The Hawthorne StudiesBy Chelsea Montrois

George Elton Mayo, born in 1880, was an Australian organizational theorist, psychologist, and industrial field researcher.

While in Queensland, Australia, Mayo researched the psychoanalytic treatment of shellshock and helped treat returning World War I soldiers overcoming the crushing mental duress of battle. Later, he served as a

professor of industrial research at Harvard University.

Mayo’s Hawthorne Studies

In 1924, Mayo studied the relationship between worker performance and factory lighting at Chicago’s Western Electric Hawthorne Plant.

The question at hand was whether various levels of artificial lighting in the plant would boost employee productivity or make workers drowsy.

The results of the study were published in 1927 and are recognized as one of the earliest studies of human behavior in the workplace.

The researchers were surprised by the outcomes of the study...

◎ The management team at the plant found that employees in the test lab exhibited higher than usual productivity throughout the study, but responded very little to the changes in lighting. It was not until the lighting was as dim as moonlight that workers expressed difficulty seeing their work and showed a decline in productivity.

◎ The researchers concluded that increased productivity through the majority of the study was a result of workers’ perceptions that management was paying attention to them and cared about their wellbeing.

◎ What is unique about the “Hawthorne effect” is that there is virtually no measureable evidence to back up these assumptions, yet it is commonly referenced in organizational behavior theory and implemented in management systems. Some refer to the Hawthorne effect as a “creation myth.”

Charted productivity outcomes from the Hawthorne studies demonstrate consistently high production rates

throughout changes to workspace lighting configurations.

“The Hawthorne effect” is described as as the phenomenon

in which subjects in behavioral studies change their performance

in response to being observed.

Key learnings from the study:

Work is a group

activity.

An adult’s social life is primarily arranged around work.

Worker complaints

may be

manifestations

about underlying

concerns about

status.

Informal social

groups in the

workplace influence

work habits and

attitudes of

individual workers.

When group

collaboration is

achieved, the

resulting

satisfaction can

counter the

disruption of

adaptive

expectations.

The human need for recognition and security have a

greater effect on morale and

productivity than physical work environment.

A worker’s attitudes and effectiveness are conditioned by social factors, including their place of work.

Organizations are adaptive societies where members must keep up with changing practices. This constant shift can be disruptive to the function of the business.

Weaknesses of the study...

◎ There were many uncontrolled variables.

◎ The human relations, which were considered part of the study’s conclusion, were not closely monitored.

◎ “If a human is being experimented upon, he is likely to know it. Therefore, his attitudes toward the experiment and toward the experimenters become very important factors in determining his responses to the situation” -Roethlisberger (as cited in Wickstrom, 2000)

◎ Workers were consulted about decisions such as the times and lengths of rest periods during the work day. Neither the alteration of rest periods, nor the worker’s input were considered in the study’s outcomes.

Weaknesses of the study… (cont.)

◎ 50 years after the studies were carried out, employees claimed in an interview that they worked so hard in the test room in order to avoid transfer back to the ordinary manufacturing department where supervision was perceived as harsh.

◎ 2 of the 5 subjects in the initial tests were replaced midway through the study. This could have explained the maintenance of a higher productivity.

◎ The subjects in the test room were placed on a production based incentive pay system. Especially during the Great Depression, this would have boosted efforts during the work day.

Benefits of the Hawthorne Study...

◎ While the integrity of the study has faced criticism, the findings resonate with the work of many other industrial and management theorists.

◎ The concepts of two-way communication, involving staff, listening to workers’ ideas and opinions, and trying to create a positive culture in the workplace make up the basis of employee engagement today.

◎ The studies urged employers to step away from the dehumanizing pattern of viewing staff simply as resources. By treating members of a staff as respected and valued individuals, workers become more engaged with their work and with the social environment of the workplace.

Do these principles still exist today?

◎ Despite Mayo’s conclusion that physical environment has negligible influence on productivity, many businesses today focus on altering the work environment to encourage a social and collaborative workplace. The whimsical and playful offices of high profile Silicon Valley companies are a strong example.

◎ Many businesses focus on employee input in policy and procedure development. Open door policies, town hall style staff meetings, and special task forces drawn from the employee base demonstrate management’s interest in its workforce.

◎ By allowing employees to hold a stake in the business’s development, employees are urged to take ownership in their work and the solutions to workplace problems.

VERSUS

Do these principles still exist today? (cont.)

◎ Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs, affirms the assumptions drawn from Mayo’s study. “Motivation starts when an individual experiences a need; the individual then formulates a goal, which, upon achievement, will satisfy the need.” Maslow, 1954 (as cited in Maslow, 1998)

◎ The social level of Maslow’s Hierarchy, the need to love, to be loved, and to belong, addresses the subjects’ reaction to the attention paid by management. The greater extent to which the needs of the hierarchy are fulfilled, the more satisfied the employee will be, thus influencing a greater output.

From the leadership point of view today, organizations that do not pay sufficient attention to ‘cultural’ variables and the

deep sentiments and relationships that connect

people are consistently less successful than those that do.

References

◎ Gorman, H.S. (1966). Hawthorne: A study in solitude. New York, NY: Biblo and Tannen.

◎ Maslow, A.H. (1998) Motivation and Personality, 1st Edition. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

◎ Robertson, F. (2009). Mayo's hawthorne study. In M. Wright (Ed.), Gower Handbook of Internal Communication (p. 153-155). Abingdon, GB: Taylor and Francis.

◎ The “Hawthorne effect” (2012). Harvard Business School Historical Collections. http://www.library.hbs.edu/hc/hawthorne/09.html

◎ Waggoner, H. H. (1963). Hawthorne: A critical study. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

◎ Wickstrom, G., & Bendix, T. (2000). The "hawthorne effect" — what did the original hawthorne studies actually show? Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 26(4), 363-367.