8/12/2019 123 Stand

1/7

ELSEVIER

ooo l3370(95)ooofs-sApplied Ergonomics Vol 27 No. 2 pp. 11 -117 1996

Copyright @ 19% Published by Elsevier S cience LtdPrinted in Great Britain. All rights reserved

ooo36670/96 10.00 + o.al

The Rationalisation Movement inperspective and some ergonomicimplications

Torsten BjGrkmanNat ional In sti tut e of Occupati onal Healt h, S-171 84 Solna, Sw eden

The paper gives an overview of the Rationalisation Movement from Taylor to the most recent

organisation models such as Business Process Reengineering. Special emphasis is put on theestimated implications of the different rationalisation strategies in terms of ergonomics/workphysiology. In addition basic terms and concepts are defined.

According to the author Taylorism Fordism and Lean Production seem to offer aninsufficient potential for good ergonomics. However more recent organisational models such asTime Based Management and Business Process Reengineering may appear more promisingbut unfortunately almost no research has been conducted to describe the ergonomicsimplications of these models.

Keywords: ergonomics, Lean Production, Rationalisat ion, reengineering, review, Taylorism

Roots of the Rationalisation MovementThe International Rationalisation Movement has anAmerican origin. Frederick Taylor (18561917) iscommonly considered to be the most important found-ing father and his teachings of Scientific Managementregarded as the basic formulation of the classicaldoctrine (see Box I). Time and motion studies, strictdivision of labour, detailed preplanning, specific joband task descriptions, and piece-rate pay are some of itsmost salient characteristics. Taylorism is another namefor those principles which Taylor thought constitutedthe one best way of organisation and management.Not choosing the one best way was simply irrational

according to Taylor, applying his principles on theother hand would be rational. For this reason hismany disciples started to call implementation of Taylorsprinciples rationalisation.

Targeting a days work was considered to be ofparamount importance; Scientific Managementinvolves a complete mental revolution on the part ofthe working man according to Taylor (1912), this newmentality focused on the daily achievement and easilymeasurable production targets. Taylor was, in otherwords, introducing some kind of workload concept,although it is obvious from his writings that heunderstood little of work physiology. Taylor wassuccessful in his lifetime. He and his principles became

famous before he published anything. His short booksabout Shop Management (1903) and The Principlesof Scientific Management (1911) sold very well. Heoften attracted huge audiences. In 1914, for instance,

Box 1 Taylorism. See also Figure I

Scientific Management Taylorism Fordism:Often used as synonyms. Frederick Taylor (18551917), the founding father of the RationalisationMovement, used to call his principles ScientificManagement but nowadays Taylorism is morecommon; note that it is often used derogatorily.During its golden era it happened that Taylorismwas named after some of Taylors disciples likeLilian Gilbreth or after its latest internal fad ormethodology, like MTM in the 196Os, but most ofthe time the name was and still is Taylorism.

Fordism has a somewhat different story. Themost straightforward interpretation is to see it asa special application of Taylors principles,namely in mass-production, and with a keycharacteristic in the moving assembly line. Anumber of scholars and debaters, mostly belong-ing to the so-called Regulation school, givesFordism a wider interpretation. It means boththe specific Fordistic way of organising massproduction, as well as the societal conditions andinstitutions supporting the mass consumptionsociety.

Super-Fordism or Neo-Fordism are contro-versial interpretations of what is happening in forinstance the Japanese manufacturing industry(see Box 2).

111

8/12/2019 123 Stand

2/7

8/12/2019 123 Stand

3/7

The Rati onalisati on M ovement in perspectiv e and some ergonomic impl ications: T. Bji irk man

groups. Operators were trying to appear to be workingat their utmost capacity whilst in reality having a lotmore to give. The most common problem for therationalisation man was to calculate for such cheating,and observation +20% has been a much used rule ofthumb (Maynard and Stegemerten, 1935).

In the Rationalisation Movement this problem is nowconsidered to be history. The alternative approach usedto employ so-called therbligs, Gilbreth spelled back-wards, after Lilian and Frank Gilbreth, who claimedthey discovered the atoms of task analysis (basicelements of all manual work). The elementary or basicmotions included such as stretch, grasp, and turn,combined with different eye movements (Gilbreth andGilbreth, 1924). These therbligs were studied in worklaboratories of the 192Os, 1930s and 1940s and finallyresulted in a kind of data bank of standard times andrecorded peak performances measured with a ratherhigh accuracy. The measurement unit was and is ahundred thousand part of an hr, i.e. 27.78 units per sec.This strange measurement unit was the result ofcounting frames on ultra-rapid films.

Work physiology was seen as a sub-discipline torationalisation by the 1920s. The interest in peakperformances was as great or even greater than theattentiveness shown to normal or average performance.Accordingly, the co-operation with sport-physiologistswas intense. The determination of maximal workcapacity as well as optimal work load to maximiseproductivity was priority. Famous studies with theseobjectives were carried out at the Kaiser WilhelmInstitut in the Weimar Republic in the 1920s (Atzler,1927). These physiological studies were sponsored byREFA, the still existing, but now very changedGerman rationalisation organisation. This is an import-ant part of the early history of ergonomics/workphysiology. The tradition was later continued inDenmark and Sweden, and is further discussed byWestgaard and Winkel in this issue.

In the Scandinavian countries the author has metsome ergonomists who do not know of the connectionsbetween Taylorism and work physiology, thus beingsomewhat ignorant of the origins of their profession.As a consequence some ergonomists have shown littleinterest in relating their own activities to issues like thewage system, or to different management styles andideas. Hopefully the situation is better in other

countries but some international conferences on relatedthemes are not overly encouraging. I am not arguingthat ergonomists are less informed of other job design- specialities compared with the knowledge or lack ofknowledge of ergonomics amongst, for instance, piecerate calculators or capital rationalisation experts. How-ever, I do claim that it might be harmful in general tobe that specialised.

Alternatives to Taylorism?

Job redesign id eas from t he post- w ar peri od

In the post-war period the critique of Taylorism and

Fordism became more constructive both in Americaand Europe; empirical evidence of its shortcomingsbecame. more obvious and well documented. One ofthe classical studies of the era is Man on the Assembly

113

Line from 1952 by Walker and Guest describing thediscontent with repetitive tasks and with the lack ofcontrol and influence. Other classical studies during thefollowing years are, in chronological order: AbrahamMaslow (1954) demonstrating a hierarchy of needsfrom physiological to safety to social to ego to self-

actualisation; Frederick Herzberg et al (1959) discrim-inating hygiene factors from motivators where toactivate the latter job redesign is essential, and inparticular job enrichment; Douglas McGregor (1960)contrasting Taylorism and Job Redesign ideas; RensisLikert (1961) arguing in favour of the so-called system4 theory claiming that work democracy pays; and ChrisArgyris (1964) presenting a goal congruence theory ofhow to integrate individual aspirations with the goals ofthe organisation, and claiming that Taylorism is failingto do just that.

In America in the 1950s and 1960s a number ofscholars proposed ideas and examples of how to createalternatives to Taylorism. They are often groupedtogether under the label of Neo Human Relations(NHR), although they were more sensitive to theirdiffering points of departures and conclusions thankeen on seeing similarities in their opinions and results.

In Europe of the 1960s and 1970s the so-called socio-technical school made a strong impact. The basictheses were first formulated at the Tavistock School ofHuman Relations in London but soon spread toNorway. Famous proponents were Einar Thorsrudfrom Norway and the Australian scholar Fred Emery(Emery, 1978; Thorsrud, 1967). The socio-technicalschool presented many job redesign ideas and was ableto prove itself in a number of pilot installations in UKand the Scandinavian countries, later on in Germanyand the Netherlands, as well as many other placesaround the world. The socio-technical school was evenmore opposed to Taylorism and Fordism than were theNHR people in the US (Emery, 1978). Taylors notionof the One Best Way was confronted; according to thesocio-technical approach there is always organisationaichoice and to choose Taylorism is a poor choice.

Semi-autonomous work groups are a salient featureof many of the socio-technical work organisations,sometimes doing away with the foreman altogether andoften redefining his role from supervision to support.The democratisation of the work place was and is basicto the socio-technical approach. Both NHR and the

socio-technical school have many redesign ideas incommon, like job rotation, job enlargement, makingthe work cycles longer, and in particular job enrich-ment, adding planning, reflection and decision makingto manual work.

Lean production

For decades the direction and development of organisa-tion theory and practice seemed to be determined,although the progress was slow. Few questioned thatthe advanced industrial countries were abandoningTaylorism and Fordism, and were designing and creat-ing more enlarged and enriched jobs. The main way to

explain the slowness of the change was to refer to theenormous backlog of old-fashioned Tayloristic work-places. When starting anew, when given the opportun-ities at so called greenfield sites, the new workplaces

8/12/2019 123 Stand

4/7

The Rati onalisati on M ovement in perspectiv e and some ergonomic impl ications: T. Bji irk man

were designed differently from the old Tayloristicparadigm. The long-term perspective was optimistic.

This post-Tayloristic and post-Fordistic vision of theadvancing working life is rapidly becoming dated, theoptions are renamed. The 1990s seem to become leanerthan few had expected in Europe a few years ago. The

Rationalisation Movement, as well as most managers,has some hard decisions to make, and the outcome ishighly relevant for ergonomists, not to mention theemployees themselves. What is at stake is the degree ofharmfulness of our working environments.

The symbol of the new situation is the rapid adoptionin Europe and North America of the Japanese inspiredorganisational doctrine Lean Production (Box 2).The Toyota Production System would be a moreadequate description, so as not to use buzzwordrhetoric from the well-known MIT-book The Machinethat Changed the World (Womack et al 1990).However, Lean Production (or in Germany SchlankeProduktion) has rapidly become the prevalent namefor making an organisation more productive andefficient. It is undoubtedly a way of organising whichhas some competitive edge over more traditionalorganisations. However, its human consequences maybe questioned.

Arguably, Lean Production is not abandoning, but ismodifying the elements of Fordism (Figure 2). Theassembly line is still there with shorter work cycles thanever before, typically around 30 set (Berggren et al1991). The moving assembly line is described as thesuperior way of organising assembly work. Time andmotion studies are generally applied although some-times they are the responsibility of the workers them-selves, which never was the case during classicalFordism. The division of labour is strict as is thepreplanning and the adherence to the principle of the

Box 2 Kaizen, Lean Production, Toyotism, Kanban,JIT, TQM. See also Figure 1

Kaizen: Usually translated as continuousimprovements. Characterise the Japanese way ofday-to-day rationalisations and is a code-word forToyotism.

Lean Production: A synonym to Toyotism.

Kanban: Refers to a special Toyotistic method-ology of governing production

JIT (Just in time): A name for the Toyotisticway of supply management, demanding stricttime discipline of deliveries. Often called LeanSupply, Outsourcing or Virtual Organisation(extreme case of outsourcing with purchasing thecentral function).

TOM (total quality management): Has its rootsin the American quality gurus Deming and Juran.

To many observers the term has become moreJapanese than American, because of the earlyand successful implementation of the total qualitymanagement-principles in Japan.

one best way. The meaning of that principle is in shortthat there always, at any given phase of organisationaland technical development, exists one best way ofdoing a task. That standard is often changed andimproved, an activity called tkaizen or continuousimprovement but there are never two different ways of

doing things approved at the same time. Thus, the workculture is disciplined and controlled, and implies littleautonomy at the shop floor level except for the right tosuggest improvements and adapt to changes.

Historically speaking the Japanese origin of theseorganisational ideas and models is of importance. TheRationalisation Movement of Japan has met littleopposition - the trade unions of the early 1950s triedand lost (Cusumano, 1985). The shortening of the workcycles, extent of job rotation, intensification of workhave all been driven to the extreme. When it comes todiscipline, synchronisation and individual integration oforganisational objectives, then lean production (or theToyota system) marks peak performance in theFordistic tradition.

History never completely repeats itself though. Themajor differences of lean production in comparisonwith traditional or classical Fordism are primarily theextensive application of job rotation and the adaptationsto that job rotation. Thus, a skilled and multiskilledworkforce is needed. Team-work is often referred to asanother deviation from Fordism, but that is a morequestionable argument. You see a lot of teams andteam spirit in lean production, but you have to searchbefore you find team work. The meaning of TeamToyota is, for instance, all employees of Toyotaworking towards the same goals of continuous improve-ment and increasing market share, a huge team byWestern standards (Berggren and Bjorkman, 1992);but with cycle times of 30 set at isolated single-workerwork stations the preconditions for team work aresimply not there. Typically, team work in lean produc-tion is mostly applied to indirect functions like qualitycircles or preventive maintenance, and sometimes tocleaning and housekeeping which are usually sharedresponsibilities of the work-teams.

Lean production seems presently to have lost incompetitiveness in Japan (Altmann, 1995; Berggren1994). Chrysler, the smallest American motor manu-facturer, was making a bigger profit in 1993 than all thenine Japanese motor manufacturers combined

(Fortune, 1994).Furthermore, Womack et al (1990) appear to beignorant about work environment matters, devotingalmost no attention to such topics apart from claimingthat lean production is a superior way of organising.Other proponents of lean production have been moreeloquent. One of the popular arguments is that leanproduction only arouses positive stress (Helling,1991), disregarding the fact that it is usually appliedwith a lot of overtime. Still another of the standardarguments points out the longevity of the Japanesepopulation; life expectancy is amongst the highest inthe world. Some of the lean production proponentsclaim a causal relationship, the healthy condition of the

population being due to healthy working conditionswithin lean production (Helling, 1991). However, onlya small fraction of the Japanese work force works underlean production conditions, not even the whole auto

114

8/12/2019 123 Stand

5/7

The Rati onalisati on M ovement in perspectiv e and some ergonomic impl ications: T. Bji irk man

industry. Nissan is, for instance, far from lean. Thenew doctrine has only been around for 30 years at itsbirthplace, Toyota and for far less at the disciplecorporations like some of the suppliers. It seemsreasonable to allow for some lead time betweenchanges in working conditions and taking measures oflife expectancy.

In surveys the younger generation of would-berecruits to the auto-plants in Japan express fears forKaroshi, the mysterious sudden death at the work-place due to exhaustion that has got a lot of mediaattention in Japan (Teruoka, 1991). A considerableproportion also estimate the workplace to be harmful.Accordingly, Toyota is struggling with a shortage ofwilling applicants (Gronning, 1995). The beliefs of .theAmerican workforce are similar, but in contrast to theyoung generation of Japan many Americans still try toget jobs at the Japanese transplants (Berggren et al1991). At the workplace in the US, lean production isoften called lean and mean production, hinting at theintensification of work that is one of the dominantcharacteristics of lean production, enabling you todouble or triple your output with the same resources(Fucini et al 1990).

To the authors knowledge, no physiological orergonomic research of relevance has been allowedaccess to lean production work-sites in Japan. Acommon management argument for denying that accessis a reference to the strong production-result-orientedspirit of their workforce, saying that workers do notlike giving away time from their process of continuousimprovement of output. However, have they beenasked for their own opinion or are the arguments only

management assumptions?The most production oriented or stochastic type ofjob rotation imaginable may still contain potential formeaningful physical and mental variation, and thusreduction of risks for developing musculo-skeletaldisorders. The problem is that we do not know whenthis potential is realised in general nor do we know it inthe single case. The need for workplace relatedergonomic research of lean worksites is obvious.

Fordistic revival?

Apart from the Japanese challenge, organisationally inthe form of Lean Production, there is another

important new element - the availability of numerouslow-wage workforces close to the advanced countries.Corporations in Western Europe have now for the firsttime during the post-war period access to nearbyEastern Europe. In countries like the Czech Republic,geographically as close or closer to the high techcorporations of southern Germany as the former DDR-industries, wages and salaries are roughly one tenth ofwhat they are in Germany, but education and skills ofthe respective workforces are close to equivalent. Ifcomparison is made with the immigrant labour inWestern Europe, the so-called Gastarbeiter, some ofthe East European skilling might be superior. This is atleast a popular belief amongst West European

managers, judging from articles in the leading manage-ment magazines. Investors are focusing on the potentialfor best practice in different countries rather than onnational characteristics. Creating an island of elitist

115

performance in the midst of a gloomy general economicsituation is a real possibility for a daring entrepreneur.

Exchanging employment in Germany for employ-ment in the Czech Republic is as tempting as hoppingonboard a time-machine. The organisation of today oreven of yesterday might become profitable simply dueto the lowered wage account. You do not necessarilyneed to improve; to move geographically might beenough. If many think the same the result mightbecome the one we witness in the Czech Republic, aboom time and low unemployment (3% in 1994). Thenew investments are not characterised by organisationalinnovation, large parts seeming to be channelled intoold-fashioned organisational solutions.

The situation is similar for Japan in relation to mostof the other Pacific Rim countries, mainland China inparticular. US corporations have the same kind ofoptions south of the border in Mexico or Latin Americain its entirety. The new workplaces in these countriesare seldom sophisticated when it comes to job enrich-ment or enlargement. A substantial number of the newworkplaces of Eastern Europe and the so-called NIC-countries (Newly Industrialised Countries) are old-fashioned. Taylorism and Fordism are alive andrumour of their death seems premature. If you use thework environments of the advanced industrial countriesas a yardstick, some of the work environments that arecreated in the newly industrialised countries are decadesbehind. The lag remains in the development of workenvironment qualities in comparison with the develop-ment of productivity and profitability. The few cases ofmodern work-organisation in Eastern Europe aremostly variations of lean production, like Opels new

plant in Eisenach in Thtiringen in former DDR, whichmight be the leanest within the whole GM-giant.In combination with the recession that has dominated

the early 1990s the relocation of many former WestEuropean workplaces to low wage areas in EasternEurope puts additional performance pressure on theremaining ones. With failing demand the weakerperformers risk becoming the victims of the ongoingshakeout of capacity. Will this slimming of capacity beused for progression or regression? Many fear regres-sion, but that might be limited to the period ofeconomic downturn. When we see more ups of the upsand downs of economic development then progressiveworkplaces will hopefully start multiplying.

What has happened in Sweden is telling in thisrespect. Many of the reformed workplaces from the1970s and 1980s have come to a halt or are being closedduring the 1990s (e.g. Kadefors et al this issue; Bae etal this issue). The star-examples of good workplacesin the auto industry have been shut down, the VolvoUddevalla and Kalmar plants, and the Saab-plant inMalmo. The Uddevalla plant has been reopened in1995, but to what extent this also means a reopening ofthe former Uddevalla concept of car manufacturingremains to be seen. The Volvo Kalmar and Uddevallaplants were closed in spite of the fact that they weremore efficient and produced with higher quality thanthe remaining Torslanda plant in Gothenburg (further

discussed by Berggren, 1994; Kadefors et al , this issue;Sandberg, 1995). In the wake of these closures wewitness a Fordistic revival at some of the remainingauto plants in Sweden.

8/12/2019 123 Stand

6/7

The Rati onalisati on M ovement in perspectiv e and some ergonomic impl ications: T. Bjt irk man

Rationalisation models of the future and theirergonomics implications

In Sweden a number of industries and corporationsimplement doctrines other than lean production; theold Socio-Technical School, Service Management,Total Quality Management (TOM) and Time BasedManagement (TBM) presently being the most prevalent(Bjorkman et al 1993) (Box 3 and Figure I). If we willtake all the synonyms and consultancy brand conceptsinto account the list will become considerably longer.This year in Sweden a conceptual addition would beMichael Hammers program for Reengineering(Hammer and Champy, 1993).

The whole list of organisational models is dominatedby imported concepts from the US and an importantcause is certainly the competitive market for consultancyin the US. The potential customers and audiences havea taste for the latest thing. They tend to be tempted bynew concepts rather than new practices, it has become

utterly important to choose the right packaging andlabelling.The American organisation models originate from

Boston, a city playing a similar role in organisationaldesign as Paris in the fashion industry. In 1990 two newmodels were put to market. Time Based Management(TBM) was introduced by the Boston ConsultingGroup and Reengineering (often called BPR forBusiness Process Reengineering) by the ex-MITprofessor Michael Hammer. Process Organisation isvery much a common denominator; map the processfrom start to finish, and try to discover or invent shortcuts. Reengineering, in particular, is not very keen onevery day rationalisations like those called kaizen in

lean production. Instead you are supposed to belooking for smart short-cuts resulting in quantum leapsin performance.

Those of us who are used to this kind of hype andmarketing are hardly enthusiastic; we have heard theclaims and not been given the evidence too many timesin the past to be impressed now. The quick-fix promisesare understandable if you want to get buyers of yourconsultancy services, but understanding this does notmake the promises more convincing, on the contrary.

Box 3 TBM and BPR

TBM (Time Based Management) and BPR(Business Process Reengineering often calledjust Reengineering): American organisationmodels from Boston. Process Organisation is verymuch a common denominator, which often is alsodescribed as the horizontal organisation. Theprocess is mapped from start to finish to inventshort-cuts. Reengineering, in particular, is notvery keen on every day rationalisations like thosecalled kaizen in lean production. Instead smartshort-cuts resulting in quantum leaps in perform-ance are focused. TBM seems similar to therationalisation of capital utilisation that was theheight of fashion a decade ago. One of a fewdifferences might be that TBM focus more ontotal through-put times, not only on productionthrough-put times.

By the same token, we should appreciate that themarketing experts promoting the ever changingacronyms for new organisation structures may claimthat the models are beneficial for alleviating musculo-skeletal problems even if the claims are not valid. Theclaims, however, could be seen as a first step towards a

truly serious treatment of the topic.An investigation of which organisational doctrines

are applied at present in Sweden has given thepreliminary result that Time Based Management(TBM) is on top (Bjorkman et al 1993). TQM andrelated quality procedures are also said to be widelyimplemented, especially in the manufacturing sector.Lean production is a distant third in Swedish manufac-turing. In the public service sector different versions ofService Management still predominate. The leadingproponent of TBM in Sweden is ABB, a multinationalcorporation with most of its products in electro-technology. ABB management prefers to name thecorporation multi-domestic due to its dispersed inter-national structure (Economist,. 1993). In 1990-1993ABB/Sweden successfully completed a so called T 50program amongst their 100 Swedish daughter companies(for a description of the program see ABB 1991a;1991b), the main goal of an average 50% reduction oftotal through-put-times was reached. In the elite groupof so-called T 50 companies this goal and others weresurpassed during the same period. Now they are talkingabout a third wave of T 50 reform at ABB focusingmore than ever on traditional white collar work. Thewell-known shop floor methodology of process organ-isation, parallelisation, multi-skilling and team buildingis applied within the offices as well. The ultimate goal isabandoning the division of blue and white collar workaltogether and forming complete teams of associates.

All these TBM-changes have so far made ABB aswifter and more flexible competitor on the market-place, but what has happened to individual work loadsand other job characteristics experienced by theemployees? Several studies are in progress, but so farfew published results. From our own investigations,e.g. at ABB CEWE in Nykoping/Sweden, we can atleast say that some features of the methodology lookpromising. The farewell to line production is one suchfeature, and restricting monotonous work tasks to 2 hrin a row is another. Contrary to lean production thebreakage with Taylorism and Fordism is explicit. Line

work and short cycles are seen as evils that you have tominimise or better still, abandon altogether. The teambuilding within ABB seems to be closer to the socio-technical tradition than to lean production. The so-called goal directed groups within ABB, normally thesmallest organisational unit, are more independent andself-directed than at lean production work-sites. Co-operation in the goal directed groups implies morethan job rotation. The groups handle their owncustomer and supplier relations, and they plan and co-ordinate their own internal activities, without anyforemen ordering the group members to do so. Theforemen have to a large extent left the scene. Some ofthe former supervisors have been promoted to positions

where they co-ordinate a number of goal directedgroups. The implications of these changes for theordinary employee seem to be a more varied work-dayand certainly greater job-enrichment.

116

8/12/2019 123 Stand

7/7

The Rati onali sation M ovement in perspectiv e and some ergonomic impl icati ons: T. Bji irk man

The new emphasis on flexibility, job rotation, multi-skilling and team work, might result in more variation.Theoretically speaking these reforms are anti-Tayloristic in the sense that they are lessening thehorizontal division of labour. The mixture of formerwhite and blue collar tasks, and thereby, the lesseningof the vertical division of labour, is hopefully alsomaking work load and the work situation more variedin many respects. In some instances this job enrich-ment might decrease the total work load, at least forthe former blue collar workers.

Pitman, London

However, we still have to repeat the argument fromour lean production examples; so far proof from theworksites is lacking. We do not know yet to what extentthe organisational changes are helping to reducemusculoskeletal problems of assembly and other routinetasks of manufacturing; perhaps they are initiating newrisks in their turn. There is no shortage of researchissues in the interaction between organisational changeand ergonomics.

Ford, H. 1922 My Life and Work Heinemann, New orkFuccini, J. and Suzy 1990 Wo rki ng for the Japanese. Insi de M azdas

American Auto Plant The Free Press, New YorkGarten, J. 1992 A cold peace Ameri ca, Japan, Germany and the

Struggle for Supremacy Times Books, New YorkGilbreth, F. and Gilbreth, L. 1924 Finding and classifying the

elements of work M anagement and Admi nistr ati on Vol. 2Griinning, T. 1995 Recent developments at Toyota Motor Co inSandberg, A. (ed.) Enriching Production Avebury, Aldershot

Hammer, M. and Champy, J. 1993 Reengineering the Corporat ion . AM anifesto for B usiness Revol uti on Harper Business, New ork

Helling, J. 1991 Viirldsmiistarna Sellin, Helsinghorg (in Swedish)Herzberg. E., Mausner, B. and Snyderman, B. 1959 The Motivation

to Work Wiley, New YorkHirzel, L. and Partner (Hrsg.) 1902 Speed-M anagement.

Geschwi ndigkeit zum Wett bewerbsvorteil muchen Gabler,Wiesbaden

Huczynski, A. 1993 M anagement Gurus Routledge, LondonImai, M. 1986 Kaizen Random House, New YorkJtirgens U., Malsch, T. and Dohse, K. M oderne Z eiten in der

Aut omobil fabrik . Strat egien der Produkti onsmodernisierung imLiinder- und Konzrrnvergleich Springer, Berlin

Kanter, R.M. 1989 When Gi unts Learn to Dance Simon & Schuster,

New York

References

ABB 1991a Customer focus. What i t means l o us ZiirichABB 1991b T 50: ABB Swedens Customer focus program Paper

presenting the Program internally and externally, VBsterisArgyris, C. 1964 Int egrating the Indi vi dual and the Organisati on

Wiley, New York

Keller, M. 1993 Coll ision. GM , Toyota, Volk swagen and the Race toOw n the 2Ist Century Currency. New York

Kelly, J. lY82 Sci enti fi c M anagement, Job Redesign and Wo rkPerformance Academic Press, London

Kiihler, C. and Schmierl, K. 1992 Technological innovation -organizational conservatism. 7 in Altmann, Norbert, KGhler andMeil (eds) Technology and Work in German I ndustry Routledge,London

Altmain, N. 199.5 Japanese work policy: opportunity, challenge orthreat? in Sandbere. .&. (ed.1 Part IV Beyond Lean Producti on:Enriching Production A&b&y, Aldershot

Argyris, C. 1964 Int egrati ng the Indi vi dual and the Organisati onWiley, New ork

Likert, R. 1961 New Patt erns of M anagement McGraw Hill,New ork

Littler, C. 1978 Understanding Taylorism in Brit ish Journal ofSociology Vol. 2

A Survey of Multinationals 1993 Everybodys favourite monstersreprint from The Economist 27 M arch

Atzler, E. 1927 Kt irper und Arbeit. Handbuch der Arbeitsphysiol ogieGeorg Thieme, Leipzig

Maslow, A. 19.54 Motivation and Personality Harper, New orkMaynard, H.B. and Stegemerten, G.J. 1935 M ethod, Ti me,

M easurement. M TM . McGraw-Hill, New YorkMayo, E. 1933 The Human Problems of an Industri al Ci vi li zati on

Harvard Business School, Boston

Berggren, C. 1994 Toward Normalization? Japanese competitiveposition and employment practices after the Heisei boom KTH,Stockholm

McGregor, D. 1960 The Human Side of Enterprise McGraw Hill.New York

Berggren, C. 1993 Mlstarprestat ioner eller mardriimsfabriker? Enutv%dering av Volvos smiskaliga fabriker i Uddevalla och KalmarRoyal Institu te of Technology, Stockholm (in Swedish)

Berggren, C. 1992 Alternatives to lean production ILR Press,Cornell University, Ithaca, New York

Berggren, C. and Bjiirkman, T. 1992 Contradictions in the teamconcept: auto transplants and labour relations in North America inTokunaga, Sbigeyosbi, Altmann, Norbert and Helmut , Demes (eds)New Impacts on Industrial Relati ons, I nternationalizati on andChanging Production Strategies Philip Franz von Siebold Stiftung,Deutsche Insti tut fiir Japanstudien. Iudicium, Miinchen

Berggren, C., Bjbrkman, T. and Hollander, E. 1991 Are theyunbeatable? Report from a field trip to study transplants, theJapanese owned auto plants in North America KTH Stockholm

Bjiirkman, T. 1991 Lean production pl svenska in Eklund/Westerberg (eds) Efter Taylor Produktivitetsdelegationen ochArbetslivsfonden, Stockholm

Peters, T. 1992 ABB Asea Brown Boveri: giant industrial company.small businesses, lean staff, big leverage through knowledgedissemination in Li berati on M anagement. Necessary Di sorganiza-ti on for t he Nanosecond Ni neti es Macmillan, New York

Roethlisberger, F.I. and Dickson, W.J. 193Y M unagement and theWorker Harvard University Press, Cambridge

Sandberg, A. 1995 The Uddevalla experience in perspectiveSandberg, A. (ed.) Enriching Production Avebury, Aldershot

Seitz, K. 1991 Di e jap a ch-amerik ani sche herausforderung.Deutschlands Hochtechnoloai e-Industri en ki imaf en urns ii berlebenBonn Aktuell, Miinchen

Stalk, G. and Hout, T. 1990 Competi ng Against Ti me. How Ti me-based Competi ti on is Reshaping Global M arkets The Fret Press.New ork

Bjbrkman, T. 1992 Den arbetsorganisatoriska fronten (Report inSwedish) Arbetslivsfoden, Stockholm

BjSrkman, T., Berggren, C., Friedrich, R. and Bengtsson, L. 1993The comparative international ABB-project, The meaning ofbeing local worlwide Progress report from the SwedishProject group, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm

Burckhardt, W. (Hrsg.) 1992 Schlank, intelligent and schnell. Sofiihren Sir Ihr Unternehmen zur Hochleistung Gabler, Wiesbaden

Carol& P. 1993 Big Blues. The Unmaki ng of IBM Crown, New orkChandler, A. 1990 Scale and Scope. The Dy nami cs of Ind ustri al

Capitalism Hayward Universi ty Press, CambridgeCusumano, M. 1985 The Japanese Auto mobi le Indust ry Harvard

University Press, Cambridge

Steger, U. 1992 Future M anagement. Europii ischr Unt ernehmen imglobalen W ett bew erb Fischer Wirtschaft, Frankfurt am Main

Steger, U. (Hrsg.) 1993 Der Ni edergand des US-M anagementParadigmas. Di e Europii ische Antw ort Econ. Diisseldorf

Stiizl, W. 1992 Lean Producti on in der Praxi s. Spit zenleistungendurch Gruppenarbeit Junfermann, Paderborn

Taylor, A. 1994 The new golden age of Autos Fortune 4 AprilTaylor, F.W. 1912 Principles of scientific management and

Testimony before the special house committee in Taylor, F.W.(ed.) Scienti fi c M anagement Harper & Brothers. New York (1947edition)

Taylor, F.W. 1903 Shop Ma nagement Harper & Brothers, New York(1947 edition)

Teruoka, I. 1991 Armes Jupan Rasch and Rahring, HamburgThorsrud, E. 1967 Socio technical Appr oach to Job Design and

Organisational Development Tavistock Institu te of HumanRelations, London

Deming, E. 1986 Out of the Crisis MIT Press, BostonEmery, F. 1978 The Emergence of a New Paradi gm o f Wo rk

Australian National University, CanberraFayol, H. 1949 General and Industri al M anagement (the French

original: Administration industrie lle et g&&ale from 1916)

Walker, C.R. and Guest, R.H. 1952 M an on the Assembly Li neHarvard University Press, Cambridge

Warnecke, H.-J. 1992 Di e Fraktal e Fabrik. Revol uti on derUnternehmenskultur Springer, Berlin

Womack, J., Daniel, T.I. and Roos, D. 1990 The M achine thatChanged the Wor ld Macmillan, New York

117