Taylor og Toyota

Taylor and Toyota – two ways of measuring a human being

Scientific management and the Toyota Production System side by side: Taylor's stopwatch, the fabricated story of Schmidt, Toyota's andon cord, how extreme both systems really are – and what separates them.

Back to the episode Arrow keys or swipe

What this covers

  1. Taylor, the stopwatch and the one best way
  2. The story of Schmidt and the pig iron
  3. What happened when somebody actually checked it
  4. Watertown, the strike and the hearings
  5. Toyota, and the opposite premise
  6. The andon cord and the right to stop everything
  7. How extreme TPS actually is

What this covers (cont.)

  1. The criticism – management by stress

Taylor and the stopwatch

Frederick Winslow Taylor published The Principles of Scientific Management in 1911. The idea was that work is not a craft each worker shapes for themselves, but a problem that can be measured and solved.

The method, in four steps

  1. Break the task downDivide the work into individual motions that can be observed separately.
  2. Time every motionWith a stopwatch, repeatedly, across several workers.
  3. Find the one best wayAssemble the fastest motions into a single prescribed method.
  4. Teach it, and require itThe worker no longer finds their own way. The method is decided somewhere else.
Note what happens in the last step. The knowledge of how the work is best done is moved out of the head of the person doing it and into a planning department. That is the core of Taylorism, and it is also why it was so hated: it makes experience worthless as a bargaining chip.

The story of Schmidt

Scientific management has one founding story, and anyone who has taken a management course has heard it.

When somebody checked it

This is where it gets interesting, and this part is missing from most accounts.

When researchers went back to the sources, the founding story turned out to be partly fabricated.

The man existed: "Schmidt" was in reality Henry Noll.
But the account did not hold: it is described as fictionalised and error-riddled.
And something had been removed: when Taylor retold the episode in his congressional testimony, the revolt among the pig-iron handlers and the mass dismissals that preceded it had disappeared from the narrative.
The scale was smaller too: the reorganisation at Bethlehem is described in hindsight as a modest affair, far less dramatic than either Taylor or his critics later made it.

The resistance

Taylorism met hard resistance, and not only in theory. At Watertown Arsenal its introduction led to a strike, and it ended in congressional hearings. The method was eventually banned in United States government arsenals.

Toyota, and the opposite premise

Half a century later, in Japan, a system is built that measures work just as precisely – but inverts one premise.

Who holds the improvement

Taylor

The worker is the object

  • The planners decide the method
  • The worker carries it out
  • Deviation is an error
  • The knowledge sits in the staff function

Toyota

The worker is the source

  • The standard is the starting point, not the answer
  • Whoever does the job proposes the change
  • Surfacing a problem is wanted
  • The knowledge sits at the machine
The difference is not how closely it is measured – both measure in seconds. The difference is who holds the watch, and what happens when something does not match. For Taylor a deviation is a disciplinary matter. For Toyota a deviation is information.

The andon cord

The clearest expression of that is a cord above the line.

Any worker can stop the entire production line.

What it means in practice: see a problem, pull. The line halts, and people come to look at it with you.
Why it is radical: at Ford, stopping the line was the most expensive thing a human being could do. Here it is a duty.
The logic behind it: a fault allowed to pass gets more expensive at every station it passes. Stopping now is cheaper than repairing later.
And what makes it a management device: it is a statement of trust that is also an instrument of measurement. Every time somebody pulls, management knows exactly where the problem sits.

How extreme it actually is

Here it is worth being honest, because TPS is often presented as the humane alternative to the line. The system is humane in some ways and rock-hard in others.

What makes TPS demanding to work in

FeatureWhat it involves
Takt timeWork is divided into cycles of seconds, set by customer demand – not by what is comfortable.
Standardised workEvery motion is described and the sequence fixed. It is more detailed than Taylor ever got.
Little slackInventory is removed deliberately. With the buffers gone, a problem propagates immediately.
KaizenImprovement is continuous. Today's standard is next week's starting point.
VisibilityEverything is meant to be visible: status, deviations, delays. Yours included.
Look at the last two together. When improvement is continuous and everything is visible, there is by definition no state in which the work is good enough. It is a system with no resting point built into it.

The criticism

The sharpest objection to TPS is not that it is inhumane. It is more uncomfortable than that.

"Management by stress", as the criticism describes it

  1. 1Remove the slackInventory, buffers and spare staffing are taken away.
  2. 2Problems become visibleWithout a buffer the line stops where it fails. That is the intention.
  3. 3The problem gets solvedThe system genuinely improves. This part is real.
  4. 4Then it is tightened againThe gain is taken out as new, lower slack.
  5. 5And the pressure is backAt a higher level of performance, with the same felt strain.
The point of the criticism is not that the system does not work – it does. The point is that the strain is held constant on purpose, because it is the strain that surfaces the problems. The improvement accrues to the business. The pressure stays with the person doing the work.

The uncomfortable kinship

Both systems measure work down to seconds, and both standardise every motion.

What actually separates them: who owns the standard, and what happens when somebody finds a better way.
For Taylor: the standard comes from above and is to be followed.
For Toyota: the standard is a hypothesis, and whoever does the job is expected to improve it.
Why the difference is real: a system where you can change your own method is a different thing to live in than one where you cannot.
But also why it is fragile: introduce the tools without the authority – the stopwatch without the cord – and you have Taylorism with Japanese vocabulary.

What is worth taking with you

That Taylorism's founding story about Schmidt and the pig iron does not survive source criticism, and that Taylor himself edited out the revolt and the dismissals when he retold it.

Key points

  • Taylor measured work with a stopwatch and determined the one best way to do it.
  • The story of Schmidt going from 12.5 to 47 tonnes of pig iron is the founding tale of scientific management.
  • When researchers went back to the sources, the story turned out to be partly fabricated.
  • Taylor removed the revolt and the mass dismissals when he retold the episode to Congress.

Key points (cont.)

  • Toyota inverts the premise: the worker is the source of improvement, not its object.
  • The andon cord gives every individual the right to stop the whole line.
  • Both systems measure work down to seconds. The difference is who holds the watch.

Questions this answers

  • What is scientific management?
  • Who was Schmidt, and what did he do?
  • Were Taylor's figures real?
  • What is the Toyota Production System?
  • What is an andon cord?
  • What is the difference between Taylor and Toyota?

Questions this answers (cont.)

  • Is lean just a kinder form of Taylorism?

Sources

  • Frederick Winslow Taylor – The Principles of Scientific Management (1911)
  • Wikipedia – Schmidt (worker), on Henry Noll and the source criticism of Taylor's account
  • Taylorism and the Workers at Bethlehem Steel, 1898–1901 (Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography)
  • James P. Womack, Daniel T. Jones and Daniel Roos – The Machine That Changed the World (1990)

Spørretimen

Read the whole thing at

www.sporretimen.no/en/episodes/taylor-og-tps/