The Hawthorne legacy

Abstract

Purpose This paper seeks to analyze the contribution that the Hawthorne studies made to the discipline of management. The recent scholarly trend has been to attack the Hawthorne studies on the grounds of methodology and originality. However, the only way to accurately view the Hawthorne studies is to recreate the intellectual environment in which the studies were conducted. Why did this version of human relations rather than Dennison's or Williams's emerge as the scholarly contribution? Design/methodology/approach Both primary and secondary sources were utilized in the research. The focus was from the time period of 1930 to 1958. More contemporary work was considered as well. Findings Contemporary scholars viewed Hawthorne as being more thorough and complete than previous work. They also viewed the study as a contribution in light of some methodological issues and political biases. Practical implications Performing temporal analysis allows the perceived strengths and weaknesses of scholarly works to become more apparent. Originality/value Previous accounts of the Hawthorne studies have mostly studied their impact on practitioners. This study examines the impact on scholars.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 52 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.