The Principles of Scientific Management

However, the area of HRM is exceptionally complex and multilateral: there are many different theories and views on the nature, methods, and techniques of management described in the abundant organizational literature.
&nbsp.Since the emergence of organizational science in the late 19th – early 20th century, the scholars have been sharing two dominant views on organizational culture. Apologists of one paradigm led by Frederick Taylor and Harrington Emerson (School of Scientific Management) believed that organizational culture was just one of the tools to ensure greater control over employees. Representatives of another approach such as Elton Mayo, Abraham Maslow, and Douglas McGregor (Human relations school) postulated that organizational culture was supposed to develop and motivate the employees without excessively rigid control (Schultz &amp. Shultz 2002). Although each of these major paradigms has contributed significantly to the development of contemporary HRM, they rely upon entirely different principles and assumptions.
&nbsp.The process of industrialization and sophistication of businesses that occurred during the last decade of the 19th century seriously changed the traditional managerial practices. Increasing the efficiency of labor became the key priority within the system of company-employee relationship. The concept of scientific management described by Frederick Taylor was the first systematic approach designed specifically to improve the labor efficiency of employees within the new system of work relationships (Taylor 1911). Taylor strongly believed that organizational culture was one of the most effective instruments to influence the employees and improve their performance and listed the most important elements of the ideal organizational culture.
&nbsp.Taylor believed that the most effective approach to managing human resources should not be different from the approach used to manage other elements of the production process. Consequently, the Taylorian model of management relied on the assumption that the average employee was lazy, ignorant, passive, and lacked the motivation to perform effectively.