The Hawthorne studies

Latest revision as of 12:24, 9 May 2023

[edit] Abstract

The Hawthorne Studies is a series of experiments that were carried out at the Hawthorne Works factory in the 1920s and 1930s. From these studies emerged several things, which are now ingrained into management tools. The most notable learning has been dubbed the Hawthorne Effect, which refers to when people change their behaviour because they are aware that they are being observed or studied. Since then, several fields, including psychology, sociology, and management, have examined and disputed this effect in great detail.^[1][2].

The Hawthorne Effect has practical applications in areas such as employee motivation, research methodology, and organisational behavior. However, it is essential to note that this effect is not free from limitations, such as questions about its generalisability, observer bias, short-term effects, alternative explanations, and ethical concerns^[3][4][5][6]. This article will take you the reader through the studies from which the Hawthorne effect emerged, present the findings of each of them, and introduce how these learnings are used in project management theory and tools today. Please be aware, that the Hawthorne Studies' validity has been highly debated since their conclusion in 1932, and you as a reader should therefor make sure to not only read the application section but the article as a whole - especially the limitations sections. Despite these limitations, the Hawthorne Effect continues to be an influential concept that shapes our understanding of human behaviour in various contexts.

[edit] The Big Idea

The Hawthorne Effect originated from a series of studies conducted at the Western Electric Company's Hawthorne Works in Chicago from 1924 to 1932 and were led by researchers from Harvard University, including Elton Mayo and Fritz Roethlisberger^[7]. These studies aimed to determine the impact of various factors on worker productivity, such as changes in working conditions and the introduction of incentives.^[3].

The Hawthorne Studies is a grouping of four distinct studies The Illumnition Studies, The Relay Assembly Test Room Studies, the Mass interviewing Program and the Bank Wiring Observation Room Studies. ^[8]

[edit] Illumination Studies (1924-1927)

The Illumination Studies was the first study conducted at the Hawthorne Plant. The Illumination Studies aimed to understand the impact of different lighting levels on worker productivity. Researchers varied the levels of lighting in the workplace to observe if increased or decreased lighting would affect the workers' output. The researches conducted several experiments and, surprisingly, the results showed worker productivity increased regardless of the lighting changes. No matter if the lighting was increased or decreased. This unexpected finding led researchers to consider other factors that might influence productivity, such as the workers' awareness of being observed. This led to the second study. ^[8]

[edit] Relay Assembly Test Room Studies (1927-1929)

In the Relay Assembly Test Room Studies, researchers focused on the effects of various working conditions on worker productivity. In order to conduct these studies, the researchers assembled a group of workers and isolated them from the rest of the organisation. They thereafter manipulated factors such as rest periods, work hours, and meal breaks to see if these changes would lead to increased productivity. Similar to the Illumination Studies, it was found that productivity increased regardless of the working conditions. This again suggested that the awareness of being observed played a significant role in the workers' behaviour. ^[8]

[edit] Mass Interviewing Program (1928-1930)

The Mass Interviewing Programs' goal was to understand the impact of social and psychological factors on worker productivity. The researchers conducted interviews with employees to gather information about what the workers independently thought about the working environment, and to seek an understanding of how productivity could be increased. These questions included understanding group norms, leadership styles, and other factors that might influence productivity. By the time of conclusion, 21.126 out of approximately 40.000 employees had been interviewed. This study revealed that both social and psychological factors had a significant impact on worker productivity, demonstrating the importance of understanding the interpersonal dynamics within a project and organisation. ^[8]

[edit] Bank Wiring Observation Room Studies (1931-1932)

The Bank Wiring Observation Room Studies tried to explore the effect of group dynamics on worker productivity. In this study, researchers observed the impact of peer pressure, social relationships, and other group dynamics on the workers' performance. They did this by creating a test group of 9 men. They were paid on the collective output of the group, and the perceived output of the single employee. The workers came to a common understanding of what a day's work is, and would make sure not to perform above or below that. It was thereby discovered that group dynamics significantly influenced worker productivity, highlighting the importance of considering how employees interact with one another and the potential impact of these relationships on overall productivity. ^[8]

[edit] Conclusion on the studies

The term "Hawthorne Effect" emerged from these experiments, referring to the observation that workers' productivity improved not because of the changes themselves but because the workers were aware they were being observed^[1] The Hawthorne Effect can be therefor be defined as a change in behaviour or performance of individuals when they are aware of being observed either by researchers or their supervisors.^[4]. This phenomenon suggests that people may modify their behaviour, consciously or unconsciously, due to the attention they receive from others^[6]. The studies furthermore made conclusions about the effect of the social environment, group dynamics and the relation to productivity. ^[8]

[edit] Application for Project Managers

The outcome of the Hawthorne Studies has several practical implications for how managers should consider, management practices, organisational behaviour, and workplace dynamics. Managers and leaders can use the learnings from the Hawthorne Studies to improve employee engagement, productivity, and well-being^[5]. In the next section, following this one, we will introduce why the Hawthorne Studies has been widely criticised, and why we cannot just take the learnings at face value. That said, many of the learnings are already ingrained and have evolved into several well-defined areas within employee/stakeholder management today, which is an essential part of project management. We will therefore focus on those learning, and how they can be applied in relation to project management by referencing overlaps with the PMBOK® Guide ^[9]. Some of the main learnings and their applications include:

[edit] Employee/Stakeholder Engagement

The Hawthorne Studies emphasised the importance of employee/stakeholder engagement in improving productivity and performance. By showing interest in employees and their working conditions, managers can help enhance motivation and engagement. Actively seeking employee feedback, providing opportunities for professional development, and recognising employees' contributions can increase productivity and job satisfaction^[6]. Project managers can apply these findings by adopting the following strategies:

• Involving team members in decision-making processes: Including team members in decision-making processes can dramatically boost their sense of ownership and commitment, which will ultimately improve performance. ^[9]. Team members become more invested in the project when they are actively participating in decision-making, and their contributions influence the project's outcome.
• Providing regular feedback and recognition: Offering constructive feedback and acknowledging team members' accomplishments are essential for boosting their motivation and productivity^[9]. Project managers can promote a positive work environment by frequently providing team members feedback on their strengths and areas for development. Celebrating individual and team accomplishments helps to foster feelings of pride and accomplishment in the task being done.
• Offering opportunities for growth and development: Encouraging team members to acquire new skills and advance their careers not only benefits the individuals but also enhances their engagement and commitment to the project^[9]. By providing learning opportunities and supporting professional development, project managers demonstrate their investment in the team members' long-term growth and success.

By actively engaging employees and making them feel valued, project managers can effectively apply the knowledge gained from the Hawthorne Studies to improve overall performance and achieve better project outcomes. These practices involve team members in decision-making, providing regular feedback and recognition, and offering growth and development opportunities are key strategies for fostering a high-performing and motivated project team.

[edit] Social Interactions

The Hawthorne Studies demonstrated the significant impact that social and psychological factors have on worker productivity ^[8]. Managers can encourage a positive work environment by fostering open communication, promoting teamwork, and creating opportunities for employees to bond and develop interpersonal relationships^[4]. Project managers can help foster a positive environment, with beneficial social interactions among team members by implementing some of the following strategies:

• Promoting collaboration: Encouraging team members to collaborate and share their knowledge and expertise can be used as a tool to create enhance problem-solving and decision-making within the project^[9].By working together, team members can pool their resources and generate innovative solutions that benefit the project as a whole, by leveraging each other strengths. This can for example be promoted by setting up interdisciplinary team meetings.
• Providing opportunities for team-building activities: Organising team-building events can help strengthen relationships among team members. This in turn can result in a more cohesive and productive team^[9]. By participating in activities that require collaboration and communication, team members can develop trust, mutual understanding, and a sense of camaraderie. All of this leads back to help establish open communication channels as well. This can be done trough external events but also internal design games and workshops.
• Maintaining open communication channels: Creating a culture of open communication can help prevent misunderstandings and conflicts within the project team. This is because it helps ensure team members feel heard and respected^[9]. Open communication channels allow for the free flow of ideas, feedback, and concerns, contributing to a more homogeneous, productive and effective work environment.

By understanding and addressing the social dynamics and communication within a project team, project managers can create an environment that encourages teamwork, boosts overall productivity, and leads to successful project outcomes.

[edit] Continuous Improvement

The Hawthorne Effect can be used to create continuous improvement initiatives in organisations. By regularly monitoring and evaluating work processes, managers can identify areas for improvement and implement changes, understanding that the attention given to these improvements can positively impact employee performance^[1]. Project managers can apply this finding by adopting the following approaches:

• Collecting feedback from team members: By encouraging team members to provide feedback on project processes and methodologies can help identify areas for improvement and ensure that their perspectives are taken into account^[9]. Actively seeking input from team members, project managers can foster a sense of ownership and collaboration while fine-tuning their approach to better meet the needs of the project. This also leads back to making the employee/stakeholder feel valued and heard, thereby feeling ownership of the project.
• Implementing lessons learned from previous projects: Applying insights gained from past projects can help project managers avoid making the same mistakes and continually better their project management practices^[9]. By incorporating lessons learned from previous experiences, project managers can build on their knowledge and expertise, resulting in more successful project outcomes over time. It might be useful to keep a log of key learning from each ended project.

The commitment to continuous improvement and a willingness to learn from past mistakes can overall lead to better project outcomes, and increased efficiency. By regularly reviewing processes, collecting feedback, and implementing lessons learned, project managers can ensure that their approach remains effective and adaptive, ultimately contributing to the success of the project.

In conclusion, the Hawthorne Studies provide valuable insights into human behaviour that can be applied by project managers to enhance employee engagement, promote social interactions, and encourage continuous improvements. By understanding and leveraging broader findings from the Hawthorne Studies, project managers can create an environment that fosters productivity, teamwork, and innovation, ultimately leading to more successful project outcomes.

[edit] Limitations

While the Hawthorne Studies provides valuable insights into human behaviour and has, as described, various applications in management, it is not without limitations^[2]. Since its publication, the studies has been widely criticised, for several reasons. Some of the key reasons and the limitations of the studies include the following:

Lack of Generalisability: Many have criticised the Hawthorne Studies for their lack of generality. They were conducted at a single plant, in Chicago, 100 years ago. This raises a lot of questions about the generalisability of the results to other contexts and industries^[1]. Furthermore, the small sample size in the original experiments may not accurately represent a broader workforce and setting.

Observer Bias: The Hawthorne Effect suggests that the presence of an observer can influence participants' behaviour; however, the observer's expectations and biases can also affect their interpretation of the observed behaviour. This can lead to misinterpretations or overemphasis on certain results^[3].

Short-term Effects: The Hawthorne Effect may result in short-term improvements in productivity and engagement due to the increased attention given to employees, at the specific moment where they are being observed. However, the long-term sustainability of these improvements is uncertain, as the effect may wear off once the attention is removed^[4].

Alternative Explanations: Some researchers argue that factors other than the Hawthorne Effect may explain the results observed in the original studies. For example, economic conditions, technological advancements, or changes in management practices could have influenced the workers' behaviour and productivity during the experiments^[5].

Ethical Concerns: The Hawthorne Effect raises ethical concerns related to the manipulation of human behaviour and the potential exploitation of employees. Should carefully consider the ethical implications of using the Hawthorne Effect to influence employees' behaviour and productivity, and if the same results could be obtained without constantly observing the employee ^[6].

All of these criticisms, and unanswered questions are the reason, behind this article focusing on the application of some of the other interesting findings from the Hawthorne Studies, which are widely implemented into management theory, instead of following the obvious path, and mainly focusing on the Hawthorne Effect, the most well-known outcome of the Hawthorne Studies, but also the most controversial.

[edit] References

1. ↑ ^{1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3} Gale, E.A.M. (2004). The Hawthorne Studies - A fable for our times? QJM - Monthly Journal of the Association of Physicians, 97(7), 439-449.
2. ↑ ^{2.0 2.1} Adair, J.G. (1984). The Hawthorne Effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact. Journal of Applied Psychology.
3. ↑ ^{3.0 3.1 3.2} Levitt, S.D. & List, J.A. (2009). Was there really a Hawthorne effect at the Hawthorne plant? An analysis of the original illumination experiments. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w15016
4. ↑ ^{4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3} Vannan, K. (2021). History of the Hawthorne Effect. In The Encyclopedia of Research Methods in Criminology and Criminal Justice: Volume II: Parts 5-8. Wiley, pp. 246-248.
5. ↑ ^{5.0 5.1 5.2} Muldoon, J. (2012). The Hawthorne Legacy: A reassessment of the impact of the Hawthorne studies on management scholarship, 1930-1958. Journal of Management History, 18(1), 105-119. Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
6. ↑ ^{6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3} Jung, C.S. & Lee, S.Y. (2015). The Hawthorne Studies Revisited: Evidence From the U.S. Federal Workforce. Administration and Society, 47(5), 507-531. SAGE Publications Inc.
7. ↑ Roethlisberger, F.J. & Dickson, W.J. (1939). Management and the worker: An account of a research program conducted by the Western Electric Company, Hawthorne Works, Chicago. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8. ↑ ^{8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6} McQuarrie, F. A. E. (2005). How the past is present(ed): A comparison of information on the Hawthorne studies in Canadian management and organizational behaviour textbooks. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 22(3), 230-242.
9. ↑ ^{9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8} Project Management Institute. (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Seventh Edition and the Standard for Project Management. Newtown Square, PA. Project Management Institute