Early Origins of HR: From the Industrial Revolution to the Human Relations Movement

The Industrial Revolution and the Emergence of Welfare Officers

The story of modern Human Resources (HR) management begins with the Industrial Revolution, a period of rapid economic and social change that transformed the way people lived and worked. The rise of factories and the shift from hand production to machine-based manufacturing brought about new challenges and opportunities for managing the workforce.

One of the earliest examples of HR practices during this period was the emergence of welfare officers. These individuals were responsible for looking after the well-being of workers in the factories, providing basic amenities such as housing, healthcare, and education. The first known welfare officer was a man named Robert Owen, who introduced progressive labor practices in his cotton mills in New Lanark, Scotland, in the early 19th century.

Owen believed that investing in the welfare of his workers would lead to increased productivity and loyalty. He implemented a range of reforms, including reducing the workday from 13 hours to 10 hours, providing education for children, and establishing a system of cooperative stores where workers could purchase goods at fair prices. While Owen’s reforms were met with skepticism by many of his contemporaries, they laid the groundwork for the development of HR practices in the years to come.

Owen’s approach was rooted in a belief that workers were not merely cogs in a machine, but human beings with needs and desires that extended beyond the factory floor. He recognized that by creating a supportive and nurturing environment, he could foster a sense of loyalty and commitment among his workers, leading to increased productivity and profitability.

However, Owen’s progressive views were not widely shared by his contemporaries. Many factory owners viewed their workers as little more than expendable resources, to be used and discarded as needed. The prevailing view was that workers were motivated solely by financial incentives, and that any attempts to improve their welfare were a waste of resources.

Despite these challenges, the emergence of welfare officers during the Industrial Revolution marked an important milestone in the development of HR. By recognizing the importance of employee well-being and advocating for progressive labor practices, these early pioneers laid the foundation for the more humanistic approach to management that would emerge in the decades to come.

Scientific Management and the Focus on Efficiency and Productivity

As the Industrial Revolution gathered pace, the focus of management shifted from welfare to efficiency and productivity. The most influential figure in this regard was Frederick W. Taylor, an American mechanical engineer who developed the principles of Scientific Management in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Taylor believed that the key to improving productivity was to break down work into its constituent parts and optimize each step of the process. He conducted extensive time and motion studies to determine the most efficient way to perform tasks, and developed a system of incentives and rewards to motivate workers to meet production targets.

While Taylor’s methods led to significant improvements in productivity, they also had unintended consequences. Workers often felt like they were being treated as machines rather than human beings, and the focus on efficiency led to a neglect of other important factors such as job satisfaction and employee well-being.

Taylor’s approach was based on a view of workers as rational economic actors, motivated solely by financial incentives. He believed that by breaking down work into its constituent parts and optimizing each step of the process, he could eliminate waste and inefficiency, leading to increased productivity and profitability.

However, Taylor’s methods also had a dehumanizing effect on workers. The focus on efficiency and standardization left little room for individual creativity or autonomy, and workers often felt like they were being treated as mere cogs in a machine. This led to widespread dissatisfaction and resistance among workers, who felt that their needs and desires were being ignored in the pursuit of productivity.

Despite these criticisms, the principles of Scientific Management had a profound impact on the development of HR. The focus on efficiency and productivity would remain a key concern for HR professionals throughout the 20th century, even as the field evolved to incorporate more humanistic approaches to management.

The Human Relations Movement and the Hawthorne Studies

In the 1920s and 1930s, a new school of thought emerged that challenged the assumptions of Scientific Management. The Human Relations Movement, led by researchers such as Elton Mayo and Fritz Roethlisberger, emphasized the importance of social and psychological factors in the workplace.

The most famous example of this approach was the Hawthorne Studies, a series of experiments conducted at the Western Electric Company’s Hawthorne Works in Chicago between 1924 and 1933. The studies initially aimed to investigate the effects of physical factors such as lighting and temperature on worker productivity, but the researchers soon discovered that social and psychological factors played a much more significant role.

One of the key findings of the Hawthorne Studies was the importance of informal social networks and group norms in shaping worker behavior. The researchers found that workers were more motivated by a sense of belonging and recognition than by financial incentives alone. This insight led to a new focus on employee motivation and job satisfaction in the field of HR.

The Human Relations Movement also challenged the traditional hierarchical structure of organizations, arguing that managers needed to develop a more participative and collaborative approach to leadership. This idea would go on to shape the development of modern HR practices such as employee engagement and empowerment.

The Hawthorne Studies were groundbreaking in their approach to understanding worker behavior. Rather than focusing solely on physical factors such as lighting and temperature, the researchers recognized that social and psychological factors played a crucial role in shaping worker attitudes and performance.

The studies found that workers were highly influenced by their social relationships and the informal networks that existed within the workplace. Workers who felt a sense of belonging and recognition were more motivated and productive than those who felt isolated or ignored. This insight challenged the prevailing view of workers as isolated individuals, motivated solely by financial incentives.

The Human Relations Movement also emphasized the importance of effective leadership in creating a positive work environment. Researchers such as Mayo and Roethlisberger argued that managers needed to develop a more collaborative and participative approach to leadership, one that recognized the importance of employee input and involvement in decision-making.

These ideas would go on to shape the development of modern HR practices such as employee engagement, empowerment, and participative management. By recognizing the importance of social and psychological factors in the workplace, the Human Relations Movement laid the foundation for a more humanistic approach to management that continues to influence HR practices to this day.

Conclusion

The early origins of HR, from the emergence of welfare officers during the Industrial Revolution to the development of Scientific Management and the Human Relations Movement, laid the foundation for the field as we know it today. By understanding the historical context of these developments, HR professionals can gain a deeper appreciation for the challenges and opportunities that have shaped the field over time.

While the specific practices and approaches of these early pioneers may seem outdated by today’s standards, the underlying principles of employee welfare, efficiency, and motivation continue to guide the work of HR professionals to this day. By building on these foundations and adapting to the changing needs of the modern workplace, HR can continue to play a vital role in driving organizational success and employee well-being.

The history of HR is a story of ongoing evolution and adaptation, as the field has sought to respond to the changing needs and challenges of the workplace. From the early focus on employee welfare and efficiency to the more recent emphasis on employee engagement and empowerment, HR has consistently evolved to meet the demands of the modern workplace.

As we look to the future of HR, it is clear that the field will continue to evolve and adapt to new challenges and opportunities. The rise of technology, globalization, and the changing nature of work will all have significant implications for HR in the years to come.

However, by understanding the historical foundations of the field and the key principles that have guided its development, HR professionals can approach these challenges with a sense of perspective and purpose. By building on the legacy of the early pioneers of HR and adapting to the needs of the modern workplace, HR can continue to play a vital role in driving organizational success and employee well-being for generations to come.

Sources and Further Reading

1. Kaufman, B. E. (2014). The historical development of American HRM broadly viewed. Human Resource Management Review, 24(3), 196-218.

2. Owen, R. (1813). A New View of Society: Or, Essays on the Formation of the Human Character, Preparatory to the Development of a Plan for Gradually Ameliorating the Condition of Mankind. London: Cadell & Davies.

3. Taylor, F. W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper & Brothers.

4. Mayo, E. (1933). The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization. New York: Macmillan.

5. Roethlisberger, F. J., & Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the Worker. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

6. Wren, D. A. (2005). The History of Management Thought. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

7. Bruce, K., & Nyland, C. (2011). Elton Mayo and the deification of human relations. Organization Studies, 32(3), 383-405.

8. Hassard, J. S. (2012). Rethinking the Hawthorne Studies: The Western Electric research in its social, political and historical context. Human Relations, 65(11), 1431-1461.

9. Levitt, S. D., & List, J. A. (2011). Was there really a Hawthorne effect at the Hawthorne plant? An analysis of the original illumination experiments. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 3(1), 224-238.

10. O’Connor, E. S. (1999). The politics of management thought: A case study of the Harvard Business School and the Human Relations School. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 117-131.