Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Hawthrone studies
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Hawthrone studies

3,344
views

Published on

Elton Mayo and Hawthrone studies

Elton Mayo and Hawthrone studies


0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
3,344
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
158
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. ELTON MAYO ANDHAWTHORNE EXPERIMENTS Prepared by: Joby Jose P.
  • 2. HAWTHORNE EXPERIMENTS The Master Brains…  ELTON MAYO  WHITE HEAD  FRITZ ROTHISBERGER  WILLIAM DICKSON Known as Management guru Founder of human relations movement. Author of the book “human problems of an industrial civilization (1933) Fritz Roethlisberger *He was a Social Scientist and Management Theorist *He was also the Professor of Harvard Business School8 November 2012 Hawthorne Experiments
  • 3. Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012“THE HAWTHORNE STUDIES”• Illumination Study (November 1924) – Designed to test the effect of lighting intensity on worker productivity – influence of human relations on work behavior• Relay Assembly Test Room Study (1927-1932) – To determine the effect of changes in various job conditions on group activity.• Interviewing Program (1928-1930) – Investigate connection between supervisory practices and employee morale – Employees expressed their attitudes towards company, supervision, insurance plans, promotion and wages (e.g., likes and dislikes)• Bank Wiring Room Observation Study (November 1931 - May 1932) – Social groups can influence production and individual work behavior – How is social control manifested on the shop floor?
  • 4. Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012 Why Human Relations and the Hawthorne Study ? The Hawthorne plant of General Electric Company, Chicago,was manufacturing telephone system bell. It employed about 30,000employees at the time of experiments.In respect of material benefits to workers, this was the most progressivecompany with pension and sickness benefits and other recreationalfacilities, there was great deal of dissatisfaction among the workers andproductivity was not up to the mark. Many findings of earlier writers, particularly of scientificmanagement, which focused attention on the mechanical andphysiological variables. All these variables were tested in the field toincrease the efficiency of the organizations.
  • 5. Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012 The positive aspects of these variables could not evoke positiveresponse work behavior at work. They discovered the real cause of thebehavior was something more than these variables. Such findings generateda new phenomenon about human behavior and focused attention on thehuman behaving in the organizations. As such, this new approach has beencalled ‘human relations approach of management.After the utter failure of an investigation conducted by efficiency experts, in1924, the company asked for the assistance form the national academy ofsciences to investigate the problems of low productivity.
  • 6. Airplane View of Hawthorne Works Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 7. Western Electric Company Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 8. 1. ILLUMINATION EXPERIMENT Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 9. Illumination Studies• 1924-1927• Funded by General Electric• Conducted by The National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academy of Sciences with engineers from MIT Purpose of the study: TO STUDY THE EFFECT OF VARIOUS LIGHTING CONDITIONS ON THE WORKERS PRODUCTIVITY. DIVIDED THE WORKERS INTO TWO GROUPS The hypothesis was that with higher illumination, productivity would increase. GROUP -1 :- LIGHTING CONDITION IMPROVED AND THE PRODUCTIVITY WENT UP . GROUP-2 :- LIGHTING CONDITION REMAINED CONSTANT AND THE PRODUCTIVITY INCREASED.• Measured Light Intensity vs. Worker Output• Result : – Rejected the hypothesis – Higher worker productivity and satisfaction at all light levels – Worker productivity was stopped with the light levels reached moonlight intensity.• Conclusions: – Light intensity has no conclusive effect on output – Productivity has a psychological component _ Concept of “Hawthorne Effect” was created Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 10. IILUMINATION STUDY Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 11. 2. Relay Assembly Test Experiments 1927-1929 Experiments were conducted by Elton Mayo Manipulated factors of production to measure effect on output ( Pay Incentives, Length of Work Day & Work Week , Use of Rest Periods, Company Sponsored Meals ) · under normal conditions, with a 48-hour week, including Saturdays, and no breaks, the girls produced 2,400 relays a week each. · they were then put on piece-work for 8 weeks. Output went up. · two 5-minute rest pauses, morning and afternoon, were introduced for a period of 5 weeks. Output went up once more. · the rest pauses were lengthened to 10 minutes each. Output went up sharply. · six 5-minute pauses were introduced, and the girls complained that their work rhythm was broken by the frequent pauses. Output fell slightly. · the 2 rest pauses were re-instated, the first with a hot meal supplied by the Company free of charge. Output went up. · the girls finished at 4.30 pm instead of 5.00 pm. Output went up. · the girls finished at 4.00 pm. Output remained the same. · finally, all the improvements were taken away, and the girls went back to the same conditions that they had at the beginning of the experiment: work on Saturday, 48- hour week, no rest pauses, no piece work and no free meal. These conditions lasted for a period of 12 weeks. Output was the highest ever recorded with the girls averaging 3000 relays a week each. Results:  Higher output and greater employee satisfaction Conclusions:  Workers’ output increased as a response to attention, feeling of being important, attention, cohesive group work, and non-directive supervision.  Strong social bonds were created within the test group. Workers are influenced by need for recognition, security and sense of belonging Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 12. WOMEN IN THE RELAY TEST ASSEMBLY ROOM Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 13. 3. MASS INTERVIEWING PROGRAMME• Conducted 21,000 interviews.• Objective was to explore information, which could be used to improve supervisory training.• Initially used the method of Direct Questioning and changed to Non Directive. Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 14. Mass Interview Program• Results - Merely giving an opportunity to talk and express grievances would increase the morale. - Complaints were symptoms of deep-rooted disturbances. -Workers are governed by experience obtained from both inside and outside the company. - The social organization of the company represents a system of values from which the worker derives satisfaction or dissatisfaction. - The social demands of the worker are influenced by social experience in groups both inside and outside the work plant. Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 15. 4. BANK WIRING OBSERVATION ROOM EXPERIMENT 14 WORKERS  9 WIREMEN  3 SOLDERMEN  2 INSPECTOR Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 16. 4. Bank Wiring Room Experiment – 1931-1932 Few Special Conditions  Segregated work area  No Management Visits  Supervision would remain the same  Observer would record data only – no interaction with workers New incentive pay rate was established for the small group Any increases in output would be included in departmental pay incentives Result – output was lower than what company had determined. The reasons for this output:  Fear of unemployment  Fear of raising the standards Protection of slower workers Satisfaction on the part of management Conclusions:  Well established performance norms existed in the group  Informal Social Organization dictated little deviation from established production standards  Informal Social Organizations protect workers from managers who  Raise production standards  Cut pay rates  Challenge workplace norms Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 17. 1. There is no direct relationship between worker productivity and physical factors.2. The employer can be motivated by psychological and social wants because his behavior is also influenced by feelings, emotions and attitudes. Thus economic incentives are not the only method to motivate people.3. Work is considered as a group activity and not as an operation performed by an individual worker.4. The human social and social factors result in the overall growth and development of the human resource.5. Group Influence: Workers being social beings, they create groups which may be different from their official group. In fact, groups are formed to overcome the shortcomings of formal relationships. The group determines the norm of behavior of members. 8 November 2012 Hawthorne Experiments
  • 18. HIGH LIGHTS CONTINUED……6. Conflicts: The informal relations of workers create groups and there may be conflictbetween organization and groups so created. The conflict may be because of theincompatible objectives between the two.7. Leadership: Leadership cannot come only from formally-appointed superior as heldby earlier thinkers. There may be informal leaders as shown by the bank writingexperiments.8. Supervision: Friendly to the workers, attentive, genuinely concerned supervisionaffects the productivity favorably.9. Communication: Through communication, workers can be explained the rationality ofa particular action, participation of workers can be sought in decision-making concerningthe matter of their importance, problems faced by them can be identified and attempts canbe made to remove these. 8 November 2012 Hawthorne Experiments
  • 19. CRITICISMS OF HAWTHORNE EXPERIMENTS:1. It lacks validity.2. More importance to human aspects3. More emphasis on group decision-making4. Mayo overstressed experimentation and drew conclusions from the strength of observations about a small sample of size.5. The experiment lacked scientific basis.6. The Hawthorne plant was not a typical plant because it was a thoroughly unpleasant place to work. Therefore, the results could not be valid for others. Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 20. CONCLUSION•The Hawthorne studies have had a remarkable impact onmanagement in organizations and how workers react to varioussituations.•Stimulated interest on human behaviour in organizations.•A lot of literature came out analysing the human behaviour inorganizations.• in spite of the short comings of Hawthorne experiments, initiateda new approach to management (Human Relations Approach). Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 21. Sources of InformationAndrew Dubrin, Management: Concepts ana cases, Lengage India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, 2009.Sumuel C. Certo and S. Trevis Creto, Modern Management, PH learning Pvt Ltd, Delhi, 2002.USP Rao, and V Hari Krishna, Management: Text and Cases, Excel books, New Delhi, 2002L. M. Prasad, Principles and Practice of Management, Educational Publications, New Delhi, 2010.ELTON Mayo and Hawthrone Experiments http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Elton+Mayo%3a+the+Hawthorne+experiments.-a0151189059 (accessed on 28 Sept 2012) Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012
  • 22. Hawthorne Experiments 8 November 2012