Hawthorne Studies

Introduction

This paper aims to discuss the success of Hawthorne Studies. The criticism and defences towards the ideology and methodology of the Hawthorne studies. Lastly whether Hawthorne study’s findings are relevant in today’s contemporary management.

Were the Hawthorne studies a success?

The Hawthorne studies was harshly criticised on its creditability. Critics believed the methodology was biased and this have ‘reversed the means and ends in the research process’ showing the lack of creditability in the whole studies (Sonnenfeld 1985).

Hawthorne critics have also risen questions on whether should universities use this study for teaching purposes due to its creditable (Carey1967). As Hawthorne critics have misunderstood the main intend of the study which was not to prove hypotheses instead the studies main intention was to create and explore hypotheses (Sonnenfeld 1985).

Thou it criticism, Hawthorne studies have brought about new insights to issues such as motivation of workers, how supervisors and workers could work together, job satisfaction and curbing the resistances to change. Disregarding it criticisms, Hawthorne studies have also been used in academic journals and professional association conferences which shows the achievement of the studies (Sonnenfeld 1985).

As a whole, harsh criticisms were made on the Hawthorne Studies on its creditability and biasness however the investigators again emphasize, these studies were never meant to prove any hypotheses but rather explore more hypotheses, to this extend clearly Hawthorne studies was successful as it created and explored hypothesis but was not successful to the extent, in proving whether their hypotheses worked in their current context.

Criticism in Hawthorne Studies

The 3 identified criticisms on creditability and biasness on the Hawthorne Studies are Ideology, Methodology, and Biasness throughout the Hawthorne Studies.

Ideology

Due to Hawthorne studies small focus on internal plant conflict control, critics condemn it as a study which lack creditable as it does not represent the majority of the industry compared to a combination of external and internal study (Sonnenfeld 1985).

Another point was ‘Roethlistberger and Dickson acknowledged the present of non-supportive data in several places’ in their studies which lead to authors of journals criticising the ideology of Hawthorne studies which propose that it does not have enough creditability to show that the Hawthorne studies could help solve present industrial problems such as productivity and conflicts in working environment by using its human relations and social influence (Sonnenfeld 1985).

The data less proving on it credibility due to its small sample size and the omission of data in several places was