General Motors Canad A Sociological Analysis
Throughout the social world, organizations exist in order to provide services, products, employment and many other completely necessary things. This paper will take a deeper look into three different organizations. It will begin by examining the ways in which they exemplify different sociological theories. It will also examine the ways in which they effectively demonstrate different administrative and organizational theories, which directly relate to they way in that their organization is structured. By examining three completely different organizations, it will become clear that despite the immense differences within the organizations, they all have many similarities in terms of their sociological nature and their organizational/administrative structure.
The first organization that will be examined through the sociological lens will be General Motors …show more content…
Canada. General Motors, a car manufacturing company that is the birthplace of many popular automobiles, provides employees an opportunity to work in many different specialized departments, as well as provides them with opportunities to work on a factory line. General Motors, or GM for short, uses scientific management in order to create their product in the most efficient way possible. Scientific management, as coined by Frederick Taylor, follows the four duties as laid out in The Principles of Scientific Management. The first duty of scientific management states that, “They develop a science for each element of a man’s work, which replaces the old rule of thumb method.” (Taylor, 27) This is extremely evident within the four walls of every General Motors manufacturing plant, as each part of the line requires its own set of guidelines. For example, instead of using a wrench or a screwdriver to manually install car parts, a machine instead does the work. In situations like this, a science in regards to how to do a job that was once completed manually is now done by machine and monitored by an employee.
The second duty of scientific management states, “They scientifically select and then train, teach, and develop the workman, whereas in the past he chose his own work and trained himself as best he could.” (Taylor, 27) This, just like the previously aforementioned example, relates to the specialization of the individual jobs that were once completed exclusively by employees. Now, these people are specifically trained on one machine in order to complete one specific job, which is incredibly unique to scientific management.
The third duty reads, “They heartily cooperate with the men so as to insure all of the work being done in accordance with the principles of the science which has been developed.”(Taylor, 27) This relates to the administrative structure that is present within General Motors. Because of the emphasis placed on individual, quick and efficient work, scientific management makes sure that employees are completely confident on doing the jobs in which they are assigned without advising from upper level management. This does, in some way, increase efficiency due to the fact that people do not constantly have to check up on their employees, but this can translate to an incredibly individualistic work environment that focuses more on production, rather than its workers.
The final duty as written by Taylor states, “There is an almost equal division of work and responsibility…” (Taylor, 27) This final point relates to the workload each employee is required, and how it is able to maintain a stable workplace as each person is completing the same amount of work.
By examining General Motors Canada’s administrative and organizational structure, it is clear that GM is most commonly viewed as a rational system.
As explained in The Sociology of Organizations, Michael Handel states, “rational systems theories see organizations as instruments designed to attain specific goals using logical plans, impersonal rules and a rational division of responsibilities among personnel.” (Handel, 3) Taking into account the principles of scientific management, it is incredibly clear that GM would be a rational system. For example, they work in order to create and manufacture cars in the most efficient way possible. They do this by implementing impersonal rules, such as using machines to do their work, as well as providing guidelines in which every employee on the line must follow. They do not take into account personalities or different working styles, which makes these rules incredibly impersonal. As well, by providing each person the same amount of work, which is one of the defining principles of scientific management, they are creating a rational division of responsibilities amongst
personnel.
Besides fitting perfectly within the rational systems theory, GM also is incredibly indicative of a mechanistic system. As explained in The Sociology of Organizations, Michael Handel states that a mechanistic system in an organization that possesses, “…centralized decision making, specialization, sharply defined duties, formal rules and hierarchical control were efficient ways to organize routine and repetitive activity in a predictable environment.” (Handel, 39) GM exemplifies many of these traits, including the specialization of jobs (installation of different parts along the factory line), sharply defined duties and formal rules. As well, mechanistic systems are most commonly found in industries that prove to be moer predictable and resistant to frequent change, such as the automobile industry.
The first organization that will be examined through the sociological lens will be General Motors …show more content…
Canada. General Motors, a car manufacturing company that is the birthplace of many popular automobiles, provides employees an opportunity to work in many different specialized departments, as well as provides them with opportunities to work on a factory line. General Motors, or GM for short, uses scientific management in order to create their product in the most efficient way possible. Scientific management, as coined by Frederick Taylor, follows the four duties as laid out in The Principles of Scientific Management. The first duty of scientific management states that, “They develop a science for each element of a man’s work, which replaces the old rule of thumb method.” (Taylor, 27) This is extremely evident within the four walls of every General Motors manufacturing plant, as each part of the line requires its own set of guidelines. For example, instead of using a wrench or a screwdriver to manually install car parts, a machine instead does the work. In situations like this, a science in regards to how to do a job that was once completed manually is now done by machine and monitored by an employee.
The second duty of scientific management states, “They scientifically select and then train, teach, and develop the workman, whereas in the past he chose his own work and trained himself as best he could.” (Taylor, 27) This, just like the previously aforementioned example, relates to the specialization of the individual jobs that were once completed exclusively by employees. Now, these people are specifically trained on one machine in order to complete one specific job, which is incredibly unique to scientific management.
The third duty reads, “They heartily cooperate with the men so as to insure all of the work being done in accordance with the principles of the science which has been developed.”(Taylor, 27) This relates to the administrative structure that is present within General Motors. Because of the emphasis placed on individual, quick and efficient work, scientific management makes sure that employees are completely confident on doing the jobs in which they are assigned without advising from upper level management. This does, in some way, increase efficiency due to the fact that people do not constantly have to check up on their employees, but this can translate to an incredibly individualistic work environment that focuses more on production, rather than its workers.
The final duty as written by Taylor states, “There is an almost equal division of work and responsibility…” (Taylor, 27) This final point relates to the workload each employee is required, and how it is able to maintain a stable workplace as each person is completing the same amount of work.
By examining General Motors Canada’s administrative and organizational structure, it is clear that GM is most commonly viewed as a rational system.
As explained in The Sociology of Organizations, Michael Handel states, “rational systems theories see organizations as instruments designed to attain specific goals using logical plans, impersonal rules and a rational division of responsibilities among personnel.” (Handel, 3) Taking into account the principles of scientific management, it is incredibly clear that GM would be a rational system. For example, they work in order to create and manufacture cars in the most efficient way possible. They do this by implementing impersonal rules, such as using machines to do their work, as well as providing guidelines in which every employee on the line must follow. They do not take into account personalities or different working styles, which makes these rules incredibly impersonal. As well, by providing each person the same amount of work, which is one of the defining principles of scientific management, they are creating a rational division of responsibilities amongst
personnel.
Besides fitting perfectly within the rational systems theory, GM also is incredibly indicative of a mechanistic system. As explained in The Sociology of Organizations, Michael Handel states that a mechanistic system in an organization that possesses, “…centralized decision making, specialization, sharply defined duties, formal rules and hierarchical control were efficient ways to organize routine and repetitive activity in a predictable environment.” (Handel, 39) GM exemplifies many of these traits, including the specialization of jobs (installation of different parts along the factory line), sharply defined duties and formal rules. As well, mechanistic systems are most commonly found in industries that prove to be moer predictable and resistant to frequent change, such as the automobile industry.