What are some common criticisms of Scientific Management?

Scientific Management, developed by Frederick Winslow Taylor, was aimed at improving productivity and efficiency through systematic studies of work processes. A prominent criticism of this approach is that it prioritizes efficiency while neglecting human factors. This focus can result in a mechanical view of the workforce, treating employees more like cogs in a machine than as human beings with needs and motivations.

In pursuing maximum efficiency, Scientific Management often emphasizes strict oversight, standardization of tasks, and performance quantification, which can lead to worker dissatisfaction. Employees may feel devalued when their contributions are reduced to mere numbers or when their input in decision-making is not acknowledged.

The other options do not accurately reflect common criticisms of Scientific Management. For example, while the theory may promote efficiency, it does not inherently encourage creativity and innovation, nor does it inherently promote individual achievement over team goals. Additionally, the structure involves defining clear managerial roles that oversee tasks rather than limiting their involvement, so suggesting that it limits manager involvement in decision-making does not align with typical critiques. Hence, focusing on the neglect of human factors is a core criticism associated with Scientific Management.