answer08

Compare the way Scientific Management differs from situational leadership -- cite relevant authors and explain what each theory means in practice.

Scientific Management is a Classical Management theory developed by Henri Fayol in which a leader interested in worker productivity (usually in a production line setting) would study the movements and actions of productive workers, determine via those motion studies the most efficient way that that particular task could be done, and then have that worker be the mechanical cog with which that task was accomplished as efficiently as possible. While some workers might be better suited fir certain tasks than others, Scientific Management sees workers as generally interchangeable at lower levels, and dedicated and limited to the task at hand, while leaders are essentially removed from the work effort, given free reign to focus on the overarching tasks of managing workers. Scientific Management is effective in high production environments where workers do production style work all day long, but there is little chance of Herzbergian Motivation being increased, since there is little opportunity for a relative improvement in recognizance, responsibility, or intrinsic reward, other than making the threshold leap to the managerial position. As a result, it's highly likely that the work may be done, but that the workers may be unsatisfied in the work.

Situational Leadership, an extension of Blake and Mouton's Leadership Grid developed by Hersey and Blanchard, in contrast sees workers as being at some level of understanding, maturity, clarity, and readiness to accomplish a given task. Situational Leadership proposes further that the leader should choose a more or less directive style based on the workers level of readiness -- for new, immature workers, without a clear idea of what to do, situational leadership says that a highly directive leadership style should be used, essentially telling workers what to do. As workers become more familiar with the task, they take more of a participative role, one in which they not only master the task, but possibly innovate upon the process. At a high level of readiness, the leader can simply monitor and allow productive work to progress. By reasonably allowing the workers to graduate beyond an autocratic leader according to their increase in ability, responsibility, and maturity, it is more likely that the Herzbergian notions of Motivators can be employed, thus increasing job satisfaction, hopefully leading to job commitment and higher productivity.