Microscopic Vision of Man What is it?

As well as the super specialization of the operator, the microscopic vision of man was one of the criticisms of Frederick W. Taylor of the Scientific Administration. This is a set of administrative knowledge, techniques and methods that can be applied to the training of professionals, companies and markets.

Frederick W. Taylor was one of the first theorists in regarding the management and improvement of processes as a scientific problem and, as such, is widely considered the father of scientific management.

He proposed that the economic efficiency of a company could be improved simplifying and optimizing work processes, which, in turn, would increase productivity. Taylorism, as a philosophy, was the product of a series of experiments and observations, as time-motion studies, designed to determine the most effective and efficient way to complete A homework. Its fundamental and interrelated principles can be summarized as follows:

• Use the scientific method to challenge common work practices and determine the most efficient way to perform specific job tasks.
• Adapt the capacity and motivation of the workers to the requirements of the task and supervise them in accordance with the established rules and procedures.
• Establish fair performance levels and develop a payment system that rewards and therefore encourages excessive achievement.
• Appropriate division of responsibilities to enable managers to apply scientific management principles to plan work and ensure that workers are effective.

Criticisms of Scientific Administration

Taylor's work influenced several other contemporary theoristsLike Frank and Lillian Gilbreth and, later, Henry Gantt, who also favored empirical methods to determine the most efficient procedures. In fact, his new scientific system of organization initially received wide support in the United States and Britain among theorists, politicians, and economists alike.

However, Taylor's scientific management was not without criticism, both at the time and later. In the 1930s and 1940s, it had generally fallen out of favor. The next section makes a critical appraisal of scientific management. It explores the arguments of opponents of Taylorism and also explores its legacy in popular modes of management practice today.

One of the most popular criticisms leveled at Taylorism is its perceived lack of human appreciation. In an effort to increase physical efficiency, it considers the worker part of the production process at a level equal to the tools he uses and, as such, strips him of all ability to reason and act autonomous.

Microscopic View of Man

One of the criticisms of scientific management is the microscopic vision of man. Directed to employees individually, excluding the human and social factor within organizations. For Taylor, the acceleration of work can only be achieved by standardizing methods, adopting instruments and working conditions. The main idea was a monocratic administrative structure, alienating in favor of obedience.

The use of workers was limited to tasks and their execution, covering only physiological variables and forgetting about the social and human factor (physiological theory of the organization).

Other major criticisms of Taylor's scientific management

While it is accepted that scientific management allows management to use resources in the best possible way, it has not been spared harsh criticism.

Workers point of view

• Unemployment: workers feel that management reduces their employment opportunities by replacing men with machines and by increase human productivity, fewer workers are needed to get the job done, leading to expulsion from their jobs job.
• Exploitation: Workers feel exploited because they are not given their due share in increasing profits, which is due to their higher productivity. Wages do not increase in proportion to the increase in production. The payment of wages creates uncertainty and insecurity (beyond a standard production, there is no increase in the wage rate).
• Monotony: Due to excessive specialization, workers cannot take the initiative themselves. Its status is reduced to mere cogs in the wheel. Jobs get boring. Workers lose interest in jobs and get little pleasure from work.
• Weakening of unions: everything is fixed and predetermined by the address. Therefore, it leaves no room for unions to negotiate as everything is standardized, standard production, standard working conditions, standard time, etc. This further weakens unions, creates a gap between efficient and efficient workers according to their wages.
• Speeding- Scientific management sets the standard production, time, so they have to hurry up and finish the job on time. These have adverse effects on the health of workers. Workers speed up to that standard exit, so scientific management prompts workers to rush to exit and finish the job in standard time.

Employer's point of view

• Expensive: scientific management is an expensive system and requires a large investment in the establishment of the planning department, standardization, work study, training of the workers. It may be out of the reach of small businesses. Heavy investment in food leads to increased overhead costs.
• Time consuming: scientific management requires a mental review and a complete reorganization of the organization. It takes a lot of time for work, study, standardization and specialization. During this organizational review, work suffers.
• Quality deterioration.