Criticisms of Hawthorne Experiments
Through the Hawthorne Experiments have opened a new chapter in management by emphasizing the importance of social factors in the output, it is not without fault. The experiments have been widely criticized by some behavioral scientists because of lack of scientific objectively used in arriving at various conclusions. Some critics feel that there was bias and preconception on the part of the Harvard researches. One writer developed a detailed comparison between the conclusion drawn by the researches and the evidence presented, and found that their conclusions were almost entirely unsupported. He asked the question, "how it was possible for studies so nearly devoid of the scientific merit, and conclusions so little supported by evidence, to gain so influential and respected a place within scientific disciplines and to hold this place for so long". Following other criticisms have also been made against the Hawthorne Experiments. The Hawthorne researches did not give sufficient attention to the attitudes that people bring with them to the workplace. They did not recognize such forces as class consciousness, the role of the unions, and other extra plant forces on attitudes of workers. The Hawthorne plant was not a typical plant because it was a thoroughly unpleasant place to work. Therefore, the results could not be valid for others. Hawthorne studies look upon the worker as a means to an end, and not an end in him. They assume acceptance of the management's goals and look on the worker as someone to be manipulated by the management. In spite of these shortcomings, Hawthorne Experiments will be known for discovering the importance of human factor in managing an organization. The experiments have stimulated many researches to study the human problems in the management.