"Scientific management focused on changes that would create efficient routines (p. 317)." My current job is perfect to illustrate this passage of the textbook. As a subdivision of Human Resources, my department is responsible for processing transactions - such as hires, separations, position creates, promotions, leave of absence, return of leave of absence, among others.
The Personnel Data Maintainers (PDMs) are the ones who handle these requests. So for every request we receive from our internal clients - managers and supervisors, we must follow a checklist to process them following what one once established as correct.
One of the negative aspects of blindly following these checklists is that they are rarely updated. Then, whoever is brand new to the PDM position can not perceive whether the information is updated or not. But they still want us to follow the checklist as if it was our bible.
The problem here is that sometimes what is considered efficient to one might not mean the same to another individual. While I understand that some standardization/routine is necessary to bring order to the organizations, I also believe in creative solutions. Clearly change is not so welcome in this department. In other words, it is what Frederick Taylor implied in his theory of systematically documenting inefficiencies: “change per se is not good".
Garota de Ipanema
Streaning Star Trek: Insurrection Full Movie
6 years ago