26TH December, 1880South Australia was blessed with

social scientist of the age.Skilled and charming lecturer Psychologist, industrial researcherInternationally acclaimed, ETC.

GEORGE ELTON MAYO

Mayo was the eldest son of George Gibbes Mayo, a draftsman and later a civil engineer, and his wife Henrietta Mary.

He attended several schools in Australia (Queen’s School, Collegiate School of St Peter, and University of Adelaide) and after 1901 attended medical school in Edinburgh and London, neither of which he completed.In 1903 he went to West Africa, and upon returning to London, began writing articles for magazines and teaching English at the Working Men’s College.

Professor of English literature language Literature, Mental and Moral Philosophy at the University of Adelaide from 1894–1922

“SIR” returned to Adelaide in 1905 to a partnership in the printing firm of J. H. Sherring & Co., but in 1907 he went back to the university to study philosophy and psychology under SIR WILLIAM MITCHELL.

He won the Roby Fletcher prize in psychology and graduated with honours (B.A., 1910; M.A., 1926 and was named the David Murray research scholar.

In 1911 he became foundation lecturer in mental and moral philosophy at the new University of Queensland and in 1919–23 held the first chair of philosophy there.

“SIR” moved on to the University of Pennsylvania, but spent most of his career at Harvard Business School (1926–1947), where he was professor of industrial research.Two influences on his career from his time at the University of Queensland were Mayo’s friendship with the social anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski and his work with shell-shock cases.

The work with shell-shock soldiers provided a focus for Mayo’s interests in clinical psychology and developed his skills in psychotherapy.

In this he was strongly influenced by the work on hysteria and obsession of the French psychiatrist, Pierre Janet.

SIR’S Major Contribution•Motivation theory and Hawthorne studies

•Group Dynamics•Human Relation Approach

STUDIES CONDUCTED

THE HAWTHORNE STUDIES CONDUCTED IN EARLY 1920s TILL 1930s AT THE WESTERN ELECTRIC HAWTHORNE WORK IN CHICAGO, TO EXAMINE PRODUCTIVITY AND WORK CONDITIONS.

SPECIFICALLY, MAYO WANTED TO FIND OUT WHAT EFFECT FATIGUE AND MONOTONY HAD ON JOB PRODUCTIVITY AND HOW TO CONTROL THEM THROUGH SUCH VARIABLES AS REST BREAKS, WORK HOURS, TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY. IN THE PROCESS, HE STUMBLED UPON A PRINCIPLE OF HUMAN MOTIVATION THAT WOULD HELP TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF MANAGEMENT.

EXPERIMENT WAS CONDUCTED IN FOUR PHASE

ILLUMINATION EXPERIMENTRELAY ASSEMBLY TEST ROOM EXPERIMENTINTERVIEW PHASEBANK WIRING OBSERVATION ROOM

ILLUMINATION EXPERIMENT• HE FIRST, A SEQUENCE OF ILLUMINATION TESTS FROM 1924 TO 1927, SET

OUT TO DETERMINE THE EFFECT OF LIGHTING ON WORKER EFFICIENCY IN THREE SEPARATE MANUFACTURING DEPARTMENTS.

• ACCOUNTS OF THE STUDY REVEALS NO SIGNIFICANT CORRELTION BETWEEN PRODUCTIVITY AND LIGHT LEVELS.

• THE RESULTS PROMPTED RESEARCHERS TO INVESTIGATE OTHER FACTORS AFFECTING WORKER OUTPUT.

IN THE FIRST SERIES TWO GROUPS WERE MADE.

ONE GROUP WAS EXPOSED TO VARYING INTENSITIES OF ILLUMINATION SINCE THE GROUP WAS SUBJECT TO EXPERIMENTAL CHANGES, IT WASTERMED AS EXPERIMENTAL GROUP.

ANOTHER GROUP WAS CALLED CONTROL GROUP, CONTINUED TO WORK UNDER CONSTANT INTENSITIES OF ILLUMINATION

THE RESEARCHERS FOUND THAT AS THEY INCREASE THE ILLUMINATION IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP BOTH GROUP INCREASED PRODUCTION.

WHEN THE INTENSITY IS DECREASED THE PRODUCTION CONTINUED TO INCRESE IN BOTH THE GROUPS.

THE PRODUCTION DECREASED WHEN THE ILLUMINATION WAS BELOW THE LEVEL OF MOONLIGHT.

MAYO TOOK SIX WOMEN FROM THE ASSEMBLY LINE, SEGREGATED THEM FROM THE REST OF THE FACTORY AND PUT THEM UNDER THE EYE OF A SUPERVISOR WHO WAS MORE A FRIENDLY OBSERVER THAN DISCIPLINARIAN. MAYO MADE FREQUENT CHANGES IN THEIR WORKING CONDITIONS,

HE CHANGED THE HOURS IN THE WORKING WEEK, THE HOURS IN THE WORKDAY THE NUMBER OF REST BREAKS. THE TIME OF THE LUNCH HOUR. OCCASIONALLY, HE WOULD RETURN THE WOMEN TO THEIR ORIGINAL, HARDER WORKING CONDITIONS.

RELAY ASSEMBLY TEST ROOM EXPERIMENT

ALWAYS DISCUSSING AND EXPLAINING THE CHANGESIN ADVANCE.

Under normal conditions with a forty eight hour week, including Saturdays, and no rest pauses. The girls produced 2,400 relays a week eachS.NO CONDITION RESULTS1. They were then put on piece-work for eight weeks. Output went up

2. Two five minute rest pauses, morning and afternoon, were introduced for a period of five weeks.

Output went up

3. The rest pauses were lengthened to ten minutes each. Output went up sharply

4. Six five minute pauses were introduced, and the girls complained that their work rhythm was broken by the frequent pauses.

Output fell slightly

5. Return to the two rest pauses, the first with a hot meal supplied by the Company free of charge.

Output went up

6. The girls were dismissed at 4.30 p.m. instead of 5.00 p.m. Output went up

7. They were dismissed at 4.00 p.m. Output remained the same

Finally, all the improvements were taken away, and the girls went back to the physical conditions of the beginning of the experiment: work on Saturday, 48 hour week, no rest pauses, no piece work and no free meal. This state of affairs lasted for a period of 12 weeks.OUTPUT WAS THE HIGHEST EVER RECORDED AVERAGING 3000 RELAYS A WEEK.

RESULTINGConfused ?

What happened was that six individuals became a team and the team gave itself wholeheartedly and spontaneously to co-operation in the experiment. The consequence was that they felt themselves to be participating freely and without afterthought and were happy in the knowledge that they were working without coercion from above or limitation from below..

They were themselves satisfied at the consequence for they felt that they were working under less pressure than ever before. In fact regular medical checks showed no signs of cumulative fatigue and absence from work declined by 80 per cent.

It was noted too, that each girl had her own technique of putting the component parts of the relay together - sometimes she varied this technique in order to avoid monotony and it was found that the more intelligent the girl, the greater was the number of variations.

The experimental group had considerable freedom of movement. They were not pushed around or bossed by anyone. Under these conditions they developed an increased sense of responsibility and instead of discipline from higher authority being imposed, it came from within the group itself.

INTERVIEW PHASE21000 PEOPLE WERE INTERVIEWED BETWEEN 1928-1930

TO DETERMINE EMPLOYEE ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE COMPANY AND THERE JOB

IT WAS CONDUCTED THAT PRODUCTIVITY CAN BE INCREASED IF WORKERS ARE ALLOWED TO TALK FREELY ABOUT MATTERS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO THEM.

INITIALLY, A DIRECT APPROACH WAS USED WHEREBY INTERVIEWS ASKED QUESTIONS CONSIDERED IMPORTANT BY MANAGERS AND RESEARCHERS.

THE RESEARCHERS OBSERVED THAT REPLIES OF THE WORKERS WERE GUARDED DUE TO WHICH THEY ADOPTED INDIRECT APPROACH IN WHICH INTERVIEWER SIMPLY LISTENED TO WHAT WORKMEN HAD TO SAY.

AND FINDINGS CONFIRMED THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL FACTORS AT WORK

BANK WIRING OBSERVATION ROOM CONDUCTED DURING 193-1932

A GROUP OF 14 MALE WORKERS IN THE BANK WIRING ROOM WERE PLACED UNDER OBSERVATION FOR SIX MONTHS.

A WORKER’S PAY DEPENDED ON THE PERFORMANCE OF A GROUP AS A WHOLE. RESEARCHERS THOUGHT THAT THE EFFICIENT WORKERS WOULDPUT PRESURE ON THE LESS EFFICIENT WORKERS TO COMPLETE THE WORK.

HOWEVER IT WAS FOUND THAT THE GROUP ESTABLISHED ITS OWN STANDARDS OF OUTPUT AND SOCIAL PRESSURE WAS USED TO ACHIEVE THE STANDARD OUTPUT.

THE HYPOTHESIS WAS THAT IN ORDER TO EARN MORE WORKERS WOULD PRODUCE MORE AND IN ORDER TO TAKE ADVANTAGES OF GROUP BONUS, THEY WOULD HELP EACH OTHER TO PRODUCE MORE.

BUT THE REASON FAILED AS THE WORKERS DECIDED THE TARGET WHICH WAS LOWER THAN COMPANIES TARGET.

• FEAR OF UNEMPLOYMENT • FEAR OF RAISING STANDARDS• PROTECTION OF SOWER

WORKERS

• SATISFACTION ON THE PART OF MANAGEMENT

EX. TARGET FOR A DAY WAS CONNECTING 6600 TERMINALS AGAINST 7300 TERMINALS AS THE STANDARD GIVEN BY CO. WORKER GAVE FOLLOWING REASONS OF DEFICIENCY.

Individual workers cannot be treated in isolation but must be seen as members of a group.

Monetary incentives and good working conditions are less important to the individual than the need to belong to a group.

Informal or unofficial groups formed at work have strong influence on behavior.

Managers must be aware of these ‘social needs’ and cater for them to ensure that employees work with the organisation rather than against it.

SIR’S CONCLUSIONS

BOOKS BY SIR

THE PSYCHOLOGY OFPIERRE JANET

THE HUMAN PROBLEM OF AN INDUSTRIAL CIVILIZATION

THE SOCIAL PROBLEMS OF AN INDUSTRIAL CIVILIZATION

CRITICAL EVALUATION IN BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT

Many, including Reinhard Bendix and Lloyd H. Fisher, criticized Mayo for generalizing his results of the Hawthorne studies. The two state that Mayo's research concerned small, isolated groups, and it was not clear that the conditions and supervision he achieved could have been replicated in large groups and factory settings . Recently, james hoopes criticized for “substituting therapy for democracy’’ in 2003.

CRITICISMS:Mayo's contributions to management theory were criticized by intellectual Daniel Bell. Writing in 1947, Bell criticized Mayo and other social scientists for "adjusting men to machines," rather than enlarging human capacity or human freedom .

SIR DIED ON1ST SEPTEMBER 1949 IN SURRAY.

BUT THEIR RESEARCHES AND CONTRIBUTIONS IN DIFFERENT FIELDS ARE EVERLASTING LIKE HIM.

ONE FRIEND

ONE PERSONWHO IS TRULY

UNDERSTANDINGWHO TAKES THE TROUBLE TO LISTEN TO USAS WE CONSIDER OUR PROBLEMSCAN CHANGE OUR WHOLE OUTLOOK OUR WORK.

THANK YOU

?SUBMITTED TO,BHADU SIR

ANY QUERIES