Taylor's Framework on Motivation: Function, Key Points, and Controversy

==============================================================================

In the early 20th century, Frederick Winslow Taylor's management theory, often referred to as Scientific Management or Taylorism, revolutionised the industrial landscape. The theory, designed to maximise efficiency and reduce costs, is still relevant today, albeit with its share of criticisms.

At its core, Taylor's theory aims to produce more output at the least possible cost. This is achieved by adopting the scientific method, requiring the mapping of work within the company and its division into smaller parts. The division of labour aims to make it easier to calculate output targets for each worker.

The theory also involves identifying the fastest method to run production, establishing procedures and instructions, and supervising employee work. To incentivise workers, payments to employees are based on the piece rate, which motivates them to work harder and maximise productivity. Employees receive more payments if they exceed the target output, and less if they don't meet it.

However, Taylor's motivation theory has faced criticism from scientists, who argue that it oversimplifies human behaviour. The reductionist approach neglects intentionality and deeper human values, and has been challenged for ignoring the complex, communal, and value-based aspects of motivation. Critics also point out that the theory's emphasis on a mechanistic and individualistic view is incompatible with social and ethical dimensions.

One of the key criticisms is the theory's focus on money as the primary motivator for employees. While it may drive productivity, it may also lead to employee dissatisfaction and high absenteeism due to the company's inability to accommodate non-financial motivators. Employees need autonomy, love, belonging, and the opportunity to actualise themselves for job satisfaction and morale.

Moreover, calculating non-physical contributions accurately is challenging in Taylor's theory, especially for service companies. This can lead to employees feeling unappreciated if their non-physical contributions are not considered in compensation.

Despite these criticisms, the theory has its merits. Matching employees' abilities and skills with job duties is essential for maximum efficiency. Harmonious cooperation between managers and workers is necessary for interdependence and understanding each other's roles. The company also provides training to workers to make them more proficient in their jobs.

The company analyses outputs and costs to improve production methods if necessary. A positive work environment is necessary to satisfy employees' needs for love and belonging. Monitoring employee work and performance is crucial for identifying efficient methods and ensuring company efficiency.

In conclusion, while Taylor's theory has been instrumental in shaping modern business practices, it is essential to consider its limitations and strive for a balanced approach that caters to both efficiency and employee well-being.