Section 3: Value-Based Management One of the first industrialists to realise the flaws in dominative management was Henry Ford, who attempted to solve the problem of agency by paying Ford employees a third more than the industrial average in between 1914-1922. This pay inspired productivity dually; the profit motive positively compels the worker to appease the employer and the resultant creation of an of employees provided an optimum environment for elite “fraternity” a corporate culture. Ford created a corporate culture that a increased productivity: “Ford developed fraternalist labor strategy, a was to ... maximise labour men’s club, whos objective . Ford appealed to the worker in a positive through ritual, symbolism, mottoes productivity” and social imperative; all of which are tools described as means of manipulating employee views and values. By stating the possibility for growth, as well as the risk of emasculation, work hard] you will be [able] to ... say: I AM A the employee is required to “[if you MAN”, fulfil work requirements. The humanist method of managing values is flexible, assigning independence and responsibilities to different work groups. The culture method, as discussed through Ford’s attempts at social propaganda and the instillation of a corporate culture, is rather proscriptive. Both seek to inspire productivity by appealing to the not rationality, to employees’ psyche, solve the Agency Problem. This motivation proves to be deeper than the motivation of a dominated employee because of the nature of the Masloan wants to which this method appeals. The synchronisation of views and values allows for the fulfilment of all needs, including esteem, belonging and self-actualisation needs. This increases the with the employee’s connection workplace: self-definition and social connection becomes intrinsically dependant on the organisation.
Section 3: Value-Based Management One of the first industrialists to realise the flaws in dominative management was Henry Ford, who attempted to solve the problem of agency by paying Ford employees a third more than the industrial average in between 1914-1922. This pay inspired productivity dually; the profit motive positively compels the worker to appease the employer and the resultant creation of an elite “fraternity” of employees provided an optimum environment for a corporate culture. Ford created a corporate culture that increased productivity: “Ford developed a fraternalist labor strategy, a men’s club, whos objective was to ... maximise labour productivity” . Ford appealed to the worker in a positive through ritual, symbolism, mottoes and social imperative; all of which are tools described as means of manipulating employee views and values. By stating the possibility for growth, as well as the risk of emasculation, “[if you work hard] you will be [able] to ... say: I AM A MAN”, the employee is required to fulfil work requirements. The humanist method of managing values is flexible, assigning independence and responsibilities to different work groups. The culture method, as discussed through Ford’s attempts at social propaganda and the instillation of a corporate culture, is rather proscriptive. Both seek to inspire productivity by appealing to the employees’ psyche, not rationality, to solve the Agency Problem. This motivation proves to be deeper than the motivation of a dominated employee because of the nature of the Masloan wants to which this method appeals. The synchronisation of views and values allows for the fulfilment of all needs, including esteem, belonging and self-actualisation needs. This increases the employee’s connection with the workplace: self-definition and social connection becomes intrinsically dependant on the organisation.
21129-essay1.docx