Introduction
Since the beginning of the previous century, employers were interested in finding out more about the efficiency of the employees and how it could be improved. While the Hawthorne Studies intended to measure the correlation between illumination and human efficiency in Western Electric enterprise, the findings touched upon more profound levels of the human resource theory and organizational behavior. It has been concluded that workers are social animals, and treating them as a collective is more reasonable than looking at them as individuals in a vacuum.
Synthesis
As mentioned before, the lighting study was the initial research that had been conducted. However, the results were unexpected since there had been an increase in productivity with any form of lighting change. The same uncertainty was observed when five women were researched during different changes within the relay assembly experiment. Despite the change of conditions, the productivity remained high compared to the prior efficiency that had been secretly observed before the investigation began. This led to a logical conclusion of an increase in productivity caused by the attention and the research itself rather than other external changes.
Another observation was the importance of the group mentality that directly affects the employee’s behavior and productivity. Individuals did not want to be different from their peers, so there was not a big difference in outcome or productivity because of the organizational culture that had formed among coworkers. The leading theory that had been concluded after the research highlights the importance of treating employees as social beings rather than as individuals. There is a strong correlation between outcome and the social environment that occurs in the organization.
The author’s concept is illustrated in the finding that the organization is just the environment where employee groups form and implement informal goals, rules, and social bonds. The concept of individuality, however, is much more important in a collective sense. Researchers point out that a worker is a social animal, which is highlighted by their behavior within the workplace (Roethlisberger, 1941). Employees are not isolated but form various social constructions within the workplace. This suggests the importance of viewing the workforce as a singular entity rather than as a form of social relationship where each person has individual goals.
Critique
The relevance of the text does not fully apply to modern-day corporations and organizations. Nowadays, the public administration is much more focused on individuals rather than the company as a whole. Since individual rights have significantly improved, the findings of the research lose their relevancy. While the experiment’s conclusions illustrate the insignificance of wages, working conditions, and other essential factors, the theories cannot be fully implemented in modern-day organizations. This may cause inherent neglect of employees, which is not something any organization would allow.
There had also been a lot of criticism due to the limitations of the experiment. Besides having a small group of people under observation, most of the individuals were familiar outside of the work environment since many neighbors and acquaintances tended to work at the same organization. This could cause faulty results and highlight faux organizational relationships that were, in fact, not based on the organizational structure itself.
Conclusion
The Hawthorne experiments have highlighted multiple significant findings that suggest certain aspects of the human research theory and organizational behavior. The research lasted for numerous years, and it illustrated the minor significance of factors such as illumination, time of breaks, wages, and other elements that did not significantly increase motivation and productivity. However, it has been highlighted that workers are social individuals that are highly dependent on the group of coworkers they align with. Such conclusions point out that employees have to be treated as a collective rather than as individual members of the organizational human resource.
Reference
Roethlisberger, F. J. (1941). The Hawthorne experiments. Classics of Organization Theory, 158-166.