Describe the experiments conducted by Elton Mayo and its outcomes.

 Great Illumination Experiment (1924-27)

In the first study, it was based on parallel observation of two groups of operatives, one a test group and the other control group, engaged in a task related to the production of electrical equipment took part in these tests. The study was designed to examine the level of production on the basis of varying levels of illumination. The control group remained with constant illumination of the level and the type with which the two groups started. Where as in the test group’s room, experimental changes were introduced periodically. Then slowly the conditions of work were changed to mark the effect of this change on the output. The researchers observed the groups and kept accurate records of production. The research, spread over a period of two years, established that regardless of the level of illumination, production in both the control and experimental groups increased. The researchers were surprised and abandoned the illumination theory and began manipulating wage payments, rest periods, duration of working hours. Instead of group incentives plan, an individual piece rate plan and provision of refreshments were introduced. All yielded a further rise in production. Surprised by the outcome, the research team decided to withdraw all the above-mentioned privileges and return to the conditions prevailing at the beginning of these experiments. For a while the output fell a little, but soon it rose to a point higher then at any other time. The research team was totally puzzled over the outcome. The illumination hypothesis was rejected, the relationship between incentive scheme, rest periods, etc., had no apparent relevance to the productivity per se. The research team came to conclusion that it might be due to the interest shown by the research team in the workers or to the incentive wage plan that was retained while several other privileges were withdrawn.

In 1927 Mayo was invited to unravel the problem through further studies. In these studies Mayo collaborated with Fritz Jules Roethlisberger. After interpreting the outcome of the Hawthorne studies Mayo was of opinion that the test room girls became a social unit and because of the increased attention of the research team to them, the unit developed a sense of participation in the project. Then they picked up the loose threads of the earlier WEC studies and found far more valuable insights into the industrial man. After eliminating various explanations they proposed the following two hypotheses to explain the failure of the original illumination project:

· The first hypothesis: the individual wage payment incentive had stimulated increase in the output.

· The second hypothesis: the changes in supervisory techniques had improved the attitudes and output.

Relay Assembly Test Room Experiment (1927-1932)

To test the above two hypotheses, two new groups were formed. They were placed in a special test room, apart from all the other workers. The group were placed on an individual incentive plan on a piecework basis. Initially the total output went up and after sometime it remained constant. The second group, although they were placed on individual incentive plan, was experimented with variations in rest periods and duration of work. Changes in the output were recorded.

In this group there was an average rise of output in the production over a period of 14 months. The research team concluded that the first hypothesis was not confirmed since it was not wages, but something else that led to greater output in the both groups.

To test the second hypothesis, the atmosphere was made more relaxed and congenial. The girls were allowed to interact freely with fellow workers and supervisors. Supervisors were told to behave more as democratic oriented supervisors. The other important factor was that managerial practices were modified. Before any change or move, the workers were consulted and advised about changes, their suggestions were also considered sympathetically. The workers responded favourably to the improved style of supervision. This had led to a feeling that they were a team of individuals, not cogs in a machine, allowed the workers to feel free to air their problems and they established new interpersonal contacts with their fellow workers and supervisions. Such work satisfaction led everyone to feel more valued and responsible for his or her performance and that of the group as a whole. The production increased when work groups felt that they were important and their efforts were meaningful.

Mayo felt that work satisfaction depends to a large extent on the informal social pattern of the working group. He said that change in the style of supervision improved the morale of worker, which in turn increased production. This link between supervision, morale and productivity became the corner stone of the human relations.

Subcribe on Youtube - IGNOU SERVICE

For PDF copy of Solved Assignment

WhatsApp Us - 9113311883(Paid)