Mayo: the human relations school

The theory

• Elton Mayo ran a series of studies at the Hawthorne electrical plant in the 1920s and 1930s, intending to find out how physical conditions — particularly lighting — affected output.
• The result was unexpected: output rose whatever they changed to the lighting, including when it was reduced. It also rose in the group that had no change made at all.
• Mayo concluded that the productivity gain came not from the conditions but from the social situation: the workers were being observed, consulted and treated as a group that mattered.

What Mayo concluded

• Employees are motivated by social factors — belonging, recognition and the attention of management — not only by pay and conditions.
• Informal groups form at work and set their own norms about how much effort is appropriate. Those group norms can be a stronger influence on output than management's instructions.
• Being consulted and listened to raises effort, even when nothing material changes.
• Work satisfaction depends heavily on the quality of relationships in the workplace.

This became the human relations school of management, and it is the direct counterpoint to Taylor.

What it predicts

• Teams outperform the same people working as isolated individuals on interdependent work.
• Consultation before a change produces better cooperation than a well-designed change imposed without it.
• A manager who takes an interest in staff raises output without spending anything.
• Breaking up an established team damages performance, even if each individual is equally skilled in their new placement.

Applying it to a business

• Structure work around teams with a shared goal.
• Consult staff on changes affecting their work — the consultation is itself the motivator.
• Provide places and time for people to interact; support the informal relationships rather than treating them as time-wasting.
• Communicate two ways: staff meetings where people are asked, not only told.
• Train supervisors in how they deal with people, since their behaviour sets the tone of the group.

Mayo's findings map closely onto whanaungatanga: the argument that relationships, belonging and working harmoniously towards common goals are what make a workplace productive.

Criticisms

• The Hawthorne studies have been re-analysed many times, and the strength of the original effect is disputed.
• The Hawthorne effect — people changing their behaviour because they are being watched — may explain part of the result, which makes it hard to know what the studies proved.
• Social factors matter, but Mayo underplays pay: no amount of belonging compensates for an unfair wage.
• Group norms can work against the business as easily as for it, if the group's norm is to restrict output.