"Human Relation Theory" By Elton Mayo

 

What is Human Relation theory and how it installed the humanistic conception of workers in a factory Unit? Critically explain it.

Imagine working for an organization that has a rigid workflow. You aren’t allowed to suggest creative interpretations and there’s only one way to perform tasks. Wouldn’t you feel like a cog in a machine?

Everyone has unique needs and expectations. Every successful workplace culture embraces multiple perspectives, accommodates various expectations and fulfills the unique needs of employees. This management approach was first seen in the Human Relations Theory. 

Human Relations theory, also known as the Human Relations movement, emerged as a response to the shortcomings of classical management theories, such as scientific management and administrative theory. According to scientific management, there was a logic to actions and knowledge that boosted workplace motivation. In other words, efficiency was a result of operational, legal and administrative improvements.

At the time, Taylorism—scientific management advocated by Frederick W. Taylor—was the prevailing theory, which viewed workers as machines. It suggested that the best way for people (factory workers) to become efficient is to receive proper training and necessary tools. The human relations approach addressed these gaps by taking into consideration the social factors. It acknowledged that people’s perceptions, attitudes and expectations play a critical role in their workplace performance.

The theory is built on simple premise that the ‘human problem requires a human solution’, since happier workers are the secret to a successful organisation. Unlike the traditional approach, which glorifies ‘Economic Man’, the human relations theory enthrones the ‘Social Man’. This theory underscores four key elements of organisation, which the classical theorists seem to have overlooked. These are:

(a) organisation is to be viewed as a social system; 

(b) workers are human beings with all humanly attributes; 

(c) informal elements also play an important role in the overall organisational output; and 

(d) organisation has a social ethics, instead of individual ethics.

Elton Mayo, an Australian psychologist from Harvard University, developed the Human Relations Theory. He conducted a series of experiments, which are now known as Hawthorne Studies or Hawthorne Experiments. He concluded that people have unique preferences and can’t be treated as machines. 

The Hawthorne experiments were named after the Western Electric Company at Hawthorne, Chicago. The experiments were conducted between1924-1932. This research marked the beginning of an ‘ideological revolution in organisation theory’. It is described in detail in a landmark volume, Management and the Worker. This research led to the first systematic conception of organisation as social system, and destroyed some of the basic assumptions of the machine model. Four studies were undertaken: 

(a) Great Illumination Experiment; 

(b) Relay Assembly Text Room Experiment; 

(c) Bank Wiring Observation Room Experiment; 

(d) Interviewing Programm

Great Illumination Experiment:

The Great Illumination Experiment was conducted to examine the impact of lighting conditions on worker productivity. Initially, Mayo and his team increased the level of illumination in a specific work area and observed the workers' performance. Surprisingly, they found that productivity improved regardless of whether the lighting was increased or decreased. This finding led to the realization that the mere fact of being observed and involved in an experiment motivated the workers, a phenomenon known as the Hawthorne effect.

Relay Assembly Text Room Experiment:

In this study, Mayo and his colleagues examined the effects of changes in working conditions on the productivity of female workers in the relay assembly test room. The researchers manipulated factors such as work hours, rest breaks, and piece-rate pay to determine their impact on productivity. Once again, they found that productivity increased regardless of whether the conditions were made better or worse. The researchers concluded that social and psychological factors, such as group dynamics and peer influence, significantly influenced workers' productivity and job satisfaction.

Bank Wiring Observation Room Experiment:

The Bank Wiring Observation Room Experiment aimed to understand the dynamics of a small group of male workers in a bank wiring room. The researchers observed how the group interacted and how their relationships affected productivity. They found that the workers developed strong social bonds and informal norms that influenced their behavior and productivity. The workers often restricted their output to conform to the group's norms, even though there was an opportunity to increase individual output. The study highlighted the importance of group dynamics and social interactions in influencing individual behavior and productivity.

Interviewing Program:

The Interviewing Program study focused on understanding the factors influencing employee attitudes and job satisfaction. Researchers conducted individual interviews with workers to gain insights into their thoughts, feelings, and attitudes towards their work and workplace. The study emphasized the significance of providing employees with a platform to voice their opinions and concerns. It was found that employees who felt heard and valued tended to be more satisfied with their jobs and were more likely to be productive and committed to their work.

Overall, the Hawthorne Studies conducted by Elton Mayo revolutionized the way we understand the relationship between productivity and human behavior in the workplace. These studies highlighted the importance of social and psychological factors in influencing employee performance and job satisfaction, leading to significant advancements in the field of organizational behavior and management theory.

Human relation theory sought to address the importance of understanding human behavior and social dynamics within organizations, emphasizing the significance of treating workers as individuals with unique needs and motivations. The Human Relations theory installed a humanistic conception of workers in factory units by focusing on factors such as communication, motivation, and leadership to enhance employee satisfaction and productivity.

Major Findings of the Hawthorne Studies:

In short, the following are the major findings and generalisations of the Hawthorne Studies:

 The social and psychological factors are responsible for workers productivity and job satisfaction. Only good physical working conditions are not enough to increase productivity.  A complaint is not necessarily an objective recital of facts; it is commonly a symptom manifesting disturbance of an individual’s status position.  The worker is a person whose attitudes and effectiveness are conditioned by social demands from both inside and outside the work area.  Informal groups within the work area exercise strong social controls over the work habits and attitudes of the individual worker.  Financial incentives alone cannot increase the performance. Social and psychological needs must also be satisfied in order to increase productivity.  The workers will work more efficiently when they believed that the management is interested in their welfare.  A worker often does not act or react to management as an individual but as a member of group.  Special attention and freedom to express their view give incentive for better performance

In a factory unit, the Human Relations theory sought to apply these principles to improve the overall work environment and the treatment of workers. It aimed to create a more humane and participative workplace by focusing on several key aspects.

Firstly, communication played a crucial role in the Human Relations approach. It emphasized the need for open and effective communication channels within the organization. Managers were encouraged to foster two-way communication, where employees had the opportunity to express their ideas, concerns, and suggestions. This helped create a sense of involvement and ownership among workers, making them feel valued and recognized as contributors to the organization's success.

Secondly, the Human Relations theory emphasized the importance of leadership and supervision styles. It advocated for a shift from authoritative and autocratic leadership towards more participative and democratic styles. Managers were encouraged to involve employees in decision-making processes, delegating authority and responsibility, and providing them with autonomy in their work. This approach recognized that workers have valuable insights and expertise, and involving them in decision-making enhanced their commitment and job satisfaction.

Furthermore, the Human Relations theory highlighted the significance of employee motivation. It recognized that financial incentives alone were insufficient to motivate workers effectively. Instead, it emphasized the importance of intrinsic motivators, such as recognition, achievement, and opportunities for personal growth. Factory units following this theory focused on creating a supportive work environment that fostered the development of employees' skills and provided them with opportunities for advancement. By meeting workers' intrinsic needs, organizations aimed to enhance their motivation and job satisfaction, leading to increased productivity.

The Human Relations theory also emphasized the significance of group dynamics and interpersonal relationships within the workplace. It recognized that workers are not isolated individuals but part of social networks and groups. The theory promoted the formation of cohesive work groups and encouraged teamwork and collaboration. By creating a supportive and inclusive group environment, organizations aimed to foster a sense of belonging and camaraderie among workers, leading to increased morale and productivity.

Critics of the Human Relations theory argue that it oversimplified the complexities of organizational behavior and ignored broader structural and systemic factors that impact workers' experiences. They contend that the theory focused on individual-level factors while neglecting larger issues such as power dynamics, inequality, and organizational structures that influence workers' well-being. Additionally, critics argue that the Human Relations approach can be manipulative, using social and psychological techniques to control and exploit workers' loyalty and commitment.

Moreover, the Human Relations theory has been criticized for its potential to create an illusion of participation and empowerment without fundamentally challenging the existing power structures within organizations. Some argue that workers' participation is often limited to trivial matters, with decision-making power still concentrated at the top levels of management. This can lead to a sense of disillusionment and frustration among workers if their inputs and suggestions are not genuinely considered.

Conclusion

Human Relations theory represented a significant shift in management thinking by recognizing the importance of understanding human behavior and social dynamics within organizations. By installing a humanistic conception of workers in factory units, the theory emphasized the significance of communication, motivation, leadership, and group dynamics. It aimed to create a more participative and inclusive work environment that valued workers as individuals and acknowledged their social and psychological needs. However, critics argue that the theory oversimplified organizational complexities and failed to address broader structural factors. Nonetheless, the Human Relations theory played a crucial role in shaping contemporary management practices, highlighting the significance of treating workers as more than mere cogs in the industrial machinery.