Management and Principles of Scientific Management in Libraries and Information Centres

1. Concept of Management

Management is the systematic process through which organisational objectives are achieved by planning work, organising resources, directing people, coordinating activities and controlling performance. Every organisation has limited human, financial, physical and technological resources; management seeks to combine and use these resources effectively. Management is therefore concerned not merely with giving instructions to employees. It involves deciding what is to be achieved, determining how work should be organised, assigning responsibilities, providing the necessary resources, guiding employees and evaluating whether the desired results have been obtained.
In libraries and information centres, management is required because the organisation must coordinate collections, staff, finance, buildings, technologies, information systems and services in order to satisfy users' information needs. A university library, for example, has to manage activities ranging from acquisition and technical processing to circulation, reference services, electronic resources and digital repositories.
Two related ideas are important in understanding management:
Efficiency refers to performing work with minimum unnecessary expenditure of time, effort and resources.
Effectiveness refers to achieving the intended objectives. A library may process books very quickly and therefore appear efficient, but if the records contain errors or the books cannot be discovered by users, the operation is not fully effective.
Good management therefore requires both efficiency and effectiveness.

2. Meaning and Development of Scientific Management

Scientific management is a classical approach to management that applies systematic observation, measurement, analysis, standardisation and training to the performance of work. Its central purpose is to replace work based mainly on habit, personal preference or unexamined tradition with methods developed through systematic study.
Scientific management is primarily associated with Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856–1915). Taylor developed his ideas through his experience in industrial organisations and presented their mature form in The Principles of Scientific Management, published in 1911.
Taylor argued that inefficiency often resulted when workers relied on individual methods and management lacked systematic knowledge about how work should be performed. He proposed that management should study work scientifically, determine appropriate methods, select and train workers systematically, and cooperate with them in carrying out the work.
Scientific management should therefore not be understood simply as “making employees work faster.” Its basic idea is that work should be studied, planned, organised and improved systematically rather than being left entirely to tradition or individual judgement.
Taylor viewed the interests of management and workers as potentially compatible rather than necessarily opposed. He argued that systematic improvement in productivity could support greater prosperity for both the organisation and its employees. In his formulation, scientific management required management itself to assume substantial responsibility for studying and planning work rather than placing the entire burden of determining methods on individual workers.

3. Main Characteristics and Objectives of Scientific Management

Scientific management has several important characteristics.

• Scientific study of work: Work is analysed systematically to determine efficient methods rather than continuing a procedure simply because it has traditionally been followed.
• Standardisation: Once an effective method has been identified, appropriate procedures, tools, forms, conditions and work methods are standardised to reduce unnecessary variation.
• Specialisation: Duties are divided according to the nature of work and the competence required to perform them.
• Scientific selection and training: Employees should be selected for work suited to their abilities and then provided with systematic training.
• Planning before execution: Management assumes responsibility for analysing and planning work rather than expecting each employee to develop an individual method independently.
• Measurement: Time, workload, cost, output and other relevant factors are measured so that decisions can be based on evidence.
• Cooperation between management and employees: Scientific management requires managers and workers to cooperate in applying improved methods.
• Continuous search for improvement: An established procedure should not be regarded as permanently ideal. It should be reviewed when evidence shows that a better method is possible.

The major objective of scientific management is therefore to achieve greater efficiency and productivity through systematic study and organisation of work. In a service organisation such as a library, this objective must be interpreted carefully: efficiency should support service quality rather than replace it.

4. Taylor's Fundamental Principles of Scientific Management

Taylor described four fundamental responsibilities that distinguish scientific management from the older “rule-of-thumb” approach. These four principles constitute the most authoritative formulation of his theory.

• Develop a science for each element of work: Management should systematically study each significant task and determine an appropriate method for carrying it out instead of allowing work to depend entirely on traditional or individually developed methods. The word science in this context does not mean laboratory science. It means systematic observation, analysis, comparison and evidence-based determination of methods. For example, suppose documents pass through six different desks before being processed. Scientific study may show that two of the steps duplicate one another. The process can then be redesigned on the basis of evidence rather than habit.
• Scientifically select, train and develop workers: Employees should not merely be assigned randomly to tasks and expected to teach themselves. Management should determine the knowledge and skills required for particular work, select suitable individuals, and provide systematic training. A person with appropriate knowledge of metadata standards, for example, may be better suited to digital-resource description than an employee who has never received relevant training. The principle therefore connects employee competence with job requirements.
• Ensure cooperation between management and workers: Developing a scientifically designed procedure is not enough. Management and employees must cooperate so that the procedure is understood and correctly implemented. Employees also possess practical knowledge about how work actually occurs. Cooperation is therefore important in identifying difficulties and improving processes.
• Divide work and responsibility appropriately between management and workers: Taylor argued that management should assume responsibility for planning, studying and designing work, while workers should carry out the operational tasks for which they have been prepared. Responsibility should therefore not be placed almost entirely on the individual worker.

In a contemporary organisation this principle should not be interpreted as excluding employees from planning. Rather, its lasting managerial significance lies in recognising that management itself is responsible for creating suitable systems, procedures, training and working conditions rather than blaming workers for every operational failure. Taylor's four principles can be summarised as follows:
Taylor also summarised the philosophy of scientific management through five memorable ideas: science rather than rule of thumb; harmony rather than discord; cooperation rather than individualism; maximum rather than deliberately restricted output; and development of each worker toward high efficiency and prosperity. These are best understood as a summary of the overall philosophy, not as a separate set of principles competing with the four fundamental principles.

5. Major Techniques Associated with Scientific Management

Taylor's principles were accompanied by techniques for analysing and organising work. Not every technique has equal relevance to contemporary libraries, but several remain important for understanding the theory.

• Time study: Time study involves systematically observing how long a defined activity requires under specified conditions. The objective is not merely to make employees work faster; it is to understand workload, identify delays and develop realistic expectations regarding task completion. For example, a library might measure the average time between receipt of a newly purchased book and its availability on the shelf. If most of the elapsed time consists of books waiting between sections rather than being actively processed, management has identified a workflow problem.
• Method analysis: Each task is examined to identify unnecessary steps, duplication, repeated handling or inefficient sequencing. The aim is to develop a more rational method of performing the work.A circulation process requiring users to enter the same information on several forms, for instance, can be examined and simplified.
• Motion study: Motion study analyses the physical movements required to perform a task and seeks to eliminate unnecessary movement. Historically, motion study is particularly associated with Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, while Taylor is more closely associated with time study. The techniques were subsequently combined in the broader tradition of time-and-motion study. In libraries, physical layout can affect movement. Frequently used equipment, book trucks, workstations and supplies can be positioned to reduce unnecessary movement and handling.
• Standardisation: Standardisation means establishing agreed methods, procedures, tools or specifications so that similar work is performed consistently. In scientific management, standards provide a basis for training, coordination, measurement and comparison. Standardisation has long been discussed specifically in librarianship. Duyvis observed that standardisation could facilitate inspection, control and training, but also warned that it should remain dynamic rather than becoming an end in itself.
• Task planning and written instructions: Taylor placed considerable emphasis on planning work in advance and communicating clearly what had to be done. Modern equivalents include written procedures, workflow documentation, checklists and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
• Functional specialisation: Taylor's concept of functional foremanship assigned different supervisory functions to specialists rather than expecting one supervisor to possess every type of expertise. The detailed industrial arrangement is rarely reproduced in libraries, but the broader idea of assigning specialised responsibilities remains relevant.
• Incentive systems: Taylor developed differential piece-rate systems that linked industrial wages with output. Such incentive systems were important historically but have limited direct applicability to professional library work, where quality, intellectual judgement, collaboration and public-service responsibilities cannot normally be represented by simple production counts.

6. Scientific Management in Libraries and Information Centres

Scientific management was developed in an industrial environment, but its methods influenced the administration of libraries during the twentieth century. A complete issue of Library Trends in 1954 was devoted to Scientific Management in Libraries, showing that librarians had been examining the applicability of workflow analysis, standardisation, cost studies and related techniques to library operations. Kipp reported that scientific-management practices in research libraries had developed unevenly but had nevertheless become part of library administrative thinking. Later historical research has similarly documented the use of cost analysis, standardisation, timing and work measurement in libraries.
The relevance of scientific management to a library can be understood through a simple principle:
Library work should be organised through systematic analysis rather than unnecessary repetition, unclear responsibility or inefficient tradition.
Scientific management can therefore be useful where library operations contain clearly identifiable and repeated processes. Examples include acquisition, accessioning, physical processing, circulation, shelving, stock verification, serial control, digitisation and routine data processing.
It is much less suitable when professional work depends heavily on interpretation, creativity, communication or individual user circumstances. Reference interviewing and research consultation, for example, cannot be adequately judged merely by counting how many enquiries are answered per hour.

7. Application of Taylor's Principles to Library Operations

The four fundamental principles can be applied to libraries without treating the library as an industrial factory.

• Acquisition work: The acquisition process can be analysed from recommendation and bibliographic verification through ordering, receipt, invoice checking and accessioning. Duplicate checking or unnecessary movement of files between desks can be identified and removed.
• Technical processing: Classification, cataloguing, metadata creation, labelling and physical processing involve recurring activities. Standard procedures can improve consistency and reduce avoidable rework. Standardisation in librarianship has historically included document formats, bibliographic description, arrangement, filing and other forms of information organisation.
• Circulation: Transaction data can be studied to understand peak hours, waiting times, staffing requirements and causes of delay. Barcode, RFID and self-service technologies can reduce routine handling when they are appropriately planned and supported.
• Shelving and collection maintenance: The sequence and routing of shelving work can be examined to minimise unnecessary movement. Shelf-reading schedules can also be organised systematically.
• Digitisation projects: A digitisation workflow may include selection, scanning, image processing, Optical Character Recognition where appropriate, metadata creation, quality checking and uploading. Defining the sequence and responsibility for each stage reduces uncertainty and duplication.
• Institutional repositories: Deposit checking, metadata creation, copyright verification, file preparation, quality control and publication can be represented as a standard workflow. Delays can then be traced to particular stages.
• Electronic-resource management: Activities such as trial evaluation, licensing, access configuration, authentication, usage monitoring and renewal can be documented and assigned clearly.
• Staff selection and development: The principle of matching people to work supports competency-based assignment. Employees responsible for specialised metadata, information technology or electronic-resource management should receive suitable professional training rather than being expected to learn complex tasks entirely through trial and error.

8. Example: Scientific Management of Book Processing

Consider the processing of newly acquired books:
Receipt → Verification → Accessioning → Classification → Cataloguing → Labelling → Shelving
A scientific-management approach would examine this workflow systematically.
First, management identifies every activity and the person or section responsible for it. Second, it observes where books spend time actively being processed and where they merely wait. Third, unnecessary duplication is identified. Fourth, appropriate methods and forms are standardised. Fifth, staff are trained in those methods. Finally, processing time, accuracy and backlog are monitored.
Suppose a study shows that a book requires only two hours of actual professional work but remains in the processing chain for fifteen days because it waits several days between sections. The major problem is therefore not that staff work too slowly; the problem is the design of the workflow.
This illustrates an important lesson of scientific management: efficiency should be improved by examining the system of work, not merely by increasing pressure on individual employees.

9. Importance and Advantages in Libraries

When appropriately applied, principles of scientific management can offer several benefits to libraries and information centres.

• Improved workflow: Systematic examination can reveal duplicate activities, unnecessary movement and avoidable waiting.
• Better use of staff time: Clearly assigned duties help prevent both duplication and neglect of responsibilities.
• Consistency of routine work: Standard procedures can improve uniformity in repeated operations.
• Improved training: New employees can learn documented procedures more easily than undocumented practices that differ from person to person.
• Evidence-based decisions: Workload, transaction and processing data provide a more objective basis for staffing and workflow decisions.
• Reduced backlogs and delays: Identifying bottlenecks can improve the movement of materials and information through different sections.
• Improved coordination: A clearly defined workflow helps employees understand how their activities connect with the work of other sections.
• Better resource utilisation: Efficient methods can reduce unnecessary use of time, materials, equipment and funds.
• Basis for automation: Before automating a process, it is useful to understand and simplify it. Otherwise, technology may merely automate an inefficient procedure.

These benefits explain why concepts such as work measurement, workflow analysis and standardisation became significant topics in library-management literature. Historical research also shows, however, that scientific management in libraries should not be treated merely as a set of mechanical productivity techniques.

10. Limitations and Critical Evaluation

Scientific management made an important contribution by showing that work processes could be systematically studied. Its application to libraries, however, has clear limitations.

• Library work is not identical to factory production: Many library activities involve intellectual judgement, interpretation, communication and professional responsibility. The quality of a complex catalogue record or research consultation cannot be assessed simply by measuring speed.
• Excessive emphasis on quantity can reduce quality: If employees are assessed only according to the number of items processed, they may have an incentive to sacrifice accuracy or service quality. For example, “reference questions answered per hour” is a poor measure if one enquiry requires twenty minutes of expert research while another requires only a few seconds.
• Human motivation is complex: Employees are influenced by professional identity, recognition, participation, autonomy, working relationships and opportunities for development, not only by financial incentives or production targets.
• Over-standardisation may create rigidity: Standards are useful when they simplify work and improve consistency. They become problematic when they prevent necessary professional judgement or adaptation. Duyvis specifically cautioned that standardisation can become counterproductive if it freezes existing practices or suppresses initiative.
• Not every activity can be meaningfully timed: Routine physical or transactional tasks are easier to measure than intellectual services such as collection evaluation, subject analysis or research assistance.
• Conditions vary between libraries: Processing time or staffing ratios from one institution cannot automatically be treated as the correct standard for another. Collections, technologies, users, service expectations and institutional environments differ.
• Separation of planning from doing has limits: Modern professional management recognises that employees who perform work often possess valuable practical knowledge and should participate in process improvement.

Kont's historical study of scientific management in libraries highlights this central limitation: librarians and professional employees cannot appropriately be treated as machines expected to produce uniform outputs.

11. References

• Duyvis, F. D. (1954). Standardization as a tool of scientific management. Library Trends, 2(3), 410–427. Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. https://hdl.handle.net/2142/5530 IDEALS
• Kipp, L. J. (1954). Scientific management in research libraries. Library Trends, 2(3), 390–400. Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/items/5497 ScienceDirect
• Kont, K.-R. (2013). Cost accounting and scientific management in libraries: A historical overview. Journal of Management History, 19(2), 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1108/17511341311307390 Emerald Publishing
• Shaw, R. R. (Ed.). (1954). Scientific management in libraries. Library Trends, 2(3). Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. https://hdl.handle.net/2142/5537 IDEALS
• Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. Harper & Brothers. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Principles_of_Scientific_Management.html?id=5ek4cYPdndYC Google Books