The principles of scientific management

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Frederick Winslow Taylor

The principles of scientific management (English original title: The principles of scientific management) is a work by Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856-1915). It appeared in 1911 and contains Taylor's views on the principle of scientific management and his new form of work organization, in short it illustrates the method of scientific management developed by Taylor . The method of scientific management is, roughly speaking, the scientific recording of work, including all individual work steps, in order to increase the success of a company. Scientific management is often associated with the term Taylorism . Taylor's monograph begins by introducing the new system of organization developed by Taylor. In the second chapter, the new system, the workload system, is compared with the initiative system that was prevalent at the time. Taylor's examples serve to show the differences, especially the advantages of the scientific method.

Scientific management principles

The Principles of Scientific Management

The basic idea of scientific management is the scientific recording and measurement of human labor . The work process is divided into various individual activities so that each worker only has to perform a single work movement. The basic components of scientific management can be described as follows:

  • a daily and individual workload,
  • higher wages when fulfilling the quota,
  • Separation of physical and mental work and
  • by means of scientific calculations it is possible to determine the best way of each work step.

In the course of measuring human labor, Taylor developed a law, the law for heavy physical work , on which he based his workload idea . This law describes the tiring influence of heavy work on a worker's performance. The law reads as follows:

"It is the law of heavy physical labor that is more like the work of the load horse than that of the racehorse. Almost all such work consists of pulling or pushing with the arms, that is, the man exerts his strength by lifting or pushing an object He grabs with his hands. The law says that with this kind of lifting or pushing work the man can only be active during a certain percentage of the time of the day [...]. The smaller the weight, the longer the work periods can be, after all there is a burden that he can wear all day long without getting tired . "

Workload system

In contrast to the prevailing initiative system, the workload system developed by Taylor shows decisive differences. First and foremost, the separation of mental and manual work should be mentioned here. Under the new system, with the workload idea, the management of a company takes on a partial task of the work. In this way, responsibility and performance are shared between the workers and their managers or management. While under the old system the workers alone decided how they worked and how much they worked, this is now taken over by the management. The main features of the workload system can be shown in four aspects:

  1. The leaders developed a unified method, a science for each individual work element, which replaces the old rule of thumb method.
  2. On the basis of a scientific degree, they select the right people, train them, teach them and further educate them instead of, as in the past, leaving the workers to choose their occupation and further training themselves.
  3. The management works in cordial agreement with the workers; so you can be sure that all work is done according to the principles of the science that you have built.
  4. Work and responsibility are distributed almost equally between management and workers. Management takes all the work for which it is better suited than the worker on its shoulder, whereas up to now almost all the work and most of the responsibility has been shifted to the workers.

Examples of scientific management

The examples in Frederick Taylor's work are intended to convince the reader of both the values ​​of the new system and the new methodology. In addition, the examples should serve as evidence of the extraordinary power and effectiveness of the workload system. Taylor cites a total of five examples in his work:

  1. The loading of pig iron.
  2. The shoveling.
  3. The masonry.
  4. Sorting out steel balls.
  5. The manufacture of complex machines.

The first four examples differ from the fifth example for Taylor. According to Taylor, these four examples are limited to simpler work steps and activities. For Taylor, no intelligent workers are necessary or available there. In order to strengthen the connection of his theory with intelligent, or first-class workers, he gives the fifth example. There it is supposed to work with workers, "[...] who can choose better and more practical working methods according to their own judgment and discretion." It is important to show that even more educated workers need instruction by the management and the prescription of a workload. The purpose of the examples presented by Taylor can be summarized as follows:

"Hopefully the examples given clearly show why the scientific-methodical operation for employers and employees has to show significantly greater success than the lock system. Furthermore, I wanted to show that the results are not overly superior to the inner construction of one operating system those of the other, but rather by replacing certain guiding principles with entirely new ones . "

The loading of pig iron or the disadvantages of the piece wage system

Frederick Taylor chose this example because he said it was the simplest and crudest form of work. To do this work, a worker only needed his own hands as tools. The entire work consists of the worker bending down, picking up the iron bars, carrying and stacking those bars. According to Taylor, this could also be done by an " intelligent gorilla ". For this example, Taylor went to the Bethlehem steel works , which at that time had an average workforce of 75. Before Taylor's changes, the daily output of a worker was 12.5 tons. According to Taylor's own calculations, however, he was certain that a high-class pig iron shipper could load up to 48 tons. In order to achieve this result, the right worker first had to be selected. According to the new system, one man at a time had to be trained and then improved. After days of observation, they finally found a suitable worker, whom they referred to as "Schmidt". As a next step, "Schmidt" had to be persuaded by the managers to voluntarily increase his workload. They promised him more wages for this, so they diverted the focus of the worker from the overtime and directed it to the higher wages. Taylor and the managers of the steel mills were quick to convince "Schmidt", who, according to Taylor, had a "mental awkwardness" which made him suitable for simple work. Schmidt then began to work under the guidance of a member of the management. " He worked when commanded to work and rested when commanded to rest ." In the evening, around 5:30 p.m., Schmidt, under the precise instructions of the management, loaded 47.5 tons of pig iron bars onto a wagon. Taylor then stayed in this steel mill for three years, and "Schmidt" managed every day, with the help of the instructions, to achieve this high workload without any problems. Building on this success, the other workers were gradually guided individually to the higher workload. With this example Taylor illustrates the prevailing relationship between work and fatigue, which was not found under the old system of initiative.

The shoveling or the advantages of individual treatment with the new system

Taylor's second example was about shoveling earth. During this activity, a "first-class shovel" must ask himself what weight load he has to lift per shovel movement in order to achieve the greatest daily output. In order to answer this question, a scientific study of this activity is necessary so that the prevailing rules of thumb could be efficiently replaced. To find this number, the research group selected two to three first-class diggers, who were promised an extra wage, which should motivate these workers to do honest and reliable work. In the following week of the experiment, the bucket loads and all environmental influences were gradually changed. The workers were closely observed by various people who had already carried out experiments. The result was an average of 9.5 kg shovel load. Based on the law already found, the shovelers were no longer allowed to own shovels of their own, nor were the workers allowed to choose their shovels. The shovels had to get eight or nine shovels, depending on the material. This made it possible for the workers to pick up the average load and also other uses for the various shovels. This scientific investigation led, among other things, to the establishment of a shovel store in which suitable tools could be stored and borrowed. For comparison: under the "rule of thumb method", in which the worker always used the same shovel for the different materials (ore, pea coal, ...), the respective loads per shovel were extremely different (from 2 kg to 15 kg). Due to these differences, it was impossible to achieve a suitable daily output, since it would have been too exhausted if the load was too high, whereas if the load was too low it would only have been able to achieve very small outputs. The following research was done to understand the science of shoveling:

  • thousands of measurements with a stop watch of how quickly a worker can remove the material with the "right" shovel,
  • Recording the time it took to swing the bucket back to throw the load as far and as high as possible,
  • Perform these measurements for various combinations of material, height, and distance.

The interaction of these statistics with the law for heavy physical work enabled the manager to instruct the digger on the exact procedure. In this way, the strength of the shovel could be optimally used and an individual, fair and daily workload assigned to him, which the worker could easily achieve. This made it possible for the worker to obtain a substantial premium. In order to treat each worker individually (workload, correct work equipment, work instructions) a work office was set up, which fulfilled these tasks. In addition, telephone calls and messenger services were established so that the time lost in giving instructions is as low as possible. An important aspect of the new system, the new management, was not to respond to mistakes with dismissal or lower wages, but rather to provide the necessary help.

The masonry or the improvement of the methods and equipment

According to Taylor, bricklaying is one of the oldest existing crafts, but it has stood still with no discernible progress, neither in terms of materials, tools nor in terms of the method of work. At the beginning of the investigation, led by Frank B. Gilberth, every single movement of the bricklayer was carefully observed and analyzed. In the course of this, all unnecessary and superfluous movements were gradually removed, while slow movements were replaced by faster ones. The accuracy of the investigation is shown by the fact that every smallest element, which could influence the speed and / or the tiredness of the bricklayer, was analyzed. Gilberth, who himself had learned to build masonry, used this to determine the position of the worker's foot, the distance between the mortar box and brick and from the worker to the wall. This has already eliminated the first unnecessary steps. Gilberth's further results were the correct height at which the mason mortar and bricks are best to be held. A frame was developed for this, which placed all relevant elements (bricks, mortar, masonry, wall) at the perfect distance from one another. The great advantage of this frame was to spare the bricklayer from having to stoop deeply and reach deeply for the bricks. Eliminating this movement saves the bricklayer a great deal of human strength and strain. The next step in optimizing the workflow was to carefully sort the bricks and, if necessary, sort them out before they were used. This in turn removed a few individual and unnecessary work steps. Another gain in time was that after embedding the bricks in the wall, printing was no longer done with mortar, but by hand. Overall, the number of handles could be reduced from 18 to 5 per tile. This result reflects three approaches:

  1. Elimination of movements and hand movements that turned out to be unnecessary,
  2. Introduction of simple equipment to replace tedious and time-consuming movements, and
  3. teaching bricklayers to use simple two-handed movements.

As a practical example, a wall can be shown which was built by Gilberth himself. This was 12 cm thick and consisted of two types of bricks. The organization of the wall enabled him to achieve an hourly output of 350 bricks (under the old system it was only 120 bricks). The management now had to provide enough teachers so that every newcomer could learn the simple steps. In addition, the newcomers had to be constantly monitored and supported. In addition, the management had to be aware that the workers would only submit to this strict discipline and harder work with additional payment. These tasks illustrate the fact that individual study of each worker was necessary. Another task of the management was to ensure that all preparatory work (bringing in bricks, mixing mortar ...) was done in good time so that an uninterrupted chain of work could take place.

"Gilberth's method of laying bricks is a fine example of true, effective collaboration, not a collaboration in which the management works together with the majority of the workers without caring about the individual, but a collaboration in which the members of the Management (each in his specialty) help the worker individually and according to his individuality, on the one hand by systematically studying his needs and inadequacies and by instructing better and faster methods, on the other hand by ensuring that the unskilled workers also do their part to do the work "correctly" and quickly . "

Gilberth's success is based on four basic principles, which reflect the essentials of the methodology of scientific management:

  1. Deriving and developing the science of masonry, including fixed rules for every move by every worker and the perfecting and normalization of all work tools and conditions.
  2. Careful selection of the right people and the subsequent education of them to be first-class workers. (At the same time the elimination of those workers without good will or skills).
  3. The establishment of a certain relationship between the right workers and science through tutoring and supervision by the management plus the payment of a bonus for working quickly and according to regulations.
  4. The equal division of work and responsibility between worker and manager. Working side by side, helping and encouraging each other.

The sorting out of steel balls or the influence of reduced working hours on the quality and quantity of the work

With the increasing number of cyclists in the 20th century, more and more steel balls were required for the ball bearings. More than 20 different work steps were required to produce the steel ball. The most important step was the inspection after the balls were polished for the last time. To investigate this work, Taylor visited a society that had existed for about ten years. For the inspection in this company 120 girls were employed, who could be described as "long-established" and very skillful. Under the old system, the inspectors had to work 10.5 hours a day. During this time, the workers had to put several balls " on the back of their left hand in the groove between two clenched fingers, roll them back and forth in all directions and carefully examine them. Each girl had a magnet in her right hand to sort out the faulty ones Bullets . " Four different types of balls (toothed, scratched, soft and cracked in fire) were filtered out. These bullets had such minor defects that they would not be noticed by an untrained eye. This work required attention and focus. A large part of the 10.5 hours of work was actually spent doing nothing because the working period was simply too long. As a first step in the scientific management of the company, the working hours were reduced, thus ensuring a clearer separation of working and rest time. The previous head of the company was instructed, together with the better and more influential workers, to convince the remaining workers that they could do as much in ten hours, with the same pay as in 10.5. All workers agreed to the changes within two weeks. After a few months, Taylor reduced the working hours step by step to eight hours, regardless of the opinions of the women workers. While the daily wage remained at the same level, production increased. In the midst of the transition to the new workload system, a new leader, Sanford E. Thompson, was installed. Thompson recognized that suitable ball testers, in addition to perseverance and diligence, have a low " personal coefficient " (" Some have an unusually quick perception and react extremely quickly. With them, the perception is transmitted almost instantaneously from the eye to the brain, and the brain in turn responds immediately by sending the appropriate message to the hand. These people are said to have a low [...] "personal coefficient" . "). Thanks to this knowledge, all workers with a high personal coefficient were sorted out. However, this laid off many of the best workers. Because wages are dependent on the quantity of performance, there is a risk that quality will suffer. To prevent this, workers were made impossible to work poorly without receiving appropriate evidence. A general inspection with a corresponding follow-up inspection was initiated for this purpose. This went as follows:

"The four most reliable of the examiners were given a number of balls to check every day, which had been examined the day before by one of the regular examiners. The number on the ball box, from which one could have seen what kind of balls it was, was arbitrarily changed by the foreman so that none of the inspectors knew which worker had checked the balls beforehand. On the following day, one of the checked boxes was examined by the so-called general inspector. A girl was appointed for this position who always looks A very effective means of checking the honesty and diligence of the inspectors consisted in the fact that every 2 to 3 days a box was specially filled with balls by the master, of which a known number was correct and a known number Number was incorrect Neither the ordinary examiners nor the re-examiners h a way to distinguish these prepared boxes from those intended for sale. In this way, any temptation to take work lightly - to fumble - as the term technicus is, has been removed . "

In order to increase the quality of the work, daily reports on the workers were requested and prepared. The evaluations based on this report aroused the ambition of the individual workers. Those with the higher quality and quantity of work received higher wages, while at the same time those workers with mediocre work received lower wages. Women workers with poor results were fired. As a next step, exact time studies were made of how quickly the best control could be carried out and what the best working conditions were. This was also a guarantee against imposing too great a workload on the workers, which would lead to physical fatigue. The result of this time study was that a large part of the work was spent doing nothing. To counteract the inactivity and nervousness on the part of the workers, Taylor introduces rest breaks of 10 minutes, which took place after every 1.25 hours of work. During this time the workers were allowed to do anything they wanted. Because they were so apart during working hours that they could no longer talk. In the last step of the system change, each worker was assigned a carefully decided workload with a corresponding bonus. This happened through the introduction of the differential wage system ( "The earnings of the girls increased proportionally with the quantity and even more with the quality of their work ."). The result of all the changes was that the work that was previously done by 120 workers was now done by 35 workers with greater accuracy. This resulted in some advantages for both the workers and the management:

Table 1: Advantages of the workload system
Advantages of female workers Advantages of leadership
1 80-100% more wages great improvement in quality
2 Reduction of working hours from 10.5 to 8.5; Saturday afternoon free; four breaks a day great reduction in exam costs (despite special expenses for office, teachers, time studies ...)
3 The feeling that the management is particularly interested in each worker; Knowledge of a constant helpful teacher on the line good understanding between management and workers
4th Possibility of two days off with the same payment

The manufacture of complicated machines or the amount of scientific research into the processes involved in metalworking

The factory examined had 300 employees at the time of the analysis and had been in operation for 15 years. Among these employees there was a good manager and equally good masters and workers, all of whom worked under the piece-rate principle (initiative system). A machine was selected which had been operated by a very good worker for at least ten years. The work in this factory was so specialized that one worker would only do a small number of repetitive tasks. At the beginning, the time that the worker needed to complete the parts was measured again. Overall, this time, the speed, the chip sizes and the time required to clamp the cast parts on the machine were measured. In this way, an average performance within the workshop could be determined. In the next step, with the help of slide rules, the relationship between the machine and the work to be done by it (pulling power at different speeds, maximum possible advance, number of revolutions) was determined. Building on this, the gears were changed so that the machine ran at the cheapest speed. With the information about the correct shape and correct cutting angle, on the part of the scientists, tools were made from high-speed steel. A specially made slide rule was then used to find out the exact speed and feeds for each individual activity on the lathe. After these preparations, each individual work step was carried out on the lathe under the aspect of scientific management . The production times could be reduced to nine times. The next thing to do was to completely redesign the workers' perception of their job and that of management. To achieve this, a long series of practical demonstrations are required to explain the advantages of the new system to every single man. "In this factory, however, production per man and machine had more than doubled within three years. Almost all of the carefully selected workers had gradually moved up from simpler and inferior work to higher, and had been trained by their teachers and by their teachers in such a way that they could earn higher wages than ever before . " The rapid pace called for the old rules of thumb to be replaced by new and faster operating methods and a systematic analysis of the craft of each worker. The time saved through the scientific analysis was even greater than the savings made with the machines. Success was only possible because metalworking is based on a " real science " including a certain complexity, practice, experience and study. A worker who is familiar with work in workshops and who has also completed an extensive study of the science of metals has the ability to perform any machine work in the shortest possible time. Every educated and intelligent worker who is interested in the technical advances in a factory manages to develop a scientific plan for his work within a short time of trying instead of fiddling with rules of thumb. Nevertheless, a management is required, a second person who helps to derive the respective workload, the law. For example, two people are already working together when one measures the other's working hours.

"With working methods on a scientific basis (scientific management) it becomes a duty, but also an interesting and grateful task of those in whose hands the management lies, not only to derive laws and to suppress rules of thumb, but also to use the fastest working methods for all their workers without distinction The gain from the application of these laws is always so great that any society can easily spend the expenses on the experiments necessary to derive them. Thus, under the new system, accurate, scientifically based knowledge and methods will sooner or later later replace the rules of thumb everywhere, while under the old system working on the basis of scientific-methodological laws is impossible. "

The benefits of these examples are primarily based on three factors:

  1. Science replaced the individual "workers judgment".
  2. Systematic analysis of the workers (examination of every worker for fitness, theoretical and practical help).
  3. Close and collaborative collaboration between management and workers, based on agreement and scientifically established laws. Management does its part, then work does the rest.

Criticism of scientific management / the examples of scientific management

see also: Critique of Taylorism

A first point of criticism of scientific management or Taylorism is the systematic dequalification of workers as well as their submission and the systematic expropriation by capital, which made employees a tool of management. Under the principle of scientific management, the worker is only expected to do one specific work step, which is also prescribed in detail. Those who are not suitable for this step are simply fired. In Germany in particular, there was a shortage of skilled workers after the First World War , which means that organizing work under Scientific Management would have been very time-consuming and costly. In addition, the German working conditions (social hierarchies, collective agreements ...) were not identical to the American working conditions, which was an additional obstacle for scientific management. The division of work into mental and physical work turned the activity into a monotonous routine, which suppresses and denies independent thinking, initiative, intellectuality and job satisfaction. In addition, the inventive mind is destroyed. Furthermore, the power of the management over the stipulations of the workload was heavily criticized. The management was often accused of ruthlessly exploiting the power gained in this way. The division of the work into the shortest and monotonously repetitive process sections allowed the worker only the smallest movements, which were also precisely prescribed for the worker. The performance targets, which only first class workers could achieve, were on the verge of nervous and physical exhaustion, so one could speak of a kind of exploitation here. Such a high permanent load ( permanent performance limit ) is proven counterproductive. The lack of science is criticized, not for the procedure, but for the results, more precisely for the precision of the results. Above all, the lack of determinism was criticized here. Taylor's stochastic results were therefore not compatible with the scientific standards of the time.

See also

literature

  • Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4
  • Haußer, Christian: Americanization of Work? German business leaders and trade unionists in the dispute over Ford and Taylor (1919-1932). Stuttgart. ibidem Verlag, 2008, ISBN 3-89821-920-8
  • Kühl, Stefan: Work and industrial sociology. Bielefeld. transcript Verlag, 2004, ISBN 3-89942-189-2
  • Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The Principles of Scientific Management. Psychologie-Verl.-Union, 1977. ISBN 3-407-54043-4
  • Vahrenkamp, ​​Richard: From Taylor to Toyota. Rationalization Debates in the 20th Century. Josef Eul Publishing House. Lohmar / Cologne. 2013, ISBN 978-3-8441-0237-6

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ See Hausser, Christian .: Americanization of work ?: German business leaders and trade unions in the dispute over Ford and Taylor (1919-1932) . Ibidem-Verl, Stuttgart 2008, ISBN 3-89821-920-8 , p. 64 .
  2. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 60/61 .
  3. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 38/39 .
  4. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 102 .
  5. ↑ Cf. Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 102 .
  6. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 121 .
  7. ↑ Taylor, Frederick Winslow: The principles of scientific management . Psychologie-Verl.-Union, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 43 .
  8. ↑ Cf. Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 .
  9. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 49 .
  10. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 50 .
  11. ↑ Cf. Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 68 .
  12. ↑ Cf. Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 70 .
  13. ↑ Cf. Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 71 .
  14. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 81 .
  15. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 84 .
  16. ↑ Cf. Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 87 .
  17. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 88 .
  18. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 91 .
  19. ↑ Cf. Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 92 .
  20. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 94 .
  21. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 95/96 .
  22. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 98 .
  23. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 102 .
  24. ↑ Cf. Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 103 ff .
  25. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 106 f .
  26. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 108 .
  27. ↑ Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 110 f .
  28. ↑ Cf. Bungard, Walter: The principles of scientific management . Repr. Of the authorized edition Munich, Oldenbourg, 1913 edition. Beltz, PsychologieVerlagsUnion, Weinheim 1995, ISBN 3-621-27267-4 , pp. 121 f .
  29. ↑ Cf. Kühl, Stefan .: Arbeits- und Industrieoziologie . Transcript, Bielefeld 2004, ISBN 3-89942-189-2 , p. 65 f .
  30. ↑ See Hausser, Christian .: Americanization of work ?: German business leaders and trade unions in the dispute over Ford and Taylor (1919-1932) . Ibidem-Verl, Stuttgart 2008, ISBN 3-89821-920-8 , p. 71 f .