization of work.” Although a small number of concepts from Taylorism were less relevant, they suggested that Taylor’s thinking was not significantly complicated.
This article helped us have a better understanding of the ideas of F.W.Taylor, demonstrated the relative importance of the concepts suggested by Taylor and revealed another side of Taylorism.

Analysis of Article 1
Wrege, C.D. & Hodgetts, R.M. 2000. Frederick W. Taylor’s 1899 pig iron observations: Examining fact, fiction and lessons for the new millennium. Academy of Management Journal, 43 (6): 1283-1291
However, the authors of this article were in dispute with Taylor in a particular circumstance. Wrege & Hodgetts (2000) stated that Taylor simplified the observation by presenting only some of the information and, he omitted many significant facts. The insight thinking of the authors was that contemporary organisation should apply new tools and techniques to achieve their objectives, and managers should increasingly concentrate on data collection and analysis and fight the tendency to accept anecdotes and hearsay as accurate (Wrege & Hodgetts, 2000).
The authors studied and analysed the case called pig iron observation, which came from Taylor’s scientific management principle, and concluded that although Taylor had made a great contribution to management history, he did neglect some significant real facts in this case such as failure to take the cost of damaging gondolas into account.
In addition, the authors suggested five points that we could learn from this observation, which are “anecdotal data are often erroneous, primary sources must be consulted, all data have inconsistencies, replication is hallmark of good science and digital archiving is now critical” (Wrege & Hodgetts, 2000).
Moreover, the authors had concluded some suggestions that are valuable for the managers in new millennium. Wrege & Hodgetts (2000) demonstrated that researchers’ being more systematic and sophisticated was important in their approach to achieving their goals, and that “benchmarking” was going to be a critical activity in the 21st century.
This article revealed the limitation of Taylor’s scientific management, and the authors of this article recommended a considerable number of approaches and methods to help today’s managers reach their objectives successfully and efficiently.
Analysis of Article 2
Boyns, T. 2001. Hans and Charles Renold: entrepreneurs in the introduction of scientific management techniques in Britain. Management Decision, 39 (9): 719-728
The author of this article used the case study of Hans Renold Ltd to extend Taylor’s scientific management theory, and explained how it was applied in this enterprise during the first and second decades of the twentieth century. The core ideals of the author were to confirm the contribution that Hans and Charles Renold made to introduce and develop scientific management in Britain, and distinguish the different methodology between Hans and Charles.
It has been accepted that Hans Renold Ltd has been the first company to introduce Taylor’s scientific management in Britain (Boyns, 2001). Hans Renold “probably was the first British industrialist to appreciate the work of F.W.Taylor and adapt it to British management practice” (Urwick, 1956).He started to change the organisational structure and introduced a new functional organisation supported by a system of committees in 1908 (Boyns, 2001). Although there were some problems arising such as little resistance from the bulk of the workforce, scientific management principles were eventual successfully adopted at Hans Renold Ltd eventually (Boyns, 2001).
The author of this article introduced the first application of Taylor’s scientific management in Britain and emphasized the fundamental position of scientific management in management history as it has already been applied for a century and it still plays a significantly important role in increasing the efficiency in the organisations in the 21st century.
Application to Current Management Practice
Around the Twentieth Century, Taylor’s scientific management theory had been widely used in the manufacturing and services industries. In the 21st century, scientific management does play an important role, and it is applied in several modern organizations. McDonalds is the world’s most famous brands, which is leading in the globally branded quick service restaurant applied the scientific management successfully in their business operations.
Initially, Taylor (1911) stated that wage systems without incentive result in low productivity if no matter how much is produced the employee will gain the same pay. McDonalds stimulates employees in many effective ways. Regardless of the base pay, McDonalds develops competitive wage and promotion programs, hard work, motivation and results are recorded and rewarded at McDonalds (McDonalds, 2006). In addition, McDonalds also establishes great incentive programs in which employees have an access to gift and free food (McDonalds, 2006). McDonalds also offers an incentive pay system and provide the opportunity to earn competitive total compensation for employees when they successfully achieve the goals (McDonalds, 2006). Moreover, Long-term incentives are ensured to employees who are qualified to both reward and long-term creation at McDonalds (McDonalds 2006).
Secondly, one of the most important principles of Scientific Management is scientifical training. Taylor (1911) suggested that each company should train the workers scientifically rather than passively leave them to train themselves. McDonalds has a strong belief in training, and training becomes a tradition at McDonalds, because they know its value to the bottom line of their business. Everyone in the business should attend a significantly important training, whether part, full time, hourly paid staff or salaried managers undergoing their compulsory restaurant training (McDonalds 2006). When a new employee joins McDonalds and starts his first working day, he will accept training at once. McDonalds even set up a Hamburger University, and the purpose of this action is to provide all McDonalds Corporation and Franchisees employees with training exclusively in various aspects of the business (McDonalds 2006). Those training systems make their staff more efficient and professional.
Finally, Taylor (1911) taught that the only one method of work that maximized efficiency was to develop a standard method of performing each job efficiently by companies. McDonalds builds up a series of detailed and strict working standards, which guarantee that every product from any chain restaurant has high quality (McDonalds 2006). Moreover, McDonalds staff is specialized in different production procedure (McDonalds 2006). McDonalds has developed a standard method of performing each job and the employees can perform efficiently.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the authors of the above three articles explained the Taylorism precisely and explicitly. The core thinking of Taylor’s scientific management was efficiency particularly was speed, and it is widely applied in most modern organizations such as McDonalds to help increase the productivity. Although Taylor’s scientific management has some limitation as sometimes managers could overlook to collect important data by relying on it excessively, it still made an important contribution to the business world in the 21st century. Taylor laid the foundation of management, and with the application of scientific management, production efficiency has improved. Much of core of Scientific Management remains with us today, only been modified, updated and given a human face (Freeman, 1996).