Management Theory of Elton Mayo

Management Theory of Elton Mayo Th?r? ?r? various m?n?g?m?nt th??ri?? d?v?l???d by diff?r?nt ??h?l?r? ?v?r the ???r?. On? ?f th??? ??h?l?r? was Elt?n M???, a Harvard ?r?f????r.H? i? ?n? of th? m?j?r ??ntribut?r? to th? human relationship ???r???h of management. A???rding t? his Hum?n R?l?ti?n? A??r???h, management is th? study of b?h?vi?ur ?f ????l? ?t work.This approach h?d its origin in a series ?f ?x??rim?nt? ??ndu?t?d by him (Professor Elt?n Mayo) ?nd his ?????i?t?? ?t the Harvard School ?f Business ?t th? W??t?rn El??tri? Company’s H?wth?rn? W?rk?, n??r Chicago.These ?tudi?? brought ?ut f?r the first tim? th? im??rt?nt r?l?ti?n?hi?? between ???i?l factors ?nd ?r?du?tivit?.B?f?r? it, productivity ?f th? employees was ??n?id?r?d t? b? a fun?ti?n ?nl? ?f physical ??nditi?n? of w?rk ?nd w?g?? ??id.For th? fir?t tim? it w?? realised th?t productivity d???nd?d largely u??n the satisfaction of th? employees in w?rk situations.F?ll?wing th? Hawth?rn? Experiments, a gr??t d??l ?f w?rk h?? b??n ??rri?d ?n by b?h?vi?ur ?l scientists b?l?nging t? a v?ri?t? of di??i?lin?? in?luding Psychology, S??i?l?g?, Phil????h? ?nd Anthropology in studying the behaviour of ????l? at w?rk. H?r? i? ?n ?x?m?l? ?f one ?tud?.Those wh? ?ub??rib? t? th? Human R?l?ti?n? S?h??l of Th?ught are of th? view that the ?ff??tiv?n??? ?f ?n? ?rg?ni??ti?n d???nd? ?n th? qu?lit? ?f r?l?ti?n?hi?? ?m?ng th? people w?rking in th? ?rg?ni??ti?n.So, ????rding t? th?m, m?n?g?r? must concern th?m??lv?? with ?n analysis ?f ?rg?ni??ti?n?l b?h?vi?ur, which in?lud?? the int?r??ti?n of ????l? with th? ?rg?ni??ti?n.Th? basic ???um?ti?n ?f this school ?till r?m?in? that the goals of th? ?rg?ni??ti?n are ??hi?v?d through and with th? ????l?.A??rt fr?m th? ?tud? of f?rm?l ?rg?ni??ti?n and techniques u??d by ?u?h ?rg?ni??ti?n?, this ??h??l ?tudi?? th? psychological processes in organizations, inf?rm?l ?rg?ni??ti?n?, ??nfli?t, ?h?ng?, m?tiv?ti?n and r?l?ti?n?hi??, ?nd th? v?ri?u? techniques of ??hi?ving ?rg?ni??ti?n?l development b? improving the re lationships ?m?ng the various gr?u?? ?f ????l? ??n?tituting th? ?rg?ni??ti?n and it? internal environment.H? wi?h?d the management to und?r?t?nd th? problems of w?rk?r? and m?k? ?ff?rt? t? redress th?m.??M? ?F TH? MAIN ??NTRIBUTI?N? ELTON MAYO M?D? T? THE FIELD OF MANAGEMENTHuman Relations ApproachM??? i? rightly ??ll?d th? f?th?r ?f hum?n r?l?ti?n? movement.Current ?r?bl?m? at work are rooted in ???i?l disintegration.   Thi? ?r????? began when indu?tri?liz?ti?n in?r????d l?b?r mobility ?nd w??k?n?d ??mmun?l ti??, i??l?t?d family lif?, ?rg?niz?d work so that ?b????i?n? d?min?t?d mental life, ?nd justified ?ll th??? ?h?ng?? b? ?l??ing a high v?lu? ?n economic growth.Hi? id??? w?r? a mil??t?n? and a turning ??int in human r?l?ti?n? ???r???h of the m?n?g?m?nt.H? recognised the im??rt?n?? of hum?n b?ing? in m?n?g?m?nt.H? ??id th?t human b?ing? are ??m?l?x and influ?nti?l input into ?rg?ni??ti?n?l performance. Th? ???i?l and psychological n??d? of hum?n beings cannot be ignored, if m?n?g ?m?nt w?nt? t? ?nh?n?? productivity.At w?rk, ?r?bl?m? ?f indu?tri?l control arise b???u?? complex organizations ?urb ?r?ft?m?n? initiative ?nd ?ut?n?m?, devalue th?ir intelligence ?nd ?kill, ?r??t? m?n?t?n?u? t??k? and, as ??m??n??ti?n, ?ff?r ?nl? m?n?? ?nd leisure tim?.Consequently, workers d? not r???gniz? th?t b?tw??n them ?nd management mu?t ?xi?t a knowledge ?f ??mm?n int?r??t? from whi?h w?uld emerge mutual ??nfid?n??, trust, ?nd effective ??ll?b?r?ti?n.Instead, workers f??u? ?n undermining management by r??tri?ting th?ir output.Management, in turn, d??? n?t ???r??i?t? how strong a n??d f?r b?l?nging exists in th?ir w?rk?r? minds and hearts.Non-Economic AwardsThe ??rli?r assumption was that w?rk?r? will work m?r? if they ?r? ?ff?r?d m?r? m?n?t?r? incentives.Taylor was th? m?in ?r???n?nt of thi? ???r???h.Elt?n M??? said th?t th? t??hniqu?? ?f ???n?mi? in??ntiv?? were not only in?d?qu?t? but ?l?? unr??li?ti?.He was able to ?h?w that hum?n? ?nd r?????tful treatment, ??n?? ?f part icipation and b?l?nging, r???gniti?n, m?r?l?, human ?rid? and social interaction ?r? ??m?tim?? m?r? im??rt?nt than ?ur? m?n?t?r? r?w?rd?.A ?tud? ??rri?d ?ut b? Pr?f????r Dorin Cosma, West Univ?r?it?, Timisoara ?nd Sinel Alexandru Gilceava, West Univ?r?it?, Timi???r? f?und ?ut th?t m?n?? w?? n? longer a m?tiv?t?r f?r intellectual j?b?. Th?? rightl? ??id “for creative, intellectual jobs, money i? n?t ?n?ugh to m?tiv?t? th? ?m?l?????”.Social ManMayo d?v?l???d a ??n???t ?f ‘???i?l man.’He ??id th?t m?n i? b??i??ll? motivated b? social needs ?nd ?bt?in? hi? ??n?? of id?ntit? through r?l?ti?n?hi?? with ?th?r?. H? is m?r? responsive t? th? ???i?l f?r??? ?f th? inf?rm?l group r?th?r than managerial in??ntiv?? ?nd controls.He also r?l?t?d ?r?du?tivit? t? a ???i?l phenomenon.Organization as a Social SystemM??? w?? ?f th? view th?t informal r?l?ti?n?hi?? in th? ?rg?ni??ti?n ?r? more effective th?n formal r?l?ti?n?hi??. P???l? f?rm inf?rm?l gr?u?? t? give a b?nt t? their f??ling? and se ek guidance f?r action fr?m such gr?u??.In Mayo’s w?rd?, “An ?rg?ni??ti?n is a social system, a system ?f ?liqu??, grapevines, inf?rm?l status ???t?m?, ritu?l? ?nd a minut? of l?gi??l, non-logical ?nd ill?gi??l b?h?vi?ur.”H? w?? ?f th? ??ini?n th?t m?n?g?r? should maintain an ?quilibrium b?tw??n th? l?gi? of efficiency’ d?m?nd?d by th? f?rm?l ?rg?ni??ti?n. He th?ught that besides l?gi? and f??t? ????l? ?r? ?l?? guided b? ??ntim?nt? and feelings.Hawthorne’s ?x??rim?nt? w?r? criticized for lack ?f ??i?ntifi? and vig?r?u? r????r?h. The ?x??rim?nt? were t?? narrow to warrant generalizations.D???it? th??? observations M???’? w?rk w?? a turning point in th? development of management thought.ELTON MAYO’S EXPERIMENTSElton Mayo ??ndu?t?d v?ri?u? studies on m?n?g?m?nt and ?r?du?tivit? and in his studies concentrated ?n f?tigu?, accidents, production l?v?l?, rest periods, working conditions, ?t?., ?f industrial w?rk?r? in f??t?ri??.Hi? tw? among m?n? im??rt?nt r????r?h?? w?r?:-R? ???r?h in t?xtil? mill n??r Philadelphia,R????r?h in Western electricity ??m??n?, Chi??g? (H?wth?rn? ?tudi??)Textile Mill, PhiladelphiaT?xtil? mill n??r Phil?d?l?hi? w?? a m?d?l organization with ?ll f??iliti?? to workers, w?? w?ll ?rg?niz?d. Th? ?m?l???r? w?r? highly enlightened and hum?n?.Th? l?b?ur personnel faced ?r?bl?ms in th? mule-spinning d???rtm?nt of th? mill.Issues wereH?d to hir? 250% m?r? w?rk?r? th?n th? ??tu?l requirement. So ?b??nt??i?m ?m?ng workers w?? th? main issue.Management ?l?? ??n?ult?d ?ffi?i?n?? ?ngin??r?; several fin?n?i?l incentives were intr?du??d, ?nd numb?r of schemes w?r? launched, but th?? ?i?ld?d n? ???r??i?bl? results.Mayo w?? consulted to ?tud? th? ?r?bl?m ?f multi-??inning Department of th? mill.Mayo’s ObservationsHe studied th? ?r?bl?m? int?n??l? from v?ri?u? ?ngl?? i.?., physical, social ?nd ????h?l?gi??l.He found th?t ?lm??t every ?i???r working in th? mul?-??inning d???rtm?nt, suffered fr?m foot tr?ubl? for whi?h they h?d n? imm?di?t? remed y. Thi? trouble developed since every ?i???r had to walk u? ?nd down a l?ng alley, a distance ?f 30 yards ?r m?r?, ?n ?ith?r ?id? ?f whi?h th? m??hin? h??d was operating f?r spinning fr?m?? with ??tt?n thr??d.A ?ingl? w?rk?r h?d t? care 10 t? 14 such machines du? t? whi?h h? f?lt mi??r?bl? ?tt?nding t? th? job.Al?? found th?t w?rk?r? w?r? ?fr?id ?f th? ??m??n? ?r??id?nt because h? was a C?l?n?l in the US Army in France b?th b?f?r? ?nd during th? Fir?t W?rld War. So, w?rk?r? w?uld n?v?r ?r?t??t.Mayo’s Experiments1. INTRODUCTION OF REST PERIODS: He intr?du??d tw? r??t ??ri?d? of t?n minutes ???h in th? m?rning ?nd ?g?in in the afternoon with every team ?f ?i???r?.Results:-  The r??t ??ri?d ??h?m? eliminated th? ?r?bl?m ?f ?h??i??l f?tigu?.Production increasedM?r?l? im?r?v?dL?b?ur turn?v?r ?lm??t ??m? t? ?n ?nd.2. INTRODUCTION OF ‘EARN BONUS SCHEME’: H? also intr?du??d ‘Earn B?nu? S?h?m?’. Under thi? S?h?m?, if th? w?rk?r? w?r? t? ?r?du?? m?r? than a ??rt?in percentage, th?? w?uld ??rn bonuses.Th??? tw? Schemes m?d? th? w?rk?r? h????. But v?r? soon, these new schemes f???d ?r?bl?m as th? supervisors w?r? n?t und?r   th??? tw? ??h?m?? so th?? n?v?r lik?d th? workers ?nj??ing rest ??ri?d. Th?r?f?r?, th?? suggested th?t workers should ‘earn’ there rest ??ri?d?. Thi? New system w?? l?un?h?dResults:-  Within a w??k th? production f?llTh? w?rk?r? became unh????The ?ld ??m?t?m? started r??????ring.So, th? company president l??k?d into the ?r?bl?m. H? di??u???d with M??? and hi? r????r?h team and ordered th?t:-Th? ??inning d???rtm?nt should b? shut down f?r t?n minutes, f?ur tim?? a d?? ?nd that ?ll h?nd? from the ?u??rvi??r? down t? th? workers should ?nj?? th? r??t ??ri?d.Al??, he g?v? th? control ?f the r??t ??ri?d int? the h?nd? of w?rk?r?.R??ult?:-  Old problems disappeared.Pr?du?ti?n increasedThe workers started ??rning b?nu?.Conclusion from Textile Mill at PhiladelphiaS?inning ?r?du??? postural fatigue ?nd indu??? ?b??nt??i?m ?nd passivityR??t ??ri?d ? r?li?v? ???tur?l f?tigu?, ?nd end ?b??nt??i?m ?nd passivity.R??t ??ri?d? ?r? more effective wh?n they ?r? regular.Th? life of th? w?rk?r ?ut?id? the mill has im?r?v?d as w?rk?r? b???m? more int?r??t?d in th?ir f?mili?? and become m?r? ??b?r.The prevailing ?r?bl?m in th? mill w?? n?t th? r??ult of working ??nditi?n? but the result ?f ?m?ti?n?l r????n?? of th? w?rk?r? to th? w?rk performed.M?n?t?n? was n?t the ?r?bl?m but repetitive work d?n? und?r conditions of i??l?ti?n.Hawthorne Studies M???’? studies ?t the W??t?rn Electricity Company, Chicago is ???ul?rl? kn?wn as H?wth?rn? Studi??.It w?? a r????r?h programme ?f National R????r?h C?un?il of th? N?ti?n?l A??d?m? ?f S?i?n?? ?t the Hawthorne Pl?nt of W??t?rn El??tri?it? C?m??n?.In th? ??rl? 20th ??ntur?, it w?? r??liz?d th?t â€"There w?? a ?l??r-?ut ??u?? ?nd effect r?l?ti?n?hi? b?tw??n the physical work, environment, the well-being ?nd productivity of th? w?rk?r.  Also, there w?? a r?l?ti?n?hi? b?tw??n production ?nd giv?n ??nd iti?ns ?f ventilation, temperature, lighting ?nd ?th?r ?h??i??l w?rking ??nditi?n? and w?g? in??ntiv??.It h?d been believed th?t â€" improper j?b d??ign, f?tigu? and ?th?r ??nditi?n? ?f w?rk m?inl? bl??k efficiency.So t? ??t?bli?h the relationship b?tw??n m?n ?nd th? ?tru?tur? ?f f?rm?l ?rg?niz?ti?n, the H?wth?rn? Studi?? were ??ndu?t?d.Th? studies were ??ndu?t?d in th? f?ll?wing f?ur phases.Illumin?ti?n Ex??rim?nt (1924-27)Relay Assembly Test R??m Ex??rim?nt (1927)Mass Int?rvi?wing Pr?gr?mm? (1928-31)B?nk Wiring Ex??rim?nt (1931-32)Illumination Experiment (1924-27)It was d?n? to determine th? ?ff??t of diff?r?nt levels ?f illumination on workers’ ?r?du?tivit?.In thi? ?x??rim?nt, tw? groups ?f female workers w?r? l???t?d in ????r?t? r??m?, ???h group performing th? ??m? t??k. The r??m? w?r? ?qu?ll? illumin?t?d with ?t?biliz?d room t?m??r?tur?, humidit?, ?t?.Slowly th? conditions ?f w?rk were changed to mark change in ?r?du?ti?n. Aft?r a ??ri?d of one-and-a h?lf ???rs, it was ??n?l ud?d th?t â€" illumination doesn’t ?ff??t ?r?du?tivit? of workers.Relay Assembly Test Room Experiment (1927)Thi? ?x??rim?nt w?? ??ndu?t?d t? ?b??rv? th? ?ff??t? ?f various ?h?ng?? in w?rking conditions on the w?rk?r?’ ?ut?ut and m?r?l?.Mass Interviewing Programme (1928-31)It w?? l?un?h?d t? ?x?l?r? th? ?m?l?????’ f??ling? (i.?., human ?ttitud?? ?nd sentiments) b? th? worker’s ???i?l group (inf?rm?l ?rg?niz?ti?n)Th? w?rk?r? w?r? ??k?d to ?x?r??? fr??l? ?nd fr?nkl? their likes and dislike ?n th? ?r?gr?mm?? ?nd ??li?i?? of th? management, w?rking ??nditi?n? ?nd behaviour ?f their b??? with workers, ?t?.Aft?r a few d??? th?r? w?? a ?h?ng? in the attitude ?f the w?rk?r?, h?w?v?r no reforms w?r? intr?du??d. That ?h?ng? w?? seen b???u?? ?f the following reasons:-Th? w?rk?r? th?ught that the w?rking ??nditi?n? were ?h?ng?d because ?f th?ir ??m?l?int?.Th?? ?l?? f?lt th?t the wages were b?tt?r although th? wage ???l? remained ?t the ??m? l?v?l.Aft?r interviewing 21,126 w?rk?r?, and ?n ?l??ing th?ir ??m?l?int?, it w?? found that â€" th?r? w?? n? ??rr?l?ti?n between th? n?tur? of complaints and the f??t?.  It w?? ??n?lud?d th?t â€" the ?x??rim?nt succeeded in id?ntif?ing th? following three ?????t?:-W?rk?r? f??l ?l?t?d if th?? w?r? ?ll?w?d t? ?x?r??? fr??l?. Th?? develop a feeling that th? conditions in th? environment w?r? changed to th? b?tt?r although no ?u?h change t??k ?l???.Sub?rdin?t?? ?h?uld be ?ll?w?d t? ??mm?nt fr??l? ?b?ut th?ir ?u??rvi??r.It is diffi?ult t? und?r?t?nd the r??l problems, personal f??ling? ?nd ??ntim?nt? ?f th? w?rk?r? d?riv?d fr?m b?th ?n ?m?l????’? ??r??n?l hi?t?r? ?nd his ???i?l situations ?t work, with?ut appreciating their f??ling? and ??ntim?nt?.Bank Wiring Experiment (1931-32)This ?x??rim?nt w?? d?n? to ?b??rv? ?nd ?n?l??? th? gr?u? behaviour, w?rk?r? performing a t??k in a natural setting.F?r th? ?x??rim?nt, a numb?r of employees ??n?i?ting of three groups of workmen wh??? w?rk w?? int?r-r?l?t?d w?r? chosen. Th?ir job w?? to ??l d?r, fix the terminals and fini?h th? wiring. It w?? kn?wn ?? ‘Th? B?nk Wiring Ex??rim?nt’.Wages w?r? ??id ?n th? basis ?f a gr?u? incentive ?l?n ?nd ???h member got his ?h?r? ?n th? basis of th? t?t?l output ?f th? gr?u?.It was f?und th?t workers h?d a fix?d ?l??r-?ut standard of output, whi?h was lower than management target, h?w?v?r th?? were ????bl? ?f in?r???ing their output.It w?? ?l?? f?und th?t th? group did n?t allow its m?mb?r? to in?r???? or decrease th? output.Th?? were highl? integrated with their ???i?l ?tru?tur?, and informal pressure w?? u??d to ??t right th? erring m?mb?r?. Th? following ??d? of ??ndu?t was maintained f?r gr?u? ??lid?rit?:One should not turn out too mu?h w?rk. If ?n? does, h? i? a ‘rat buster’.One ?h?uld not turn ?ut t?? littl? work. If ?n? d???, he i? a ‘?h??l?r’.On? should not t?ll a ?u??rvi??r ?n?thing d?trim?nt?l t? an associate. If ?n? d???, he i? a ‘?qu??l?r’.On? ?h?uld n?t attempt t? m?int?in social di?t?n?? or act ?ffi?i?u?. If ?n? i? ?n in????t?r, f?r ?x?m?l?, h? should not ??t lik? ?n?.ConclusionsM??? and th? r????r?h?r? ??n?lud?d th?t:Th? behaviour of th? t??m had n?thing to do with m?n?g?m?nt of g?n?r?l economic conditions ?f the ?l?nt.The w?rk?r? viewed int?rf?r?n?? of extra d???rtm?nt personnel as di?turb?n??.Th? w?rk?r? ??n?id?r?d supervisors as r??r???nt?tiv? ?uth?rit? to discipline the w?rk?r?.Th? l?gi? of efficiency did n?t g? w?ll with th? logic ?f ??ntim?nt?.One should n?t miss th? hum?n ?????t? ?f ?rg?niz?ti?n while ?m?h??i?ing t??hni??l and economic aspects.In ?dditi?n t? th? t??hni??l skills, th? m?n?g?m?nt ?h?uld handle hum?n ?itu?ti?n?, motivate, lead and ??mmuni??t? with th? w?rk?r?.Th? ??n???t ?f ?uth?rit? ?h?uld be b???d ?n social ?kill? in ???uring cooperation r?th?r than ?x??rti??.Conclusions from Hawthorne Studies BrieflyThe ???i?l and psychological f??t?r? at the workplace, not th? physical ??nditi?n? of th? w?rk?l???, determine th? ?m?l?????’ m?r?l? ?nd output.The ?rg?niz?ti?n is a ???i?l ???t?m.N?n-???n?mi? rewards and ??n?ti?n? ?ignifi??ntl? ?ff??t the w?rk?r?’ b?h?vi?ur, morale ?nd output.W?rk?r? ?r? n?t inert ?r i??l?t?d, unrelated individu?l; th?? ?r? ???i?l animals.Divi?i?n ?f l?b?ur ?tri?tl? on ????i?liz?ti?n i? n?t n??????ril? th? m??t ?ffi?i?nt ???r???h.The w?rk?r? have a tendency t? f?rm ?m?ll gr?u?? (informal organizations). The production n?rm? ?nd behavioural patterns are ??t by ?u?h gr?u??.L??d?r?hi?, style ?f supervision, ??mmuni??ti?n and participation ?l?? a ??ntr?l role in workers’ behaviour, ??ti?f??ti?n ?nd productivity.Thu?, th? findings ?f H?wth?rn? ?tudi?? revolutionised the ?rg?niz?ti?n?l thought, ?nd gave ri?? to a n?w th??r? called Human R?l?ti?n? Th??r?.CRITI?I?M OF H?WTH?RN? STUDI?? / EX??RIM?NT?Th? Hawthorne Ex??rim?nt? are m?inl? ?riti?iz?d ?n the f?ll?wing grounds:L??k? Validity: Th? H?wth?rn? ?x??rim?nt? w?r? ??ndu?t?d und?r ??ntr?ll?d ?itu?ti?n?. Th??? findings will n?t w?rk in real setting. The w?rk?r? und?r observat ion kn?w about th? ?x??rim?nt?. Therefore, th?? may h?v? improved their performance only f?r the ?x??rim?nt?.M?r? Im??rt?n?? t? Hum?n Aspects: Th? H?wth?rn? experiments gives t?? much im??rt?n?? to hum?n aspects. Hum?n aspects ?l?n? ??nn?t im?r?v? ?r?du?ti?n. Pr?du?ti?n ?l?? d???nd? on t??hn?l?gi??l ?nd other f??t?r?.M?r? Em?h??i? ?n Gr?u? Decision-making: Th? Hawthorne ?x??rim?nt? ?l???d t?? mu?h ?m?h??i? on group d??i?i?n-m?king. In the r??l situation, individu?l decision-making cannot b? totally neglected ?????i?ll? when qui?k decisions are r?quir?d and th?r? i? n? tim? to consult others.Ov?r Importance t? Fr??d?m of W?rk?r?: The Hawthorne ?x??rim?nt? giv?? a l?t of im??rt?n?? to fr??d?m of th? w?rk?r?. It d??? n?t giv? importance to the ??n?tru?tiv? r?l? ?f th? supervisors. In reality t?? mu?h ?f fr??d?m to th? w?rk?r? ??n l?w?r d?wn th?ir ??rf?rm?n?? ?r ?r?du?tivit?.WH?T DOES THI? MEAN FOR THE MODERN WORKPLACE?Ev?n th?ugh it? criticism it is regarded as a major development in a dministrative th??r?, till date you will find hi? t??hniqu?? being u??d in ?ll organizations lik? r?w?rd? and ?rd?r?, ??rti?? ?nd celebrations, gr?u? ?uting? ?nd appraisals t? boost morale and m?tiv?ti?n.M?n?g?r? n??d t? b? aware ?f h?w their t??m? ?r? operating in ?rd?r f?r them to b? ?r?du?tiv?. In 3 ?ut ?f 4 in?t?n??? ?f ?n ?m?l???? quitting, it is b???u?? the relationship with th? b??? does not equate to th? n??d? ?f th? individual within th? gr?u?.Managers n??d t? recognize what th? ?urr?nt ??h??iv?n??? ?f th?ir team h????n? to b?. They mu?t ?n??ur?g? high n?rm? ?? th?t the standards ?f ????m?li?hm?nt have ??m? l?v?l ?f meaning t? ???h employee.Th?? mu?t ?l?? encourage t??m ??h??iv?n??? ?? th?t a ?u???rtiv? matrix ??n f?rm, ?ll?wing ?v?r??n? t? ?u????d.Unf?rtun?t?l?, th? opposite points ?f ?m?h??i? tend t? b? ?r???nt in most modern t??m? and w?rk?l????. The focus ?n b?n?fit? f?r the ?m?l???? often inv?lv? m?n?t?r? r?w?rd?, job ?r?m?ti?n?, ????ifi? benefits, or ????ifi? w?rk loc ations.If you w?rk hard enough ?nd long enough, ??u ??n ??rn th?t ??rn?r ?ffi?? with a vi?w, a nice paycheck, ?nd an ?xtr? w??k of vacation every year.A???rding to Elt?n M???’? theory ?f m?n?g?m?nt, those t?ngibl? rewards ?r? not ?ignifi??nt enough t? most ?m?l????? t?d??.It would b? beneficial t? l??k at h?w ??h??iv?n??? i? f?rm?d within a t??m ?nd th?n build rewards f?r ?r?du?tivit? around th?t. If ??u work h?rd enough ?nd l?ng ?n?ugh, ??u will ?r??t? lif?l?ng friendships with ??ur co-workers.The w?rk?l??? i? ?lw??? evolving. The needs th?t ????l? have ?r? ?h?nging.In th? past, a ????h??k and ??m? ?xtr? v???ti?n tim?, ?l?ng with the ??rn?r ?ffi?? with a vi?w, w?? ?n?ugh t? k??? ????l? ??ti?fi?d.In today’s w?rk?l???, ?m?l????? want t? m?rg? their ??r??n?l ?nd professional lives t?g?th?r ?? th?t ???h fit? in nicely with the other.Money i? im??rt?nt, but n?t as im??rt?nt ?? r???gniti?n, appreciation, and th? ?r???n?? of a support m?trix.B? following th? th??r? of m?n?g?m?nt, it b ecomes possible f?r ?m?l???r? t? gain a greater insight int? th?ir ?m?l?????, t??m?, and w?rking environments.Thi? ?ll?w? th? r?l?ti?n?hi? b?tw??n managers and w?rk?r? t? d?v?l?? authentically, ?r??ting ??h??iv?n??? and standards that will l??d t? mutu?l success.CRITICISMS OF MAYO’S HUMAN RELATION THEORYThi? th??r? l??k? ??i?ntifi? b???.Thi? th??r? is n?t b???d ?n ??tu?l behaviour of w?rk?r? as th?? w?r? influ?n??d b? th?ir feelings ?f im??rt?n??, ?tt?nti?n ?nd ?ubli?it? th?? r???iv?d in the r????r?h ??tting. Workers r???t positively and giv? their b??t wh?n th?? know that they ?r? b?ing ?b??rv?d.It i? anti-union and ?r?-m?n?g?m?nt. Mayo und?r??tim?t?d th? r?l? of Uni?n? in a free society ?? well ?? n?v?r tri?d t? integrate unions int? hi? thinking.Thi? th??r? n?gl??t?d th? n?tur? ?f w?rk and in?t??d f??u??d ?n int?r??r??n?l r?l?ti?n?.It ign?r?d th? environmental f??t?r? of w?rk?r?’ ?ttitud?? ?nd b?h?vi?ur.Evidence ?bt?in?d fr?m th? experiments d??? n?t ?u???rt ?n? ?f the ??n?lu ?i?n? d?riv?d b? M??? ?nd th? r????r?h?r?.It l??k? ???n?mi? dimension.It d??? n?t ??n?id?r ?ff??t? ?f ‘??nfli?t?’ ?nd ‘t?n?i?n’ on th? workers.This theory give much ?tt?nti?n t? inf?rm?l r?l?ti?n? ?m?ng workers and between w?rk?r? ?nd supervisors, but littl? to th? f?rm?l relationships with inf?rm?l ?n??.Human relations th??r? were implemented ?? a t??hniqu? for manipulating ????l? to ??m?l? with management directives instead ?f f?r bringing m?n?g?m?nt to ?n und?r?t?nding ?f hum?n n?tur? ?nd thereby ?r??ting th? d??ir?bl? ?h?ng?? in the ?rg?niz?ti?n.Hum?n R?l?ti?n? i? ?l?? ?riti?iz?d for ?v?r?m?h??izing hum?n needs ?t th? ?x??n?? ?f n??d f?r accomplishment or r????n?ibilit?, ?r for ?rg?niz?ti?n?l t??k ?nd ?r?????.Th? ?ff??t of hum?n r?l?ti?n? theories did not result in the d?mi?? ?f th? num?r?u? applications ?f classical theory.S?m? ?f th? ???tul?t?? advanced by human r?l?ti?n? theorists did n?t giv? th? ri?? of d?riv?ti?n? that w?r? ?ubj??t t? ?m?iri??l t??ting. Unde (2007) ??int?d out that th? ?vid?n?? i? l??? ??n?lu?iv? with regard t? th? ?ft?n ???um?d r?l?ti?n?hi? b?tw??n increase ?m?l???? ??ti?f??ti?n ?nd in?r????d productivity.Hum?n r?l?ti?n? th??ri??’ id?? posed certain dil?mm?? without ??luti?n? ?ff?r?d.