This short statement can be a meaningful summary of what Mayo’s Teamwork and Human Relations is all about when it comes to motivation.
The Hawthorne Effect is the conclusions of Mayo’s work – other factors (e.g. teamworking, consultations, etc.) completely separated from the conditions of work motivate better allowing for an increase in productivity.
Introduction to Mayo’s Teamwork and Human Relations
Elton Mayo is the creator of the ‘Human Relations Theory’ which was based on The Hawthorne Effect. This effect, which has taken the discussion about motivation of workers industry away from the engineer-focused and purely money-motivated views of Taylor – later sustained by the work of two other famous researchers such as Maslow and Herzberg – to development of the human side of business.
This is a short description of the Hawthorne experiment that led him to publishing his findings on motivating through social relations:
Elton Mayo and his team conducted a series of experiments at the Hawthorne factory of Western Electric Co. in Chicago over a five-year period. They wanted to confirm the assumption that working conditions such as lighting, heating, rest periods, etc. have a significant effect on workers’ productivity. After establishing the optimum working conditions, the output of a control group was recorded. Surprisingly, the group of workers working in ideal conditions experienced no changes productivity. In other groups, as lighting and other working conditions were changed (both improved and worsened), productivity increased rose in all those other groups. Conclusively, working conditions in themselves were not that important in determining productivity levels, so other factors needed to be investigated further before conclusions could be drawn. This time, changes to rest periods, payment systems, workspace layout and canteen food were made over a three-month period. However, before every major change, the researchers discussed extensively those new changes with the work group making the workers involved. At the end of the research period the conclusion was drawn that output rose far above the original level.
The Hawthorne experiment led Elton Mayo to believe that other social factors, which were completely separately from the conditions of work and financial rewards, motivated which allowed for an increase in productivity. Let’s take a look at them now:
- Positive relationships with managers and colleagues. Management consults with workers and takes an interest in their work.
- Feeling valued and appreciated. Some control is given to workers to decide over their own working lives such as when to take breaks.
- Being part of a cohesive team. Working in teams and developing a team spirit with groups allowed to establish their own targets or norms as well as choose the informal leaders of the group.
Relevance of Mayo’s motivation theory to modern industry
Despite originating in the 1920s, Elton Mayo’s Human Relations Theory continues to hold significant value in motivating employees and fostering positive work environments within modern industries. Here is how:
Employee participation. The trend towards empowering employees to participate in decision-making aligns perfectly with Mayo’s emphasis on social interaction and a sense of belonging. When employees feel valued and involved, their engagement and motivation increase, leading to improved performance.
Teamwork and collaboration. Modern businesses heavily rely on teamwork and collaboration, creating fertile ground for The Hawthorne Effect. Cohesive teams fostering positive relationships, communication, and mutual support echo the principles highlighted by Mayo’s research.
People side of business. Mayo’s theory challenged the solely money-driven, productivity-focused approach prevalent in his time. The rise of personnel departments and the growing focus on the ‘people side’ of business reflect a shift towards prioritizing employee well-being and satisfaction. This emphasis aligns with the humanistic principles advocated by Mayo.
Criticism of Mayo’s approach to motivation
1. Hawthorne Effect bias. Critics argue that the Hawthorne studies, which formed the basis of the theory, suffered from the Hawthorne Effect itself. Increased attention from researchers may have artificially inflated productivity, making it difficult to isolate the true impact of social factors.
2. Oversimplification of human motivation. The theory has been criticized for presenting a one-size-fits-all approach, overlooking the diversity and complexity of human needs and motivations. What motivates one employee might not hold true for another.
3. Limited scope. The research was conducted in a single factory setting with specific working conditions, raising questions about the generalization of the findings to diverse industries and work environments.
4. Neglect of external factors. The theory primarily focuses on social and relational factors within the workplace, potentially underestimating the impact of external factors like wages, benefits, and working conditions on employee motivation.
5. Managerial bias. Critics argue that Mayo’s theory served management interests by focusing on improving company output without addressing concerns related to power dynamics, worker rights, or fair compensation.
Mayo’s theory of motivation, while not without limitations, remains highly relevant in modern industry. Its emphasis on social interaction, employee well-being, and a human-centric approach continues to guide organizations in fostering engaged and motivated workforce.
