CHAPTER TWO
HUMAN RELATIONS DEVELOPMENT THEORIES
Elton mayors Hawthorne Experimental Theory (1924)
The human relations development theory of management began in the early 1920's during the industrial revolution. At that time, efficiency was the focus of business. Professor Elton Mayo began his experiments (the Hawthorne Studies), to prove the importance of people development for efficiency – not to be used as machines. The human relations management theory is a researched belief that people desire to be part of a supportive team that facilitates development and growth. Thus, if staff receive special attention and are encouraged to participate, they perceive their work has significance, and they are motivated to be more productive, resulting in high quality work. The following human relations management theories are the basic became evident during any human relations studies:
1. Individual attention and recognition aligns with the human relations theory.
2. Many theorists supported the motivational theory.
3. Studies supported the importance of human relations in business.
The results of Professor Elton Mayo's Hawthorne studies proved that the factor most influencing efficiency is decent relationships. The Researchers realized that efficiency rise due to relationships. Also, that being part of a supportive group where each staff's work had a significant effect on the team output. As a side result, the researchers noticed that the rise attention the staff received by the researchers rise motivation and efficiency, which resulted in what is called the Hawthorne Effect.
Elton Mayo is considered the founder of the Human relations Theory. Prior to this trend, Elton Mayo already started an experiment in the Hawthorne plans in 1924. The Hawthorne experiment Story states that there was a great deal of discontent among the 30,000 staff in the Hawthorne plants in Chicago in the early twenties of the last century. This was somewhat peculiar, because this phone parts plant already acted extremely progressively towards its staff (through pensions and sickness benefits), something which was almost unthinkable in the period. They experimented with light, duration of breaks and working hours. A group of women were exposed to either more or less light. It turned out that, regardless of the amount and duration of lighting, this had a positive effect on their performances. The same was true for rest periods; shorter or longer breaks both led to a rise in labour efficiency.
The conclusion drawn from the Hawthorne research was that giving attention to staff resulted in improved performances. The group of staff who were involved in the search felt their voices heard and experienced a feeling of greater personal freedom. The staff were pleased that their assistance was requested, which they believed led to their higher job performances. During the study, senior officials regularly visited the workplace, making the staff feel like they belonged to a certain elite group. This personal attention stimulated the group to work even harder together and give their all for the organization. Collaboration in an informal group is also one of the main aspects of this Human relations Theory. Elton Mayo (1924) concluded that the needs of staff were often based on sentiment (belonging to a group and thus having a sense of value) and that this could lead to conflicts with managers, who mainly focused on cost reduction and efficiency. And thus, he came to the following final conclusions: Individual staff must be seen as members of a group, Salary and decent working conditions are less important for staff and a sense of belonging to a group.
Douglas MacGregor’s X and Y Theories
The human relations school of management has been used for quite some time, enjoying fairly worldwide acceptance, till, even today not every company or manager embraces this management theory’s, there's little doubt that it has changed the overall management practice for the better. The theory is referred to as the motivational theory. Human relationss management theory views the staff differently than the more autocratic management theories of the past. Douglas McGregor's X and Y Theories, is another human relations management theory. Theory (Y), assumes that people want to work, that they are responsible and self-motivated, that they want to succeed and that they comprehend their own position in the company hierarchy. This is the exact opposite of Theory (X), which presumes that staff are lazy and if unmotivated, that they seek nothing more from their jobs than security and that they require discipline from without. Human relations theory, rather than viewing the worker as merely one more cog in the company’s wheel, asserts that the organization will prosper as it helps the staff prosper. According to human relations management theory X and Y, some positive management actions that lead to staff motivation and improved performance are these:
1. Treating staff as if work is as natural as play or rest, just as motivational theory states
2. Sharing the big-picture objectives towards which their work is aimed
3. Empowering them to innovate and make as many independent decisions as they can handle
4. Training and developing them, increasing freedom and responsibility as their capabilities grow
5. Providing appropriate recognition and rewards when they achieve company goals
6. Using any other helpful theories of human relations that will keep them motivated toward excellence in their work.
Scientific Management Theory (1950)
The immediate period after World War Two saw a different approach in organizational human relations studies. Until that time, there was only talk of scientific management, which mainly focused on efficiency, efficient division of labour and staff as an extension of machinery. 1950 saw a change to this discourse with the introduction of the Human relations Theory. This movement saw staff in a different light; they were now seen as thinking beings with needs, who liked to receive attention. Firms realized that attention motivated staff and even allowed them to get more out of themselves for the benefit of the organization.
In the era of the Human relations Theory, the concept of labour motivation’ is given a new meaning compared to the scientific management theory era. The fact that personal attention led to improved performances was a completely new perspective. The term staff was gradually replaced with staff, which more explicitly implies that these people are thinking people who can positively contribute to the organizational goals.
Behavioural Management Theory
Starting in the 1950s, a definitive different approach to management emerges. Staff behaviour is placed centrally and the Human relations theory placed strong emphasis on the fact that organizations consist of groups of people. Human relations theory supporters thus replaced the mechanistic perspective on management with a people-oriented perspective. Every person is unique and thus unpredictable. Their behaviour is complex and to fully comprehend them, it is important to recognize their personal motivations. The way staff think and act at work is not only influenced by rules, procedures and requirements imposed by management. Attention, respect, interest shown and social/ interpersonal relationships are just as important. These kinds of human interactions trigger an emotional sense in staff, which is often referred to as a person’s soft side. This soft side consists of emotional or irrational logic and can strengthen rational logic, but at the same time can weaken or eliminate it. Rational logic focuses on each other, which in turn leads to internal conflicts and dilemmas.
Complex Humanity Theory
The complexity of human behaviour rises even more if a staff indicates his desires and knows when he will make certain decisions. From a behavioural perspective, staff can also decide what behaviour they prefer and how this behaviour manifests itself. As a result, there is no single pattern that can automatically be associated with a specific situation. Every person is very much different in terms of character and behaviour. Everyone has different values, standards and desires, which results in demonstrably different behaviour. This complex humanity is an important factor in guiding staff. It is thus the task of managers to identify the individual needs of staff and act accordingly.
Human relations sounds decent but, Grey points out that Mayo also thought that “worker resistance is a psychological maladjustment rather than a rational response to conditions of engagement” this can be used to dehumanize people. Mayo was also supposed to have “proposed that membership of a Trade Union was a sign of mental illness”. Action that follows from such prejudice has often been abusive. We need to be vigilant when it comes to Psychological Manipulation and Negative Impression of Management regardless of intentions. Agreed definitions of terms become the standard to measure relations. e.g. “Transparency”.
This human relations theory emphasized the need for a clear comprehending of the importance of human attitudes, capacity and abilities in terms of organizational effectiveness. The human relations theory or approach sought to respond to emerging social pressures with a more enlightened treatment of staff. This body of work focused on the idea that people need companionship and to have a sense of belonging and seek satisfaction in the social relationships they form at work. The best-known social studies of industry were the Hawthorne studies conducted by Elton Mayo. The conclusions from this study were that groups of staff quickly become self-governing team sand, when fully involved in effective two-way consultation in decisions which affect them, will be highly committed to management and organizational goals. They belief that human relations are the best approach for improving efficiency, this idea still persists in many organizations today and the works of motivational theorists such as McGregor and Hertzberg support this view.
Effective of Management Strategy and Necessary Actions
§ More conscious of worker’s feelings
§ More emphasis on meaningful work
§ Job enrichment
§ Job rotation
§ Job design.
§ Greater delegation of responsibility
§ Less management controls
§ Decent induction techniques
§ Encouragement of the formation of
§ Cohesive groups
§ Group incentives
§ Respect for individual personalities and
§ Personal circumstances
§ Expectation of greater moral
§ Commitment from subordinates
Henry Fayol Classical Management Theory
Henry Fayol's management theory of human relations is a simple model of how management interacts with personnel. Fayol's management theory covers concepts in a broad way. Almost any business can apply his theory of management. Today the business community considers Fayol's classical management theory as a relevant guide to productively managing state. The management theory of Henry Fayol includes 14 principles of management. From these principles, Fayol concluded that management should interact with personnel in five basic ways in order to control and plan production well.
1. Planning: According to Fayol's theory, management must plan and schedule every part of the industrial processes.
2. Organizing: Henry Fayol argued that in addition to planning a manufacturing process, management must also make certain all the necessary resources (raw materials, personnel, etc.) came together at the appropriate time of production.
3. Commanding: Henry Fayol's management theory states that management must encourage and direct personnel activity.
4. Coordinating: According to the management theory of Henry Fayol, management must make certain that personnel work together in a cooperative manner.
5. Controlling: The final management activity, according to Henry Fayol, is for the manager to evaluate and ensure that personnel follow management's commands and directives.
References
Bellet, Paul S. & Michael J. M. (1991). "Theories of human relations”. JAMA.226 (13): 1831–1832. doi:10.1001/jama.1991.0347 References0130111039.
Gallese, V. (2003). "The Roots of human relations theory: The Shared Manifold Hypothesis and the Neural Basis of Intersubjectivity". Psychopathology.36 (4): 171–180. CiteSeerX10.1.1.143.2396. doi:10.1159/000072786. PMID 14504450.
Decety, J. (2011). "The neuroevolution of theory of human relations". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.1231 (1): 35–45. Bibcode: 2011NYASA1231...35 D. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.201 1.06027.x. PMID 21651564.