Descripciones mejoradas de Syndetics:

This book argues that the "authoritarian" depiction of Frederick Taylor trivializes his important contribution. Schachter's analysis of Taylor's work shows that he actually originated many of the human relations insights that the literature attributes to Mayo, Maslow, and McGregor.



Introduced are two major arguments. Through an examination of Taylor's work, a new way of understanding his actual approach to management is opened. Also discussed are the political and historical reasons that led to the distortion of his work.

Tabla de contenidos provista por Syndetics

• Acknowledgments
• Chapter
• 1 Substance and Reputation
• 2 Taylor in Textbooks
• 3 Early Years
• 4 Scientific Management
• 5 Immediate Reception
• 6 Morris Cooke, a Link between Taylor and Public Administration
• 7 Scientific Management and Public Administration: Act One
• 8 Scientific Management and Public Administration: Act Two
• Notes
• Bibliography
• Index

Reseñas proporcionadas por Syndetics

CHOICE Review

Schachter disputes a prevailing consensus presented in public administration texts: Frederick Taylor's scientific management approach ignored social factors in his quest for efficiency by means of restructuring work processes and providing wage incentives. The effect of social factors on productivity were revealed later during Mayo's Hawthorne experiments. Mayo and others subsequently developed a human relations approach that superseded scientific management as a dominant school of organizational theory. However, Schachter carefully sifts through Taylor's original books and correspondence to demonstrate that Taylor was not as neglectful of social factors as he is alleged to have been. Taylorism was misapplied by managers and misrepresented by proponents of the human relations school. Scholars have tended to disregard Taylor's original works and the historical context in which they were written. Scholars have also been inclined to view Taylorism within a natural science paradigm, which assumes that new theories entirely discredit previous theories. Schachter's thesis is lucid and convincing. It challenges orthodox interpretations of Taylor and, more importantly, challenges specialists to seek new insights by evaluating on their own the classics of public administration. Upper-division undergraduates and above. A. F. Johnson Bishop's University

Notas de autor provistas por Syndetics

Hindy Lauer Schachter is Professor of Social Sciences at New Jersey Institute of Technology. She is author of Public Agency Communications and articles in Public Administration Review and Administration and Society, among other journals.