HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN ORGANIZATION

UNIT V: ORGANIZATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM

5.1: HAWTHORNE EXPERIMENT

I. Introduction

Organization, in its essence, is derived from the Latin word “organum” which is
translated as an instrument or a tool. This term is then modified into its current form
to convey the meaning of being a systematic framework of individuals with various
functions for a collective purpose.
Given this structure, it is then imperative that an organization shall follow an
administrative system that shall govern its affairs and set order in the conduct of its
functions, the setting of its goal, and all other decisions that are vital for the
maintenance and development of the organization. Particularly, it shall follow a
hierarchical structure that conforms to a chain of command from its heads, its
executives, and down to its peripheral workers. Each individual shall have their
duties and powers well-defined, so as to set the bounds of what they must do, what
they can do, and what they can’t do. This way, every individual working in the
organization will be focused more on carrying out their duties efficiently, while being
collectively productive as the system organizes itself for its function.
Contextually, every existing organizational administrative system implements
hierarchy, bounds of duty, and sets of rules in an organization. Its rules are regarded
as having higher authority than the hierarchy itself as the rules determine and define
the organization as a whole under its subjection. Considering these factors, it is then
crucial for any organization to lay down its foundations, first from the system itself.
The skills and competence of an organization’s human resources shall still have its
efficiency decimated when the system itself does not allow its optimal function.
An indication of a successful organization is seen not just in the potential of its
manpower or availability of resources, but rather on its ability to maintain its
productivity by means of providing an effective working condition that encourages an
optimum output.
II. Content

Hawthorne Experiment
Studies have been conducted in the field of behavioral management, namely, the
Hawthorne experiment which continues to predominantly influence theories and
studies on the field of behavioral science, organizational management, and other
relevant fields. This experiment was initiated by Hawthorne Works, a Western
electric company that employed approximately 45,000 employees during their
operations from 1905 to 1983.
The study was conducted by a group of researchers led by Elton Mayo and Fritz
Roethlisberger of the Harvard Business School between 1927 and 1932 which
yielded to the conclusion that productivity is not merely the physical working
conditions and rates of wages. It introduced productivity as the satisfaction of the
employees in their employment situation. Mayo highlighted the idea that emotional
factors hold greater influence than logical factors in determining productivity
efficiency. Additionally, the most influential factor in employee behavior were the
ones affecting social group participation. Conclusions were derived that work
management must not solely be focused on the completion of production
requirements, but it must also pursue a system that satisfies its workers in the
subjective social aspect.
In detail, the study was broken down into four different parts as follows:
Illumination Experiment, Relay Assembly Test Room Experiment, Interviewing
Program, and Bank Wiring Test Room Experiment.

Illumination Experiment

As the term suggest, the experiment employed illumination or lights a variable in

determining the relationship of illumination and productivity output. The findings of
the experiment has shown that as the intensity of light increases, the output
correspondingly increases as well. However, the output still increased even in the
decrease of light intensity. Thus, it was concluded that there is no significant
relationship between productivity and light intensity. This then led to further fact-
finding as it was hypothesized that there must be some other factors aside from it.
Relay Assembly Test Room Experiment

A second phase of the study was conducted, which had the objective finding out
not just the effect of illumination on production but also other factors such as length
of working days, rest time, and other physical conditions. The researchers
subdivided the participants into a small homogeneous work-group composed of six
girls. The participants were shown to readily have good peer interaction with each
other and the researchers requested them to work in a very informal atmosphere
under their supervision.

The results have shown sufficient basis to record an increase in morale and
productivity within the experiment duration. On the resumption of the pre-test
conditions, productivity still kept increasing and stabilized at a high level even in the
context of declining condition improvements. It was concluded that socio-
psychological factors e.g. feeling of individual importance, recognition, attention,
participation, cohesive work-group, and non-directive supervision holds a significant
relationship with productivity.

Mass Interview Program

The third part is a program that is aimed at making a systematic study of the
attitude of the employees toward their working conditions and how they put meaning
to it. The researchers conducted an interview on a large number of workers on their
opinions on work, working conditions, and supervision. It started with a direct
approach whereby the interview asked questions regarded as important by
managers and researchers. The researchers have observed that the responses of
the workers were guarded. Hence, this approach was replaced by an indirect
technique, where the interviewer simply listened to what the workmen had to say.
The findings have revealed the importance of social factors in the efficiency of the
workplace.

Bank Wiring Test Room Experiment

 The final experiment was conducted by Roethlisberger and Dickson, aiming to
develop a new observation method and acquire more precise information on social
groups within a company and also the factors restricting output. The experiment was
conducted to study a group of 14 workers under most normal possible conditions.
Subsequent to the experiment, a comparative analysis of production records was
conducted to compare the experimental and pre-experimental production records. It
was found out that the group developed its own production norms for each individual
worker, which was made lower than those set by the management. Due to this,
workers produce only that amount, thus defying the incentive system. The workers
producing beyond the group norms were isolated, harassed or punished by the
group. The findings suggest that every individual was restricting output, the group
developed its own unofficial performance standards, individual output was constantly
maintained, and informal groups hold significant part in the overall function of an
organization.

The Relevance of the Hawthorne Experiment

From the time of its completion, the Hawthorne experiment has been popular in
the field of social science, psychology, administration, management, business, and
other relevant fields as basis for approaches and ideas in policy-making for a more
effective system.

The study made way to a new perspective of business as a social system

beyond just a technical economic system. It suggested feelings, emotions, and
attitudes as other motivating factors aside from financial compensation. It urges the
humanization of management into a framework of cooperation and not merely a
chain-of-command. In achieving this, there must be open communication and
consensus among employers and employees. It must take into account the
satisfaction of employees as a priority rather than just increasing productions.

It also highlighted the importance of group psychology in any organization.

Particularly, it revealed how groups are formed within the workplace and the way
these groups create informal relationships that leads to unofficial standards which
must be taken note of and attended to. In fact, the study has called it as “Hawthorne
effect,” which refers to the healthy teamwork in the working environment. It viewed
 workers as sentient beings that are due for proper treatment beyond being seen as
working machines. Organizations must raise the morale of workers as higher morale
results to higher output.

The Hawthorne effect has effectively influenced the approaches and systems of
workplace and significantly changed the working conditions of people. It bred a
system that compelled employers to provide proper treatment and welfare of
workers, not just merely for subjective reasons but also due to its positive effects of
increasing productivity – creating a win-win situation for both parties.

Though still scrutinized due to the limits of controlled environment, the

Hawthorne experiment secures its place in the academe as a breakthrough
experiment that helps lead to more studies relevant to the field. It opened new ideas
on the frameworks of a working environment and serves as guides for future course
of actions.

III. Assessment Questions

1. What is the relevance of the Hawthorne experiment to the field of Public

Administration?
2. What disadvantages can you contemplate in following the Hawthorne Experimen
as basis for management and administration?