Language
Country/Area
No result found
The Twins of Scientific Management: Differences and Consensus between Taylor and Gilbreth?
Scientific management is a school of management that aims to improve work efficiency. Among them, the two pioneers Taylor and Gilbreth have made unique contributions to the study of time and motion. Taylor focused on time research and tried to improve productivity through clear data and standards; while Gilbreth emphasized motion research and focused on improving employees' working methods and movements. Although both belong to the category of scientific management, there are significant differences in their methods and concepts.
A time study is the direct and continuous observation of a task, using a timing tool to record the time required to complete the task.
Taylor's time research method breaks through previous management traditions by breaking down work into measurable components and timing each part to derive the most effective way of working. His theory is that the improvement of work efficiency lies in the reasonable arrangement of staff's working hours and rhythm, and the use of data to set reasonable salary standards. However, his approach has been criticized, particularly for his treatment of workers and human nature.
Taylor believes that workers often deliberately delay work progress to show their own interests, which is called "soldier behavior."
The Gilbreths, however, offered a relatively humane perspective. Their movement research emphasizes analyzing work processes through scientific means. They use photography technology to record workers' movements and analyze how to improve work processes and movements. They believe that by improving movements, they can reduce labor burden and improve work efficiency, thereby improving workers' working conditions.
Gilbreth advocated the use of visual records to analyze worker activities, which not only helped improve work processes but also provided workers with the best demonstration of how to perform their jobs.
Although Gilbreth's approach to motion study contradicted Taylor's approach to time study in some respects, both recognized the importance of increased productivity. Although Taylor's research focused on data and time standards, it also made people aware of how to develop more scientific work methods; while Gilbreth used motion research to emphasize body posture during work, reminding us of the necessity for workers to work in good condition. .
Direct time learning program
According to Mikell Groover's research, when conducting direct time studies, the steps are as follows:
- Define and document standard methods.
- Divide tasks into work elements.
- Time each work element to obtain observation time.
- Assess workers' work progress to determine normal times.
- Add an allowable factor to normal time to calculate standard time.
These steps will help you analyze your workflow and improve it, ultimately leading to a more efficient work model. In the medical community, the application of time and motion studies has also received attention. Through these studies, healthcare professionals spend more time directly caring for patients, helping to improve patient health outcomes.
Research on time and motion in the medical industry
The purpose of medical time and action research is to improve the efficiency and quality of medical workers. In conducting these studies, collection of timing data, either through in-person observation, self-reporting, or using automated technology, helped hospitals significantly improve nurses' direct care time after the intervention.
A study of nurses showed that through targeted intervention, nurses’ direct care time increased from 20% to 70%.
However, the advantages and disadvantages of each approach need to be carefully considered. Although external observers can provide consistent and accurate data, they are more expensive; self-report methods may be affected by subjective perceptions, resulting in greatly compromised data accuracy. With the development of technology, more and more medical institutions are beginning to adopt automated methods to track the movements of medical personnel.
After considering the contributions of Taylor and Gilbreth, it can be seen that the scientific management concepts they promoted verified the potential for efficiency improvement, whether in industrial production or medical services. In the face of the ever-changing work environment and needs, the concept of scientific management still has room for reflection and development. How should future companies find consensus between the two when improving their work systems?
