Mayo's notoriety for being an administration master lies on the Hawthorne Experiments which
he directed from 1927 to 1932 at the Western Electric Hawthorne Works in Cicero, Illinois (a
suburb of Chicago). The processing plant utilized essentially ladies laborers who collected
phone cabling gear. The point of the investigation was to build up the effect of various states of
work on worker efficiency. At first, Mayo analyzed the effect of changes in the production line
condition, for example, lighting and dampness. He at that point went ahead to contemplate the
impact of changes in business plans, for instance, breaks, hours, and legislative initiative. Not
exclusively were the Hawthorne analyzes the main extensive scale investigations of working
individuals' conditions at any point made; they likewise created a scope of surprising outcomes
that changed the substance of people administration.Mayo's reputation as a management guru
rests on the Hawthorne Experiments which he conducted from 1927 to 1932 at the Western
Electric Hawthorne Works in Cicero, Illinois (a suburb of Chicago). The factory employed mainly
women workers who assembled telephone cabling equipment. The study aimed to establish the
impact of different conditions of work on employee productivity. Initially, Mayo examined the
effect of changes in the factory environment such as lighting and humidity. He then went on to
study the effect of changes in employment arrangements such as breaks, hours, and
managerial leadership. Not only were the Hawthorne experiments the first large-scale studies of
working people's conditions ever made; they also produced a range of remarkable results that
changed the face of people management.
F.W. Taylor through his analyses expanded creation by supporting it. Elton Mayo and his
adherents tried to build creation by acculturating it through behavioral examinations prominently
known as Hawthorne Experiments/Studies. The reality remains that an introduction to the
investigation of authoritative conduct will stay inadequate without a say of Hawthorne
thinks about/tests.In November 1924, a group of scientist teachers from the eminent Harvard
Business School of the U.S.A. started researching into the human parts of work and working
conditions at the Hawthorne plant of Western Electric Company, Chicago. The organization was
delivering
ringers and other electric types of gear for the phone industry. Conspicuous teachers
incorporated into the exploration group were Elton Mayo (Psychologist), Roethlisberger and
Whitehead (Sociologists) and William Dickson (organization delegate). The group led four
separate exploratory and behavioral investigations over a seven-year time span.
The Hawthorne tests were pivotal examinations in human relations that were conducted in the
vicinity of 1924 and 1932 at Western Electric Company's Hawthorne Works in Chicago. Initially
planned as enlightenment concentrates to decide the connection amongst lighting and
efficiency, the underlying tests were supported by the National Research Council (NRC) of the
National Academy of Sciences. In 1927 an examination group from the Harvard Business
School was welcome to join the investigations after the brightening tests drew unexpected
outcomes. Two other arrangements of tests, the transfer get together tests, and the bank-wiring
tests took after the enlightenment tests. The investigations accepted the name Hawthorne tests
or concentrate from the area of the Western Electric plant. Finished up by 1932, the Hawthorne
ponders, with
accentuation on another elucidation of gathering conduct, where the reason for the school of
human relations.Some of the major phases of Hawthorne experiments are as follows:
1. Illumination Experiments
2. Relay Assembly Test Room Experiments
3. Mass Interviewing Program
4. Bank Wiring Observation Room Experiment.
1. Experiments to determine the effects of changes in illumination on productivity, illumination
experiments, 1924-27.
2. Experiments to determine the effects of changes in hours and other working conditions on
productivity, relay assembly test room experiments, 1927-28;
3. Conducting plant-wide interviews to determine worker attitudes and sentiments, mass
interviewing program, 1928-30; and
4. Determination and analysis of social organization at work, bank wiring observation room
experiments, 1931-32.
1. Illumination Experiments:
Enlightenment tests were embraced to discover how fluctuating levels of brightening ( a
measure of light at the work environment, a physical element) influenced the efficiency. The
speculation was that with higher brightening, efficiency would increase. In the first arrangement
of tests, a gathering of
specialists were picked and set in two separate groups. One gathering was presented to
fluctuating forces of brightening. Since this gathering was subjected to test transforms, it was
named as test convention. Another forum, called as control gathering, kept on working under
steady powers of enlightenment. The scientists found that as they expanded the knowledge in
the exploratory gathering,
Both gatherings expanded the generation. At the point when the power of enlightenment
diminished, the generation kept on expanding in both the gatherings.The creation of the test
assemblies diminished just when the light was diminished to the level of moonlight. The decline
was because of light falling much beneath the ordinary level. Along these lines, it was reasoned
that enlightenment did not have any impact on profitability but rather something else was
meddling with the efficiency. Around then, it was supposed that humans calculate critical
deciding profitability however which perspective was influencing, it didn't know. Along these
lines, another period of trials was embraced
2. Relay Assembly Test Room Experiments:
Relay assembly test room experiments were designed to determine the effect of changes in
various job conditions on group productivity as the illumination experiments could not establish
a relationship between the intensity of light and production. For this purpose, the researchers
set up a relay assembly test room and two girls were chosen. These girls were asked to choose
more girls as co-workers. The work is related to the assembly of telephone relays. Each relay
consisted of some parts which girls assembled into finished products. Output depended on the
speed and continuity with which girls worked. The experiments started with introducing
numerous changes
in sequence with the duration of each change ranging from four to twelve weeks. An observer
was associated with girls to supervise their work. Before each change was introduced, the girls
were consulted. They were given the opportunity to express their viewpoints and concerns to
the supervisor. In some cases, they were allowed to take decisions on matters concerning them.
Following were the changes and resultant outcomes:
1. The incentive system has been modified so that each girl's extra pay was based on the other
five rather than the output of larger group, say, 100 workers or so. The productivity increase as
compared to before.
2. Two five-minute rests one in the morning session and other in evening session were
introduced which were increased to ten minutes. The productivity increased.
3. The rest period was reduced to five minutes, but the frequency was increased. The
productivity decreased slightly, and the girls complained that frequent rest intervals affected the
rhythm of the work.
4. The number of rest was reduced to two of ten minutes of each, but in the morning, coffee or
soup was served along with the sandwich, and in the evening, snack was provided. The
productivity increased.
5. Changes in working hours and workday were introduced, such as cutting an hour off the end
of the day and eliminating Saturday work. The girls were allowed to leave at 4.30 p.m. instead of
usual 5.00 p.m. and later at 4.00 p.m. productivity increased.
As each change was introduced, absenteeism decreased, morale improved, and less
supervision
was required. It was assumed that these positive factors were there because of the various
factors
being adjusted and making them more confident. At this time, the researchers decided to revert
to an original position, that is, no rest and other benefits. Surprisingly, productivity increased
further instead of going down. This development caused a considerable amount of redirection in
thinking, and the result implied that productivity increased not because of positive changes in
physical factors but because of the change in girls' attitudes towards work and their workgroup.
They developed a feeling of stability and a sense of belongings. Since there was more freedom
of
work, they developed a sense of responsibility and self-discipline. The relationship between
supervisor and workers became close and friendly.
3. Mass Interviewing Program:
During experiments, about 20,000 interviews were conducted between 1928 and 1930 to
determine employees' attitudes towards company, supervision, insurance plans, promotion and
wages. Initially, these interviews were conducted using direct questioning such as "do you like
your supervisor?" or "is he in your opinion fair or does he have favorites?" etc.
This method has the disadvantage of stimulating antagonism or the oversimplified ‘yes' or ‘no'
responses which could not get to the root of the problem; the method was changed to
non-directive interviewing where the interviewer was asked to listen instead of talking, arguing
or advising. The interview program gave valuable insights into the human behavior in the
company.
Some of the major findings of the program were as follows:
1. A complaint is not necessarily an objective recital of facts; it is a symptom of personal
disturbance the cause of which may be deep-seated.
2. Objects, persons or events are carriers of social meanings. They become related to
employee satisfaction or dissatisfaction only as the employee comes to view them from his
situation.
3. The personal situation of the worker is a configuration, composed of a personal preference
involving sentiments, desires and interests of the person and the cultural reference constituting
the person's human past and his present interpersonal relations.
4. The position or status of a worker in the company is a reference from which the employee
assigns meaning and value to the events, objects and features of his environment such as
hours of work, wages, etc.
5. The social organization of the company represents a system of values from which the worker
derives satisfaction or dissatisfaction according to the perception of his social status and the
expected social rewards.
6. The social demands of the workers are influenced by social experience in groups both inside
and outside the work plant.
4. Bank Wiring Observation Room Experiment:
These investigations were directed to discover the effect of little gatherings of the people. In this
trial, a group of 14 male laborers were framed into a little work meeting. The men were occupied
with the gathering of terminal banks for the utilization in phone trades. The work included
appending wire with switches for certain gear utilized as a part of phone deals. Time-based
compensation for every specialist was settled on the premise of the normal yield of every
laborer. Reward as additionally payable on the assumption of collective endeavor.It was normal
that profoundly skilled specialists would convey weight on less capable laborers to build yield
and exploit gather motivation design. In any case, the technique did not work and
experts built up their particular standard of yield, and this was implemented enthusiastically by
different strategies for social weight. The specialist's referred to different explanations behind
this conduct viz. dread of unemployment, a dread of increment in yield; yearning to secure
moderate laborers and so on. The Hawthorne tests unmistakably demonstrated that a man at
work is roused by more than the fulfillment of financial needs. The administration ought to
perceive that individuals are social creatures and not simply monetary creatures. As a social
being, they are people from a gathering and the government should attempt to comprehend
assemble states of mind and gather brain science.
The following were the main conclusions drawn by Prof. Mayo by Hawthorne studies:
1. Social Unit:
A factory is not only a techno-economic unit but also a social unit. Men are social beings. This
Social characteristics at work play a major role in motivating people. The output increased in
Relay Room due to the effective functioning of a social group with a warm relationship with its
supervisors.
2. Group Influence:
The workers in a group develop a common psychological bond uniting them as the £ panel in
the form of informal organization. Their behavior is influenced by these groups. The pressure of
a group, rather than management demands, frequently has the strongest influence on how
productive workers would be.
3. Group Behavior:
Management must understand that a typical group behavior can dominate or even supersede
individual propensities.
4. Motivation:
Human and social motivation can play even a greater role than little monitory incentives in
moving or motivating and managing employee groups.
5. Supervision:
The style of control affects a worker's attitude to work and his productivity. A supervisor who is
friendly with his employees and takes an interest in their social problems can get co-operation
and better results from the subordinates.
6. Working Conditions:
Productivity increases as a result of improved working conditions in the organization.
7. Employee Morale:
Mayo pointed out that workers were not simply cogs, in the machinery. Instead, the employee
morale (both individual and in groups) can have profound effects on productivity.
8. Communication:
Experiments have shown that the output increases when workers have explained the logic
behind various decisions and their participation in decision-making brings better results.
9. Balanced Approach:
The problems of employees could not be solved by taking one factor, i.e. management could not
achieve the results by emphasizing one aspect. All the things should be discussed, and a
decision is made for improving the whole situation. A balanced approach to the whole situation
can show better results.
Criticism of Hawthorne Studies / Experiments:
The Hawthorne Experiments are mainly criticized on the following grounds:-
1. Lacks Validity: The Hawthorne experiments were conducted under controlled situations.
These findings will not work in the real setting. The workers under observation knew
about the tests. Therefore, they may have improved their performance only for the
experiments.
2. More Importance to Human Aspects: The Hawthorne experiments give too much
importance to human aspects. Human aspects alone cannot improve productivity. The
production also depends on technological and other factors.
3. More Emphasis on Group Decision-making: The Hawthorne experiments placed too
much emphasis on group decision-making. In a real situation, an individual decision
cannot be neglected especially when quick decisions are required, and there is no time to
consult others.
4. Over Importance to Freedom of Workers: The Hawthorne experiments give a lot of
relevance to freedom of the workers. It does not give importance to the constructive role
of the supervisors. In reality, too much of freedom to the workers can lower down their
performance or productivity.
Conclusions of Hawthorne Studies / Experiments:
It took Elton Mayo some time to work through the results of his Hawthorne Experiments,
particularly the seemingly illogical results of the Relay Assembly room operations. His most
an important conclusion was that the prevailing view of the time that people wanted to work
purely for money and living was deeply flawed. Work was much more. It was first and foremost
a group activity in which other people and their behavior, be they colleagues, managers or
observers, affected how well people worked. People's morale and productivity were affected not
so much by the conditions in which they worked out by the recognition they received. The rises
in productivity in the Relay Assembly Room were achieved under the affected eye of the
observers not because the conditions made the workers feel good but because the employees
felt valued.
The conclusions derived from the Hawthorne Studies were as follows:-
1. The social and psychological factors are responsible for workers' productivity and job
satisfaction. Only good physical working conditions are not enough to increase
productivity.
2. The informal relations among workers influence the employees' behaviour and
performance more than the formal relationships in the organization.
3. Employees will perform better if they are allowed to participate in decision-making
affecting their interests.
4. Employees will also work more efficiently when they believe that the management is
interested in their welfare.
5. When employees are treated with respect and dignity, their performance will improve.
6. Financial incentives alone cannot increase the performance. Social and Psychological
needs must also be satisfied to increase productivity.
7. Good communication between the superiors and subordinates can improve the relations
and the productivity of the subordinates.
8. Special attention and freedom to express their views will improve the performance of the
workers.
