From Taylorism To Neo-Taylorism: A 100 Year Journey in Human Resource Management
From Taylorism To Neo-Taylorism: A 100 Year Journey in Human Resource Management
From Taylorism To Neo-Taylorism: A 100 Year Journey in Human Resource Management
1. Introduction
but after a while they turned into mass consumption when prices became more
affordable as a result of their massive production.
Specifically, Daimler and Benz built their first automobile in Germany in
1885, but it was the Ford's popular and cheap "Model T" (1907) which
revolutionized the automotive industry and not the expensive Rolls-Royce vehicles.
In 1914, two million cars were circulating in the whole world, half of them in the
USA. In a similar way, after the first airplane flight by the Wright brothers in 1903,
both military and civil aviation were soon developed.
The spread of new industrial inventions became an unstoppable process.
Complementing the fall in prices that was possible after the mass production of
goods, sales by installments appeared to enable low income consumers to buy
products of relatively high prices.
Mass and series production required a greater concentration of labor force in
large manufacturing centers. Tasks were assigned to workers in the production lines,
mostly fixed and repetitive. A typical example of this was Henry Ford's car
manufacturing.
Frederick Winslow Taylor conceived and developed his theories and postulates in
the above context. The famous American mechanical engineer and economist,
promoter of the scientific reorganization of work tasks, and later known as the father
of Scientific Management, was born in Germantown, Philadelphia (Pennsylvania)
on March 20th, 1856.
Even as a child he began to lose his sight, and this, coupled with a weak
physical constitution, prevented him from actively participating in games like
baseball and tennis. Forced to be a mere observer, he devoted his first years of life to
conceive ways of improving the performance of the players’ physical effort through
properly designing the game tools they used.
This attitude would mark him for life. Measuring efforts, locations and
movements became his key objectives when collecting data in order to benefit from
them with a maximum increase of efficiency, either in sports or later in production
tasks. His biographers also described him as a person of uncompromising attitude
against the rules of the game: "even a game of cricket appeared to him as a source of
study and analysis" (Serra 1984, p. 9.).
In 1878 he made his first comments on work processes in the steel industry,
followed by a series of analytical studies on workers' execution times and
remuneration. His main contribution was to determine standard work procedures
scientifically, leading to a mental revolution through a set of concepts which could
498 José Luis Vázquez – García María Purificación
be deducted from his work published in 1903, entitled "Shop Management", one of
his three major works along with "Principles of Scientific Management" (1911) and
"Testimony before the Special House Committee" (1912), these two latter appeared
shortly before his death on March 21st, 1915, at the age of 591.
The guiding principles of what was to be known as "Taylorism" were largely
exposed in the second of these contributions. Specifically, Taylor suggested a
separation and delimitation between the planning and management functions and
task execution. He applied positivist scientific methods to study the relationships
between workers and the modern techniques of industrial production in order to
maximize the efficiency of labor force and the performance of machines and tools
through a systematic subdivision of tasks into simpler ones, through the rational
organization of work in its sequences and processes, through the elimination of
unnecessary or redundant movements of workers and through the introduction of
task timing in operations. He also urged the introduction of a system which
motivated workers by paying them premiums on their performance and the
elimination of all improvisation in the industrial activity.
The application of Taylor's postulates transformed the production systems in
the industrial sector by: i) increasing the skills of workers through expertise and
technical knowledge; ii) allowing a greater control of time in factories, which meant
greater accumulation of capital; iii) introducing the initial idea of technical
individualism and role mechanization; and iv) starting the scientific study of
motions and productive time.
According to Taylor himself, the stages to operate his system of work
organization were as follows:
1. Find ten to fifteen workers (if possible in different companies and regions)
who were particularly adept at implementing a specific work process to be
analyzed.
2. Define the exact series of elementary movements to be carried out by each
of the workers to execute the work under analysis, as well as the tools and
supplies used.
3. Determine with a chronometer the time required to perform each of the
elementary movements and choose the simplest way of execution.
4. Remove all poorly designed, slow or useless movements.
5. Once all unnecessary movements have been eliminated, collect the fastest
movements in a sequence allowing a better use of tools and supplies.
1
These three main works were later grouped and published together in a single volume in 1947 under
the title "Scientific Management".
From taylorism to neo-taylorism: a 100 year journey in human resource management 499
Diverse authors (e.g. George 1972) have analyzed the immediate influence of
Taylor's postulates. Carl G. Barth, an early consultant on scientific management and
later lecturer at Harvard University was not only influenced by Taylor's ideas but
also helped him to develop speed-and-feed-calculating slide rules to a previously
unknown level of usefulness.
At the same time, Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company, was one
of the first entrepreneurs to apply Taylor's principles, pioneering the model of mass
production in his Model T plant at Highland Park (Michigan, USA) in 1914. Ford's
system was based on the fabrication of a large number of goods at low cost through
chain production, thus offering cheaper products to the largest number of
consumers. At a time when -as above mentioned- automobiles were reserved for a
wealthy minority, the Ford Model T became one of the archetypes of such
consumer-oriented products this way revolutionizing industry. Ford's system
required improvements in the productivity of labor force and in efficiency levels
when using specialized machinery (Taylor's scientific principles being ideal for this
purpose) as well as a large number of line workers in factories. The development of
this system would result in Fordism. Moreover, the interconnection between Taylor's
and Ford's postulates is so obvious that a number of authors refer to Taylorism-
Fordism as a single paradigm (e.g. Neffa 1998).
Other prominent Taylor's followers in the USA were Henry L. Gantt (the
author of the chart that bears his name, a visual aid for scheduling tasks and
displaying the flow of work), Frank and Lillian Gilbreth (the former developing
motion studies in the building industry and the latter introducing Psychology into
management studies), Harrington Emerson (applying scientific management
principles in the railway industry), Morris Cooke (applying the same principles in
educational and public -municipal- organizations), or Hugo Münsterberg (the
promoter of the Industrial Psychology).
500 José Luis Vázquez – García María Purificación
Harvard was one of the first American universities to offer a graduate degree
in Business Management in 1908, basing its first-year curriculum on Taylor's
Scientific Management. Taylor's principles were also specifically promoted by other
prominent lecturers, as Harlow S. Person (Dean of Dartmouth's Amos Tuck School
of Administration and Finance) or James O. McKinsey (Professor of Accounting at
the University of Chicago).
In Canada (Rinehart 1975) the textile industry had already been re-organized
according to Scientific Management principles by the early 1920s and workers also
went on sound strikes against them some years later (as at the Canada Cotton Ltd. in
Hamilton, Ontario, in 1928). Henry Gantt introduced the same principles when re-
organizing the Canadian Pacific Railway.
On the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, Henry Le Chatelier introduced
Scientific Management in government owned plants during World War I, but the
most prominent follower of Taylorism was Henry Fayol, later known as the father of
the Modern Theory of Administration. Fayol's principles (fourteen, against the five
by Taylor) would grant a kind of "adulthood" to the then new discipline. Soon
widely spread and well-known, these principles were related to the division of work,
authority, and discipline, the unity of command, the subordination of individual
interest to the general interest, remuneration, centralization, scalar chain, order, and
equity (Fayol 1949).
In Switzerland, the American Edward Albert Filene established the
International Management Institute to spread information about management
techniques, being highly influenced by Taylor's postulates, just as Vladimir Lenin in
the Soviet Union.
Lenin, together with Joseph Stalin incorporated Taylorism into Soviet mass
production manufacturing. However, some authors state that Taylor's methods had
never really taken root in the Soviet Union (Atta 1986), as the stop-and-go of the
production process -workers having nothing to do at the beginning of a month and
"storming" during illegal extra shifts at the end of the month- and the voluntaristic
approach of the Stakhanovite movement of setting individual records was
diametrically opposed to Taylor's systematic approach, and proved to be even
counter-productive and had nothing to do with the successfully taylorized plants
(Head 2005).
Later on, Taylor’s principles have been applied, modified or reviled in different
ways, then giving chance to alternative approaches fitted to specific circumstances
and market requirements, either aiming at their development or substitution. This
From taylorism to neo-taylorism: a 100 year journey in human resource management 501
In this case, the working context appears as dynamic, flexible and optimistic,
clearly stressing the desirability of having motivated and satisfied workers at
disposal and encouraging self-control and free initiative (within limits).
Theory Y principles could be summarized in the following six (Koontz–
Weihrich 1994):
Even when it might be seen otherwise, Theory X and Theory Y were not
considered as a sequential process over time, or the former has to precede the latest
in the management approaches at each and every organization. McGregor was
already aware of this potential misinterpretation of his theories and tried to avoid it
by using a terminology as "neutral" as possible. Moreover, in McGregor's words, his
postulates are just mere assumptions on the generality of prevailing systems in
human resource management, requiring an empirical contrast in the reality of every
organization. In fact, they are two significantly different views, but what is not so
clear is whether Theory Y is to perform more efficiently than Theory X in each and
From taylorism to neo-taylorism: a 100 year journey in human resource management 503
4.2. Toyotism
While in the 50s the abundance of workforce in Western countries allowed the
development of mass production and consumption, the situation in Japan after the
big World War was pretty different, thus leading to the transformation of Taylorism
with quite different parameters. A new working system was developed aiming at the
maximization of efficiency in mass production which would be known as Toyotism,
as mainly attributed to Toyota’s founder, Sakichi Toyoda, together with his son
Kiichiro Toyoda and the engineer Taiichi Ohno. This alternative system was due to
the concrete need of producing relatively small quantities of many products, so
being designed to be very flexible and to face difficult diversification circumstances
(Coriat 1995) by increasing productivity through effective management and
combined work, a step forward from mechanization and individualism that
characterize Taylorist and Fordist processes. The main guiding points of Toyotism
are as follows:
The efficiency of Toyotism derives from the application of the so-called "five
zeros" strategy: zero defects, zero breakdowns, zero delays, zero paper (reduction of
bureaucracy) and zero inventory (stock minimization). This way it is possible to produce
highly differentiated products in small quantities (in contrast with mass production
characterizing Taylorism-Fordism). Organizations have small multifunctional staffs,
504 José Luis Vázquez – García María Purificación
they adapt their production to current demand and introduce mechanisms for an
automatic shutdown of faulty machines (thus avoiding waste of materials and failures).
1982) which is applied, among other possibilities, to assess and select ideas for
innovation processes.
However, and even when the initial basements were previously established,
Theory Z did not become part of academic or managers' language until the economic
expansion in Japan was experienced as a reality. Then, problems when directly
trying to apply Eastern principles in other countries and cultures could be observed,
and subsequently the need to adapt them to practices in Western organizations (or
more specifically in the USA) was advocated.
So we could say that Theory Z is not a single proposal but a compendium of
practices and experiences resulting from the expansion of specific Japanese
companies in the Western context due to the need to adapt their operational methods
to the new environmental circumstances. Among the major common postulates
guiding these new forms of personnel management we could refer to (Ouchi 1981):
– Perfect quality at the first attempt: aiming zero defects and detection and
resolution of problems at source.
– Waste minimization: removing all activities which are not adding value,
establishing safety nets and making an optimal use of scarce productive
resources (financial, human and systems).
– Continuous improvement: reducing costs, improving quality, increasing
productivity and sharing information.
– Pull processes: products are requested by clients, not offered by pushing
on demand.
– Flexibility: aiming quick production of a range of products without
efficiency losses due to lower production volumes.
From taylorism to neo-taylorism: a 100 year journey in human resource management 507
On this last point, the references to remuneration and incentive systems would
also deserve further consideration and analysis. In summary, closed payment
systems structured on predefined elements must evolve to more open and flexible
models aiming at the motivation and integration of the staff members through the
combination of wages with other factors, also positively valued by people, such as
From taylorism to neo-taylorism: a 100 year journey in human resource management 509
processes that craft and chain work experienced once in time when reconsidered
under the original principles of Taylorism.
Under the postulates of Digital Taylorism, creative and intellectual tasks -
until recently considered as non-machinable- are subject to the same process as
chain work. Once they have been codified and digitalized, the human capacity
for decision and judgment can be replaced by automatic programs with
computerized decision protocols. As processes can be easily relocated due to
technical mobility possibilities -as proper of computerized global connections-
jobs are easy to export, change or replace.
The effects of Digital Taylorism are more visible in developed countries as
computerized tasks are increasing day by day there, while in developing and
underdeveloped countries wages remain at lower levels.
2
Queuing theories are not new at all in organizational literatures. What is more, different authors have
been considering for years the usefulness of single queues (see, e.g., Gelenbe–Pujolle 1976).
From taylorism to neo-taylorism: a 100 year journey in human resource management 511
However, one of the most well-known cases applying this philosophy is the
Internet giant Google. Together with high wages, the company provides its
employees all sorts of "extra benefits", such as corporate transport, breakfast, lunch
or dinner facilities, gyms and a wide range of activities for relaxation and leisure. At
the first sight this can be perceived as a "maximum development" of the principles
of internal marketing (up to the extent that Google occupies year after year top
leading positions in the rankings of "most desired companies" when seeking for a
job3), but it may be also interpreted as the overexploitation of the imaginative and
creative potential of a highly qualified personnel (thus dealing with Digital
Taylorism) whose lives take place almost entirely in the working place and its
immediate surroundings, day and night sharing talks, comments, activities and
experiences with colleagues in a very restricted affective circle where everything is
related to the company, its projects and problems.
Although economic conditions may be attractive and perception on other
incentives may be favorable, the reality is that employees devote in one way or
another 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and 365 days a year to the organization.
6. Conclusions
3
Appearing in the fourth position in 2011 (CNNMoney 2011).
512 José Luis Vázquez – García María Purificación
scheme in mass production and evolved into Lean Manufacturing and other hybrid
forms in Western countries.
However, and far away of being considered an obsolete or exhausted model,
new forms of Neo-Taylorism remain fully in force up to current times in productive
organizations, even nowadays in a highly globalized and technologically developed
environment. That is the case of Digital Taylorism or other forms of Neo-Taylorism
in connection with customer service or the overexploitation of the imaginative and
creative potential of highly qualified employees appearing as an attractive internal
marketing offer.
Therefore, we could not conclude but Taylor’s principles remain fully in
force. Of course, we are not specifically or only talking about their application in
assembly lines or work chains, but about the usefulness and validity of general
statements dealing with the maximization of efficiency through reduction of time
and resources in production (something also closely related to current positions
regarding sustainability of productive activity).
We can expect new forms of Taylorism to be developed and applied based on
and compatible with social progress in labor sphere. One hundred years after the
publication of his Principles of Scientific Management, Taylor’s assumptions are
nowadays entirely valid in current socioeconomic context.
Felhasznált irodalom
Amako, T. (1982): Quand les enterprises japonaises intègrent la gestion américaine. Revue
Française de Gestion, 35, 2, pp. 59–63.
Arndt, J. (1983): The Political Economy paradigm: Foundation for theory building in
Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 47, 4, pp. 44–54.
Atta, D. van (1986): Why is there no Taylorism in the Soviet Union? Comparative Politics,
18, 3, pp. 327–337.
Barranco, F. J. (1993): Planificación estratégica de los recursos humanos. Del marketing
interno a la planificación. Pirámide, Madrid.
Brown, P. – Lauder, H. – Asthon, D. (2011): The global auction: The broken promises of
education, jobs, and incomes. Oxford University Press, New York.
CNNMoney (2011): 100 best companies to work for 2011. Retrieved October 26,
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2011/index.html
Coriat, B. (1995): Incentives, bargaining and trust: Alternative scenario for the future of
work. International Contributions to Labor Studies, 5, pp. 131–151.
Fayol, H. (1949): General and industrial management. Pitman Publishing, New York.
Gelenbe, E. – Pujolle, G. (1976): The behaviour of a single queue in a general queuing
network. Acta Informatica, 7, 2, pp. 123–136.
From taylorism to neo-taylorism: a 100 year journey in human resource management 513
George, C. S. Jr. (1972): The history of management thought. Englewood Cliffs Prentice-
Hall, New Jersey.
Grönross, C. (1984): Internal marketing: Theory and practice. In Bloch, T. –Upah, G. D. –
Zeithamlm V. A. (eds.): Services marketing in a changing environment. American
Marketing Association, Chicago, pp. 41–47.
Head, S. (2005): The new ruthless economy. Work and power in the digital age. Oxford
University Press, New York.
Jürgens, U. – Malsch, T. – Dohse, K. (1993): Breaking from Taylorism. Changing forms of
work in the automobile industry. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Koontz, H. – Weihrich, H. (1994): Administración. Una perspectiva global (10th ed.).
McGraw-Hill, México.
Langarica, C. (1995): La comunicación interna como herramienta de management. Dirección
y Progreso, 140, 2, pp. 56–58.
Levionnois, M. (1987): Marketing internet et management des hommes. Les Editions
d’Organisation, Paris.
McGregor, D. (1960): The human side of enterprise. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Neffa, J. C. (1998): Los paradigmas productivos taylorista y fordista y su crisis. Una
contribución a su estudio desde la Teoría de la Regulación. Lumen-Humanitas,
Buenos Aires.
Ouchi, W. G. (1981): Theory Z. Addison-Wesley, Reading Massachusetts.
Rinehart, J. W. (1975): The tyranny of work. Academic Press, Don Mills Ontario.
Serra, A. (1984): Prólogo. In Taylor F.W.: Management Científico. Hyspamérica, Buenos
Aires, pp. 1–12.
Taylor, F.W. (1947): Scientific Management. Harper&Brothers, New York.
Vázquez, J. L. – García, M. P. (1999): La gestión integral de los recursos humanos: Las
Teorías X, Y, Z y algo más. In Vázquez, J. L. –Placer, J. L. (dirs.): La gestión de
recursos humanos en el siglo XXI. Nuevas tendencias económico-jurídicas León: J. L.
Vázquez y J.L. Placer Eds, pp. 15–26.
Vázquez, J. L. (1998): El papel de los recursos humanos en la empresa: La persona como
objetivo y producto del marketing de los recursos humanos. In Vázquez, J. L. –
Placer, J. L. (dirs.): Perspectivas de trabajo en el mercado laboral actual.
Alternativas de trabajo para los titulados universitarios León: J. L. Vázquez y J.L.
Placer Eds. pp. 15–24.
Womack, J. P. –Jones, D. T. (2003): Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your
corporation. The Free Press, New York.