Scientific management

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Frederick Winslow Taylor

The Scientific Management ( German  Scientific management ) is a management concept that Frederick Winslow Taylor developed and expounded (1856-1915) in 1911, in his eponymous main work. Taylor believed that management , work and companies could be optimized with a purely scientific approach in order to solve social problems and achieve “ prosperity for all ”. The essential components are:

Scientific management mainly refers to still more handcraft-oriented mass production structures ( workshop production ) in the transition from manufacturing to factory work and less to structures in which the work cycle is determined by machines.

A distinction must be made between the ideas of Taylor himself called Scientific Management and their receptions, further developments and criticisms, which are summarized with the term Taylorism .

Term scientific management

The term Scientific Management was not coined by Taylor himself, but by Louis D. Brandeis as part of a meeting he organized, in which Frank Bunker Gilbreth and Henry Laurence Gantt also took part. Taylor himself was very reluctant to accept the term. He rejected the alternative designation Taylor system entirely and even preferred the term process control (original: task management .). In the end, he agreed to the term scientific management after it was publicly accepted.

Principles and principles of scientific management

As a starting point for his analysis chose the so-called Taylor loafing (English: lounging; here: power profile) of the workers. The question was how to get the workers to do the full job they can. He came to the conclusion that there was a power struggle between workers and management and that this struggle would be won by the workers as long as they knew and mastered the work and the management did not know what the actual achievable work output was. Taylor was convinced of the nonsense of such a power struggle and postulated that the provision of the maximum possible daily output by a worker is not only in the convergent interests of the two parties, but even of society as a whole. Therefore, he started from two principles :

  1. Instead of fighting each other, employees and managers should become aware of their common interests and jointly strive for the best possible well-being of both sides and thus of the company and society.
  2. Both sides should trust in the new science of scientific management, which determines the requirements and conditions of a work activity impartially and unquestionably.

The goal is "high wages, low manufacturing costs" with a workload that enables the worker to provide this service day after day for years without any health impairment. To this end, he called for the following principles to be applied :

  1. a large daily workload,
  2. Uniformity and regulated working conditions,
  3. high wages with high work performance as well
  4. Loss of wages for underperformance.

For workshops that have already largely successfully introduced its system, a fifth principle should be added, namely: "The daily workload should be so high that it can only be accomplished by a first-class worker". This principle is already very much based on its methods and instruments .

Basic principles

The methods suggested by Taylor are based on various basic principles ( axioms ) and only work as long as these principles can be adhered to:

  1. The external (e.g. suppliers) and internal (e.g. work processes) processes of a company can be calculated and controlled.
  2. The work can be divided into executive and planning work.
  3. The workers and machines only fulfill individual functions ( specialization ) that can be centrally planned and controlled ( centralization ).
  4. Using scientific methods, it is possible to determine the best way to carry out a work step.
  5. The work processes necessary to manufacture a product consist of a specific and definable sequence of execution functions.
  6. People only work to make money.

In practice, however, these basic principles often cannot be adhered to. Suppliers can be late and workers get sick, machines break down or workpieces do not meet quality requirements and have to be reworked. The high degree of specialization of the work creates monotony among workers , which is detrimental to productivity. As a result, more and more effort has to be made (with increasing bureaucracy) in order to maintain the predictability and controllability of the work systems. Reserves have to be built up to compensate for late deliveries, to replace sick workers or broken machines, which causes additional costs.

Organization of scientific management

F. Taylor 1873

In terms of organizational ideas, Taylor moved at a crossroads between “traditional” manufacturing organization and the requirements of “modern” factory organization . He hardly deals with the situation of the work cycle often determined by the machine in factories. He aptly analyzes the collapse of the master craftsman's economy in industrial production and the problem of the sole influence of the worker on the production time outside of a machine cycle. However, some of his proposed solutions met with great skepticism from management as well as from the unions and in the literature.

The core of its organization is the so-called work office (today: work preparation ). At least half of the work should be shifted here. It should at least work out detailed work plans for each worker for the next day and thus inform the worker in writing what he had to do, how and for how long . In the work office in particular, there was resistance from management, who saw it as a reduction in their own function and power.

Taylor saw the military-oriented, one- line system that had been customary up to that point and instead postulated the need for a functional division of labor, including in management, especially in the work office. He divided the master's task into a total of eight functions and provided a so-called function master for each of the functions , who should not only instruct and train the worker in his respective function in detail, but also be able to master the respective work well enough to be a worker at any time to pretend.

Methods and tools

Taylor himself considered the methods presented by Taylor to be of secondary importance. They are of no use if the principles are not understood and observed. He also expected that they would be replaced by better ones in further development.

Method 1: Recording and standardizing work activity

Slide rule for filming developed by Taylor's colleague, the mathematician Carl Georg Barth around 1904

Planning and control of production should be separated from its execution (separation of manual and mental work) . The physical-mechanical execution of the production is carried out by workers interested in the wage, the analysis and planning of the work process is carried out by specialists in management based on scientific principles. Taylor pointed out that many of the trades that can be found in "modern" factory workshops have been handcrafted for thousands of years and have been improved from generation to generation. Nevertheless, they are carried out in completely different ways from craftsman to craftsman and if they are examined with new scientific methods, they can still be decisively improved. His conclusion was that the worker, even with the best effort, was unable to develop the best working method himself.

He made this clear using the example of turning . Here it was only possible through extensive time studies and with the help of a mathematician ( influencing variable calculation) to develop a slide rule on which the worker can read off the best tool and the optimal turning speed for a given turning job. A performance that the worker is not able to achieve based on his experience alone.

Taylor was thus neither - as is often claimed in the literature - the inventor of time studies, let alone the division of labor . What was new was the use of the time study to analyze the workflow and to improve it. With the aim of avoiding waste in this way , time studies are increasingly being carried out again in industry at the beginning of the 21st century.

Method 2: selection and instruction

Taylor pointed out that not all people are the same and that there must therefore be the ideal worker for every job, who alone is capable of top performance in this area. This is to be found and used for the work. In doing so, he assumed that, due to the good fit between work and people, even greater pleasure in work would be achieved than with less intensive personnel selection.

The work should be based on precise instructions, which the management had to systematically develop and specify using scientific methods and to monitor compliance with them. This principle was based on the assumption that there is a best way to accomplish a job ( one-best-way principle). Taylor was - as also often claimed - not about wresting his knowledge from the worker. Rather, he was convinced that the worker, due to his lack of scientific training, could not find the most efficient working method himself. Rather, it is the job of the work engineers to determine these and then to instruct and guide the workers accordingly.

Method 3: motivate

Taylor had a very positive view of people and assumed a basic willingness to work, which would be hindered solely by the previous systems of workshop control , i.e. the management method used. Nevertheless, it was important to him to support the willingness to submit to his system by means of a remuneration incentive . Since he promised considerable increases in performance, he demanded at least 30% up to 60% more wages than was paid in traditionally controlled, similar jobs. So money was used as a motivational tool by making payment dependent on the service provided.

He called the performance-based pay system proposed by Taylor "differentiated piece rates" and it had the property that the worker, as far as he actually achieved the specified maximum performance, received a promised, high wage. However, if the performance lagged behind, the wages were reduced proportionally. In the Taylorism criticism of this system, this malus principle is the main focus. It is seldom mentioned that the specified maximum wage was significantly higher than the usual for such work. Taylor did not want the increased wages to be understood as remuneration for the piece performance, but rather as a motivation for the worker to submit to the specifications. Taylor is convinced that if he did so, the performance was automatically set.

Despite the broad scope of pay issues at Taylor, his ideas about motivation were not limited to this. At least two contributions to modern motivational theories are seen today, namely VIE theory and goal setting theory . It is significant that it required challenging but achievable goals, carefully selected and trained workers, precise tasks, quick feedback on results and progress and, in addition to remuneration, also provided non-financial performance incentives such as promotions.

Development and application of scientific management

Scientific Management in Taylor's Time

Mechanic at Tabor Co., one of Taylor's flagship companies around 1905

Starting in 1882, Taylor had large-scale time studies carried out, introduced performance wage systems , and developed new, scientifically based, detailed work and movement sequences to increase worker performance. As a result, the factories became increasingly rationalized : the workers were given a standardized environment with standardized lighting, tools and operational processes. In return, they were increasingly denied self-determination and personal responsibility. The worker was now only responsible for carrying out the work itself, not for planning and preparing it or solving problems.

Taylor first published his ideas in lectures before the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), of which he was chairman at the time, and published them in various works, mostly through ASME. His ideas for piece-wage systems first appeared in 1885, followed by Shop Management in 1903 and finally, in 1911, Scientific Management .

His successes brought him a lot of attention, many followers and more or less able imitators, but also bitter criticism and resistance (see: Taylorism ). Scientific management became a political issue with the typical consequences of such interest-based receptions and escalated to negotiations before an American congress committee. The different, mostly only partial aspects, practical implementations quickly blurred the concept of scientific management. The theory and practice of scientific management in the USA differed significantly from one another as early as 1915. The head of the investigative commission set up by the American congress committee, Robert Hoxie , found in the year that the experts for questions of efficiency offered their services on a short-term basis and did not show the ability or willingness to introduce scientific management in accordance with Taylor's ideas.

Parts of Taylor's concepts were not implemented. This is especially true for the concept of function masters. To the extent that this is taken literally in relation to people and not taken as personified descriptions of functions, not even Taylor succeeded in doing this himself in his flagship companies.

Development of Scientific Management according to Taylor

In the USA, the Taylor Society was founded in 1912 , which in 1936 merged with the Society of Industrial Engineers to form the Society for the Advancement of Management . At the same time, the use of language shifted to speak of industrial engineering instead of scientific management .

Taylor's ideas were quickly taken up abroad, too.

His standard work “Shop Management” appeared in France as early as 1907, and Michelin and Renault set about working according to the specifications. However, the untrained and generally insufficiently trained working study staff there initially discredited Scientific Management and slowed its spread in this country.

German and Dutch editions of “Shop Management” also appeared quickly. Among other things, in order to spread and further develop scientific management, REFA was founded in 1924 . The introduction of the degree of performance assessment and the distribution time opened a “back door” for the unions to have a say, which made the system acceptable to them. In contrast to Taylor, they essentially rely on piecework .

Starting with the first international management conference in Prague in 1924, Scientific Management received a strong impetus in Poland, the then Czechoslovak Republic and Hungary.

A series of congresses followed in Brussels (1925), Rome (1927), Paris (1929), Amsterdam (1932), London (1935) and Washington (1938) with an average of 1,300 participants. The organization of the conferences came into the hands of a permanent institution in 1927, the Le Comite International de l'Organisation Scientifique (CIOS) in France. In the same year the International Management Institute (IMI) was founded in the USA .

Lenin dealt intensively with scientific management and is considered an admirer of Taylor's ideas. For him it was the key to turning the Russian peasants into industrial workers. In correspondence with the American Taylor Society , Alexei Gastew set up and operated an institute for scientific work organization . With increasing tensions to the western world, this expressly American-based approach gave way to a counter-movement that "breaks with the outdated technical standards [...] projected capabilities", to Stachanovism (see also: Stachanov Movement ). Analogous to this there was the Henneke movement in the GDR , which was supposed to replace the “Refa system”.

In Japan Scientific Management in 1911, translating into Japanese occurred in 1913. appeared in the following years, there are some organizations were founded to develop the scientific management, for the most part in 1927 in the Japanese Association of Clubs for efficiency research aufgingen which the magazine Industrial Efficiency issued . The high productivity successes in Japan are attributed to a particularly consistent application of the principles of scientific management. A systemic view reveals the application of these principles even in the Toyota production system . Taiichi Ohno in 1988 suggested that the roots lie there .

Only in England did the very strong trade unions, together with important entrepreneurs such as John Cadbury , partly as a response to Taylor's rigid approach to licensing his patents such as high-speed steel , oppose the “Taylorism” that - so gripped - there has not blossomed for a long time.

Scientific management in management training

One of the first American "management schools", the Wharton School , which is still important today , was founded by Joseph Wharton . Wharton knew Taylor's ideas as an insider from his work on the board of directors at Bethlehem Steel , where Taylor had developed many of his ideas. Taylor appeared at the Wharton School as a visiting professor.

He also taught at the Tuck School of Business, which was shaped by the very pragmatic German engineering schools and is still important today .

The Harvard Business School taught in this German tradition . There Taylor's ideas were fundamentally integrated into the training concept. Taylor himself, for the universities were too theoretical, could only be induced to teach at Harvard, which he took over from 1909 to 1914, by pointing out that his system would be taught there with or without his participation.

The basic structures of modern management training at the most influential American management schools were thus shaped by Taylor's ideas.

Significant further developments and intermediate structures

In most countries , the implementation and further development of the methods of scientific management was initially carried out by management consultants , who thus acted as intermediaries , and only later, as industrial engineering (in Germany: industrial engineering / ergonomics ), through university research and teaching. The problem with dissemination by consultants is the difficult differentiation between seriousness and charlatanism (see also: Taylorism ). The competition among consultants also leads to frequent pseudo-innovations, which quickly mean a great deal of confusion for clients, even with serious offers.

In Germany, well-known industrialists such as Carl Friedrich von Siemens, with state support from the Ministry of Economic Affairs, established semi-state associations that were supposed to serve as intermediaries for selected and coordinated methods. The aim was that our own employees should implement the methods in the organizations and that they should be trained directly without the intervention of consultants. This is how first the RKW and later the REFA came into being. The dissemination via consultants was therefore slow in Germany. Only the Bedaux Society succeeded in gaining a foothold in Germany to a significant extent. It was founded in 1926 and closed by the Nazi government in 1933. On the other hand, similar institutions were founded in France, for example, with the participation of the state and the central business associations, without them being able to build on the success of their German counterparts even remotely.

The Gilbreths and Charles Bedaux particularly stand out among the consultants who made significant contributions to scientific management .

Modern development and criticism

After the Second World War, piecework wages and the use of the stopwatch to determine the target times and the associated accounting systems were common worldwide in the most varied of variants, and not only in industry. Various influences and ideas, including Fords , had been added and mixed together unspecifically. The systems were no longer directly associated with Taylor. This was already clear from the development of the participant structures at the CIOS conferences. More and more top managers and fewer engineers came. At the first post-war conference in 1947 it was found that "Scientific Management" had become a collective term for all productivity-increasing technologies.

It was not until the 1970s, when automation and the consequences of the change from the seller's to the buyer's market radically changed the requirements for production processes on the one hand, but the possibilities of outsourcing and the possibility of employing poorly trained and paid guest workers , the death of the now traditional , on the other Delayed structures, he came back into conversation, mostly poorly received in his ideas, as a counter-model to be replaced under the term Taylorism , used like a dirty word .

If attempts to rethink work organizations and to eliminate traditional, “Tayloristic” forms through work structuring reached a high point in the early 1990s, at the beginning of the 21st century it became clear that the principles of scientific management were the shareholder- stems from the Calvinist tradition. Well support value ideology along with principal-agent theory . Taylor's ideas are returning across the board in many companies - under a variety of new names - and factories.

From the perspective of the 21st century, at least the following sustained impulses can be derived from the conception of Scientific Management:

  1. To ensure competitiveness, it is necessary to work continuously to reduce unit costs.
  2. Company management and employees form a community of interests.
  3. Improving work processes is one of the core tasks of management.
  4. Middle management forms the backbone of a functioning company.
  5. Workers and management depend on cooperative collaboration.

literature

  • Frederick W. Taylor : Shop Management. In: Transactions, American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Volume XXVIII, 1903, pp. 1337-1480.
German: The management in particular of the workshops. Springer, Berlin 2007, ISBN 978-3-540-72147-5 . (Reprint of the 3rd, increased edition, Berlin, 1914; 2nd, unchanged, new edition 1919.)
  • Frederick W. Taylor: The principles of scientific management. Cosimo, New York 2006, ISBN 1-59605-889-7 . (Reprint of London: Harper & Brothers, 1911)
German: The principles of scientific management. Salzwasser, Paderborn 2011, ISBN 978-3-86195-713-3 .
  • Angelika Ebbinghaus : Workers and ergonomics: the emergence of "scientific management". Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1984, ISBN 3-531-11667-3 .
  • Christian Haußer: Americanization of Work? German business leaders and trade unionists in the dispute over Ford and Taylor (1919–1932). Stuttgart: ibidem, 2008, ISBN 978-3-89821-920-4 .
  • Simon Head: The new ruthless economy: work & power in the digital age. Oxford University Press, Oxford 2005, ISBN 0-19-517983-8 . (detailed description and analysis of neo-Tayloristic practices in the automotive and service sectors in the USA)
  • Walter Hebeisen: FW Taylor and Taylorism: on the work and teaching of Taylor and the criticism of Taylorism. Zurich: vdf, 1999, ISBN 3-7281-2521-0 .
  • Robert Kanigel: The one best way: Frederick Winslow Taylor and the enigma of efficiency. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 2005, ISBN 0-262-61206-2 .
  • Karl Markus Michel , Wieser, Harald (eds.); Hans Magnus Enzensberger (arr.): Work organization: the end of Taylorism? (= Kursbuch. 43) .. Rotbuch, Berlin 1976.
  • Rita Pokorny: The rationalization expert Irene M. Witte (1894–1976): Biography of a border crosser. Dissertation . TU, Berlin 2003. ( PDF full text ). - About a German representative of Taylorism
  • Fritz Söllheim: Taylor system for Germany: Limits of its introduction in German companies. Oldenbourg, Munich 1922.
  • John-Christopher Spender, Hugo J. Kijne (Ed.): Scientific Management: Fredrick Winslow Taylor's Gift to the World. Kluwer, Norwell, Mass. 1996, ISBN 0-7923-9758-4 .
  • Rolf Todesco: The rational core in Taylorism. In: A&O magazine for work and organizational psychology. No. 3, 1994. (full text)
  • Walter Volpert , Richard Vahrenkamp (eds.); Frederick Winslow Taylor: The Principles of Scientific Management. Beltz, Weinheim 1977, ISBN 3-407-54043-4 .

Web links

Commons : Scientific Management  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Frederick W. Taylor: The principles of scientific management. Cosimo, New York 2006, ISBN 1-59605-889-7 . (Reprinted from Harper & Brothers edition, London 1911)
  2. ^ Manfred Schulte-Zurhausen : Organization. 5th, revised and updated edition. Vahlen, Munich 2010, ISBN 978-3-8006-3736-2 , p. 10 f.
  3. ↑ The term Taylorism was also used in works referring to Scientific Management. For example Edgar Herbst: Taylorism in our economic hardship. 2nd, expanded edition. Anzengruber, Leipzig 1920.
  4. ↑ Modern translations are task control or task management .
  5. ^ Daniel A. Wren, Alexander Ring (trans.): Fredrick W. Taylor: Myth and Reality. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , pp. 55, 70.
  6. ^ Walter Volpert , Richard Vahrenkamp (ed.): Frederick Winslow Taylor: The principles of scientific management. Beltz, Weinheim 1977, ISBN 3-407-54043-4 . S. XII.
  7. ^ Adolf Wallichs (Ed.): Fred. W. Taylor: The management, especially the workshops. Third, increased edition. Springer, Berlin 1919 (Reprint: (= Milestones of Political Economy. Volume 7). 2007, ISBN 978-3-540-72147-5 , p. 7)
  8. ↑ a b Adolf Wallichs (Ed.): Fred. W. Taylor: The management, especially the workshops. Third, increased edition. Springer, Berlin 1919. (Reprint: (= Milestones of Political Economy. Volume 7). 2007, ISBN 978-3-540-72147-5 , p. 23)
  9. ↑ H. Schüpbach: Industrial and organizational psychology. (= UTB basics ). Ernst Reinhardt, Munich 2013.
  10. ^ Eduard Gaugler : The Principles of Scientific Management: Significance and aftermath. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , p. 31.
  11. ^ Gertraude Mikl-Horke : Industrial and work sociology. 6., completely revised Edition. Oldenbourg, Munich 2007, ISBN 978-3-486-58254-3 .
  12. ↑ Ingo Janas: Taylor on the Way of St. James: Case study on reactivating time management at Bosch Rexroth. In: IAW Chair and Institute for Ergonomics at RWTH Aachen University (ed.): Work organization of the future: Growth through productivity management. (4th Symposium Sept. 18, 2008). IAW, Aachen 2008.
  13. ↑ A thesis which, presumably in ignorance of this prominent predecessor, represented by Reinhard Sprenger at the end of the 1990s, aroused a great deal of approval, especially among opponents of Taylorism. See also: Eduard Gaugler: The Principles of Scientific Management: Significance and aftermath. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , p. 34.
  14. ^ Daniel A. Wren, Alexander Ring (trans.): Fredrick W. Taylor: Myth and Reality. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , p. 70.
  15. ^ Walter Hebeisen: FW Taylor and Taylorism: on the work and teaching of Taylor and the criticism of Taylorism. vdf, Zurich 1999, ISBN 3-7281-2521-0 , p. 85.
  16. ^ Daniel A. Wren, Alexander Ring (trans.): Fredrick W. Taylor: Myth and Reality. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , p. 72 f.
  17. ^ Frederick Winslow Taylor : A Piece Rate System: Being a Step Toward Partial solution of the Labor Problem. In: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (Ed.): Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. New York City: The Society, 1895 (Vol. XXIV), pp. 856-903. (Morgen Witzel: Human resource management. Thoemmes Press, Bristol 2000, ISBN 1-85506-629-7 )
  18. ^ Frederick Winslow Taylor: Shop Management. In: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (Ed.): Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Vol. XXVIII, The Society, New York City 1903, pp. 1337-1480.
  19. ↑ Frederick Winslow Taylor: The principles of scientific management. Harper & Brothers, London 1911. (Cosimo, New York 2006, ISBN 1-59605-889-7 )
  20. ↑ Angelika Ebbinghaus: Workers and ergonomics: On the emergence of "scientific management". Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1984, ISBN 3-531-11667-3 , p. 110 f.
  21. ^ Daniel A. Wren, Alexander Ring (trans.): Fredrick W. Taylor: Myth and Reality. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , p. 68.
  22. ↑ knol (Ed.): Industrial Engineering: Definition, Explanation, History, and Programs ( Memento of the original from January 24, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , read: 10-11-20. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / knol.google.com
  23. ^ Daniel A. Wren, Alexander Ring (trans.): Fredrick W. Taylor: Myth and Reality. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , p. 65.
  24. ^ Eric Bloemen: The Movement for Scientific Management in Europe between the Wars. In: John-Christopher Spender, Hugo J. Kijne (Ed.): Scientific Management: Fredrick Winslow Taylor's Gift to the World. Kluwer, Norwell, Mass. 1996, ISBN 0-7923-9758-4 , p. 113 f.
  25. ^ Eric Bloemen: The Movement for Scientific Management in Europe between the Wars. In: John-Christopher Spender, Hugo J. Kijne (Ed.): Scientific Management: Fredrick Winslow Taylor's Gift to the World. Kluwer, Norwell, Mass. 1996, ISBN 0-7923-9758-4 , p. 111.
  26. ^ Eric Bloemen: The Movement for Scientific Management in Europe between the Wars. In: John-Christopher Spender, Hugo J. Kijne (Ed.): Scientific Management: Fredrick Winslow Taylor's Gift to the World. Kluwer, Norwell, Mass. 1996, ISBN 0-7923-9758-4 , p. 122.
  27. ^ Wallace J. Hopp, Mark L. Spearman: Factory physics: foundation of manufacturing management. 2nd Edition. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, Boston 2001, ISBN 0-256-24795-1 , p. 27.
  28. ↑ Kurt Kühn: Stachanow and Hennecke: Is the Hennecke movement in the eastern zone of Germany to be equated with the Stachanow movement in the Soviet Union. FDGB, Dresden 1949, pp. 9 and 7.
  29. ↑ Moriyuki Tajima: Scientific Management: Influence on Theory and Practice of Management in Japan. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , p. 81 f.
  30. ^ Seishi Nakagawa: Scientific Management and Japanese Management, 1910-1945. In: John-Christopher Spender, Hugo J. Kijne (Ed.): Scientific Management: Fredrick Winslow Taylor's Gift to the World. Kluwer, Norwell, Mass. 1996, ISBN 0-7923-9758-4 , pp. 163-179.
  31. ^ Daniel A. Wren, Alexander Ring (trans.): Fredrick W. Taylor: Myth and Reality. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , p. 65.
  32. ^ Hugo J. Kijne, John-Christopher Spender: Introduction. In: John-Christopher Spender, Hugo J. Kijne (Ed.): Scientific Management: Fredrick Winslow Taylor's Gift to the World. Kluwer, Norwell, Mass. 1996, ISBN 0-7923-9758-4 . S. xv.
  33. ^ Manfred Schulte-Zurhausen: Organization. 5th, revised. and updated edition. Munich, Vahlen 2010, ISBN 978-3-8006-3736-2 , p. 9.
  34. ↑ Michael Faust: Why is management consulting booming? : and why not at all times and everywhere. In: Sofi-Mitteilungen. 28, 2000, pp. 67f. (PDF) , accessed on February 21, 2011.
  35. ^ Eric Bloemen: The Movement for Scientific Management in Europe between the Wars. In: John-Christopher Spender, Hugo J. Kijne (Ed.): Scientific Management: Fredrick Winslow Taylor's Gift to the World. Kluwer, Norwell, Mass. 1996, ISBN 0-7923-9758-4 , p. 121.
  36. ^ Hanns Blasius: Porsche - Toyota - General Electric: Good corporate governance in Germany, Japan and the USA. Orell Füssli, Zurich 2007, ISBN 978-3-280-05227-3 , p. 207.
  37. ^ Eduard Gaugler: The Principles of Scientific Management: Significance and aftermath. In: Eduard Gaugler (Ed.): Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management; Vademecum on the classic in scientific management. Verlag Wirtschaft und Finanz, Düsseldorf 1996, ISBN 3-87881-102-0 , p. 44 ff.