Scientific Management Essay Example

Scientific Management Essay Example Scientific Management Essay Scientific Management Essay The chosen article that will be explored through this essay, by Locke, Edwin A. (1982) The Ideas of Frederick W. Taylor: An Evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 7(1). This main source believes that Taylor was the Founding father of Scientific Management, being his key principle, featuring the one best way. However in order to understand the reasoning and logic behind Taylors principles, one must understand the context of the time to make informed decision of the validity of the principles.Fifty percent of the sources believe that Taylor’s principles have transcended through time, forming the basis for modern day contemporary organizations, such as IBM. However the other half of the sources believe that Taylor’s principles have been a detriment to society, which have dehumanized the workforce, creating men as machines, believing that this has established the elements of today’s bureaucratic society. In The Ideas of Frederick. W.Taylor: An evaluation, there ar e various key themes and principles evident which have provided the foundations for some contemporary styles of management. The author suggests that Taylors concept of scientific management can be likened to the works of Thomas Edison. Scientific Management is Taylors most widely recognized principle. Taylor believed in a scientific approach toward managerial decisions making. That managerial decisions should be based upon proven fact rather than on tradition This principle proved to be most effective when selecting workmen and the time taken to complete a task, through scientific selection and time and motion studies, the man most suited to a particular type of work will be chosen, who is able to complete the work within a specific time frame through the one best way. Taylor believed in the standardization of tools and procedures becoming cohesive, allowing for effective and efficient work time, with adequate rest and pause breaks and shorter working hours.To motivate the worker Ta ylor assigned a realistic, quality amount of a job, on the basis of time study, which he deemed a task, which is the long term equivalent to the word goal. He believed that if management was to provide monetary incentives (the money bonus) and the worker achieved their goal, then there would be efficient productivity. However the key to efficiency was for management to provide feedback on the work being done. Along with this, a main objective of Taylors was to have positive working relations etween management and workers by understanding social factors, to achieve this, management would take responsibility for their new employees by training them properly which would eliminate confusion of standards and process and supporting the elimination of systematic soldiering. It is evident that Taylors main objective was to forge a mental revolution of knowledge and communication between manager and employee. In order to see the viewpoint of the sources, one must understand the context of th e time, where the working class man became of importance due to the boom of the industrial age, which created a middle class of society.Also the impending First World War would create need for consistency and efficiency. Due to the progression of the development of the machines, man needed to find a solution to compete in the global market, to increase workers efficiency so revenue would not become obsolete. Taylor’s principles, in theory, created the solution at the time. This is clear, as the ‘wage earner in the railroads car repair shops was only $163 compared to $283 in the shops of commercial car builders such as Pullman’ (Aldrich, 2010, p. 504 ) stressing a need to be competitive in the financial market.The implementations of Taylor’s principles of the incentive system and time study, costs in the shops were reduced 13-15%, with the worker earning a bonus if he was ‘at least 80% efficient’ (Aldrich, 2010, p. 507). A critique of this, it caused hostility in the worker, which resulted from the incentive system and as the ‘Taylorites viewed unions as interference’ (Aldrich, 2010, p. 507). This disagrees with the main source as Taylor did not oppose unions; he felt them unnecessary, as the proper implementation of his principles should result in effective manager-worker relations.Fifty percent of the sources accept that the concepts of Scientific Management, which Taylor wrote of, formulated the management style in the early 1900’s and subsequently elements of some contemporary organizations, such as IBM. All agree that Taylor was the ‘Founding Father’ of scientific management and produced some of the most influential principles, featuring the ‘One best way’, where the most efficient method of work would be adopted to all employees. Some of Taylors Scientific Management principles can be seen in IBM, first and foremost IBM believes in making informed decisions hrough knowle dge, in order to generate growth – scientific management. In the past IBM has spent twenty-five million on employee benefits, allowing security- incentive system. IBM expects ‘a return on investment from IBM families’ (Mason, 1991, p. 10). Through this they are able to measure ‘employee productivity’, which can be seen as a very modern and skewed notion of the time and motion studies, which Taylor would have measured the output of his employees. However at IBM ‘after 3 three years benefits are cut up to 75% and employees are no longer guaranteed full employment’ (Mason, 1991, p. 2). The first few concepts of IBM agree with the main article, however the last concept disagrees as Taylors incentive scheme would reduce the wage of a worker if they were not efficient, not dependant on the number of years an employee worked. Another critique of Taylor’s Scientific Management Principles was the mechanization of humans into machines, crea ting a lack of creativity within the employee, separating ‘brain from muscle’ (Maqbool, Zakariya, Paracha, 2011, p. 46). Taylor’s intention with Scientific management was to improve the working relations between manager and employee, believing that systematic soldiering could be stopped by good management, however Maqbool, Zakariya, Paracha believe that Taylor was naive in his understanding of employees, that the worker craved more than money and personal interrelations within the workforce, to be treated as individuals, not as machinery – this especially became evident after the war.This is clear in the study done by French and Coch in a pajama factory, where management had supposedly implemented the Scientific Management principles, money incentive and feedback system though the employees had little motivation and very low self esteem, due to the changing nature of their jobs. They found that employees felt satisfied when they were included in the decis ion making process and when management explained the changes, leading to job security. This both agrees and disagrees with the main source. It agrees, as that Taylor knew if his principles were not fully implemented, than it would not work.Though it could be said that Taylor was naive in the sense that he did not account that as the pie got bigger, so too would people’s ambitions. This disagrees, believing that Taylor did not dehumanize the workforce, just increased the efficiency of the worker through positive working relations. In conclusion it is clear that there is a distinct difference of opinion on Taylor’s principles. Fifty percent of the sources believe that scientific management became the fundamental concept of the early 1900’s due to the changing social and financial context of the time.That he was able to increase productivity efficiency with a reduction of costs, alongside positive working relations between manager and worker. Through this point of view it is clear that these principles transcend through time into a contemporary organisation, such as IBM However the remainder of the sources believes that Taylor dehumanized the workforce, focusing on efficiency and neglecting the basic needs of the worker, believing that the elements of Taylor’s principles have created a negative impact on society, bureaucracy.This view point accepts that Taylor ultimately created men as machines, ‘separating brain from muscle’ (Maqbool, Zakariya, Paracha, 2011, p. 846). References Aldrich, Mark. (2010). On the Track of Efficiency: Scientific Management Comes to Railroad Shops, 1900-1930. Business History Review, 84(3), 504-507. Bartlem, Carleton S. , Locke, Edwin A. (1981). The Coch and French Study: A critique and Reinterpretation. Business Source Complete, 34(7). Blake, Anne M. Moseley, James L. (2010). One Hundred Years After The Principles Of Scientific Management: Frederick Taylors Life And Impact On The Field Of Hum an Performance Technology. Performance Improvement, 49(4). Kidwell Jr, Ronald E. , Scherer, Philip M. (2001). Layoffs and Their Ethical Implications under Scientific Management, Quality Management and Open-Book Management. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(1/2). Locke, Edwin A. (19820. The Ideas of Frederick W. Taylor: An Evaluation.Academy of Management Review, 7(1). Latham, Gary P. , Timothy, P, Steele. The Motivational Effects of Participation Versus Goal Setting on Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 26(3). Maqbool, Mugheera. , Zakariya, Ahmad. , Paracha Naveed, Ahmer. (2011). A critique on Scientific Management. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(4), 846. Mason Cohen, Julie. (1991). IBM at the Crossroads. Management review, 80(9), 10-12. Myers, A. Lewis, Jr. (2011).One Hundred Years Later: What Would Frederick W. Taylor Say?. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(20) Ratnayake, Chandima R. M. (2009). Evolution of Scientif ic Management Towards Performance Measurement and Managing Systems for Sustainable Performance in Industrial Assets: Philosophical Point of View. Journal of Technology Management Innovation, 4(1). Zimmerman, Kent D. (1978). Participative Management: A Reexamination of the Classics. Academy of Management Review, 3(4).

Catherine of Aragon - Early Life and First Marriage

Catherine of Aragon - Early Life and First Marriage Catherine of Aragon, whose parents united Castile and Aragon with their marriage, was promised in marriage to the son of Henry VII of England, in order to promote the alliance between the Spanish and English rulers. Dates: December 16, 1485 - January 7, 1536Also Known as: Katharine of Aragon, Catherine of Aragon, CatalinaSee: more Catherine of Aragon Facts Catherine of Aragon Biography Catherine of Aragons role in history was, first, as a marriage partner to strengthen the alliance of England and Spain (Castile and Aragon), and later, as the center of Henry VIIIs struggle for an annulment that would permit him to remarry and try for a male heir to the English throne for the Tudor dynasty. She was not simply a pawn in the latter, but her stubbornness in fighting for her marriage and her daughters right to inherit were key in how that struggle ended, with Henry VIII separating the Church of England from the Church of Romes authority. Catherine of Aragon Family Background Catherine of Aragon was the fifth child of Isabella I of Castile and Ferdinand of Aragon. She was born in Alcal de Henares. Catherine was likely named for her mothers grandmother, Katherine of Lancaster, the daughter of Constance of Castile who was second wife of John of Gaunt, himself son of Englands Edward III. Constance and Johns daughter, Catherine of Lancaster, married Henry III of Castile and was the mother of John II of Castile, Isabellas father. Constance of Castile was the daughter of Peter (Pedro) of Castile, known as Peter the Cruel, who was overthrown by his brother Henry (Enrique) II. John of Gaunt tried to claim the throne of Castile on the basis of his wife Constances descent from Peter. Catherines father Ferdinand was the great-grandson of Philippa of Lancaster, the daughter of John of Gaunt and his first wife, Blanche of Lancaster. Philippas brother was Henry IV of England. Thus, Catherine of Aragon had considerable English royal heritage herself. Her parents were also both part of the House of Trastmara, a dynasty that ruled kingdoms in the Iberian peninsula from 1369 to 1516, descended from King Henry (Enrique) II of Castile who overthrew his brother, Peter, in 1369, part of the War of the Spanish Succession the same Peter who was the father of Isabellas grandmother Constance of Castile, and the same Henry John of Gaunt tried to overthrow. Catherine of Aragon Childhood and Education: In her early years, Catherine traveled extensively within Spain with her parents as they fought their war to remove the Muslims from Granada. Because Isabella regretted the lack of her own educational preparation when she became a ruling queen, she educated her daughters well, preparing them for their likely roles as queens. So Catherine had an extensive education, with many European humanists as her teachers. Among the tutors who educated Isabella, and then her daughters, was Beatriz Galindo. Catherine spoke Spanish, Latin, French and English, and was well-read in philosophy and theology. Alliance with England Through Marriage Catherine was born in 1485, the same year Henry VII seized the crown of England as the first Tudor monarch. Arguably, Catherines own royal descent was more legitimate than Henrys, who was descended from their common ancestor John of Gaunt through the children of Katherine Swynford, his third wife, who were born before their marriage and later legitimized but declared ineligible for the throne. In 1486, Henrys first son, Arthur was born. Henry VII sought powerful connections for his children through marriage; so did Isabella and Ferdinand. Ferdinand and Isabella first sent diplomats to England to negotiate Catherines marriage to Arthur in 1487. The next year, Henry VII agreed to the marriage, and a formal agreement including dowry specifications was drwan up. Ferdinand and Isabella were to pay the dowry in two parts, one when Catherine arrived in England (traveling at her parents expense), and the other after the wedding ceremony. Even at this point, there were some differences between the two families over the terms of the contract, each wanting the other to pay more than that other family wanted to pay. Henrys early recognition of the unification of Castile and Aragon in the Treaty of Medina del Campo in 1489 was important to Isabella and Ferdinand; this treaty also aligned the Spanish with England rather than France. In this treaty, the marriage of Arthur and Catherine was further defined. Catherine and Arthur were far too young to actually marry at that time. Challenge to Tudor Legitimacy Between 1491 and 1499, Henry VII also had to contend with a challenge to his legitimacy when a man asserted himself to be Richard, duke of York, son of Edward IV (and brother of Henry VIIs wife Elizabeth of York). Richard and his older brother had been confined to the Tower of London when their uncle, Richard III, seized the crown from their father, Edward IV, and they were not seen again. Its generally agreed that either Richard III or Henry IV had them killed. If one had been alive, hed have a greater legitimate claim to the English throne than Henry VII did. Margaret of York (Margaret of Burgundy) another of the children of Edward IV had opposed Henry VII as a usurper, and she was drawn into supporting this man who claimed to be her nephew, Richard. Ferdinand and Isabella supported Henry VII and their future son-in-laws inheritance by helping to expose the pretenders Flemish origins. The pretender, whom the Tudor supporters called Perkin Warbeck, was finally seized and executed by Henry VII in 1499. More Treaties and Conflict Over the Marriage Ferdinand and Isabella began secretly exploring marrying Catherine to James IV of Scotland. In 1497, the marriage agreement between the Spanish and English was amended and treaties of marriage were signed in England. Catherine was to be sent to England only when Arthur turned fourteen. In 1499, the first proxy wedding of Arthur and Catherine was held in Worcestershire. The marriage required a papal dispensation because Arthur was younger than the age of consent. The next year, there was new conflict over the terms and especially over payment of the dowry and Catherines arrival date in England. It was in Henrys interest for her to arrive earlier rather than later, as payment of the first half of the dowry was contingent on her arrival. Another proxy wedding was held in 1500 in Ludlow, England. Catherine and Arthur Marry Finally, Catherine embarked for England, and arrived in Plymouth on October 5, 1501. Her arrival took the English by surprise, apparently, as Henrys steward did not receive Catherine until October 7. Catherine and her large accompanying party began their progress towards London. On November 4, Henry VII and Arthur met the Spanish entourage, Henry famously insisting on seeing his future daughter-in-law even if in her bed. Catherine and household arrived in London on November 12, and Arthur and Catherine were married at St. Pauls on November 14. A week of feasts and other celebrations followed. Catherine was given the titles of Princess of Wales, Duchess of Cornwall and Countess of Chester. As prince of Wales, Arthur was being sent to Ludlow with his own separate royal household. The Spanish advisors and diplomats argued whether Catherine should accompany him and whether she was old enough for marital relations yet; the ambassador wanted her to delay going to Ludlow, and her priest disagreed. Henry VIIs wish that she accompany Arthur prevailed, and they both left for Ludlow on December 21. There, they both became ill with the sweating sickness. Arthur died on April 2, 1502; Catherine recovered from her serious bout with the illness to find herself a widow. Next: Catherine of Aragon: Marriage to Henry VIII About Catherine of Aragon: Catherine of Aragon Facts | Early Life and First Marriage | Marriage to Henry VIII | The Kings Great Matter | Catherine of Aragon Books | Mary I | Anne Boleyn | Women in the Tudor Dynasty