Human Relations Management Theory: Summary, Examples

Human Relations Theory says people work harder when they feel noticed, belong to a good team, and have a say in how their work gets done. It came out of the Hawthorne studies at Western Electric in the 1920s, and it was a direct challenge to the idea that workers are just parts in a machine who respond to pay and nothing else.

The key principles of Human Relations Theory:

1. Workers are motivated by social needs, like belonging and recognition, not just pay.
2. Informal groups and cliques set their own rules, and those rules can matter more than the official ones.
3. Supervisors who listen and involve workers get better results than authoritarian ones.
4. Paying attention to workers raises morale and output.
5. Workers who get a say in decisions are more committed to them.
6. The organization is responsible for working conditions, both physical and social, that make all of this possible.

Some of it shows its age, but the theory is still cited as the root of “startup” perks like on-site daycare and employee wellness programs.

A Brief History of Human Relations Theory

Human Relations management theory originated between 1924 and 1932 during experiments conducted at the Hawthorne plant of the Western Electric Company in Cicero, Illinois.¹

These studies were started by scholars from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), but Elton Mayo and Fritz J. Roethlisberger of the Harvard Business School became involved in 1927 and eventually popularized the subject.

Around that time, Western Electric had begun to look for ways to “inspire company loyalty, discourage high employee turnover and unionization, and present a good face to the public.”²

They attempted to accomplish these goals by increasing total compensation and improving employee well-being in the workplace. The latter of the two methods, increasing employee well-being in the workplace, is what prompted the Hawthorne Experiments and marked a shift in management theory from strictly scientific to multidisciplinary.

In fact, the Hawthorne studies were the first to focus on the work life of employees. From then on, companies would have an interest in the applications of behavioral, social, and medical sciences to management and productivity, and scholars (like George Lombard, Paul Lawrence, and others) began to develop the field of Organizational Behavior.

What Are the Key Principles of Human Relations?

During the Hawthorne Experiments, researchers discovered that employee motivation is influenced by many factors.

These factors are categorized in a number of ways, but the simplest for understanding Human Relations is to do it by actor.

Using this method, you can see that four primary categories of actors influence employee motivation:

By understanding each actor category’s role in the process, an organization can put in place working conditions that optimize employee motivation and, in turn, productivity.

In each of the following sections, I’ll go over what was discovered about the category and the Human Relations principles that came as a result.

Examples of Human Relations Theory

The original example: the relay assembly room. At Hawthorne, a small group of women assembling telephone relays kept getting more productive as researchers changed their breaks and hours, and output stayed high even when some of the changes were reversed. The researchers concluded that the group itself was the cause: the workers had become a close team, they were consulted about the changes, and they knew someone was paying attention.

What it looks like at work today:

• Regular 1:1s. A manager meets each person individually to talk about their work and any problems, not just to assign tasks.
• Engagement surveys. The company asks employees how they feel about their work and their manager, then acts on the answers.
• Recognition programs. Shout-outs, peer awards, and thank-yous that cost little but signal that someone noticed.
• Team-based goals. Targets are set for a group rather than an individual, so the team’s own norms push people to perform.
• Employee input on decisions. Workers are asked how a process should change before it changes.
• Benefits beyond pay. Parental leave, wellness programs, and development budgets, like the ones Google offers (more on that below).

Criticisms of Human Relations Theory

• The evidence is shaky. The Hawthorne studies used very small groups, changed several things at once, and later reanalyses of the original data have questioned the conclusions.
• It generalizes from small groups. Critics argued that what worked in a test room of five or six people couldn’t be assumed to work across a whole factory.
• It can be a nicer way to manage people into compliance. Some critics saw it as a pro-management tool for making workers content rather than giving them real power. Western Electric’s own goals included discouraging unionization.
• It underplays pay and structure. Being treated well doesn’t replace being paid fairly, and later research found no reliable link between workers’ social satisfaction and their output.

Schools of Thought Related to Human Relations Theory

The simplest way to determine which schools of thought have a relationship with Human Relations Theory is to examine the theory’s contemporaries.

In the next few sections, we’ll dig deep on the historical context of management theories that took root around Human Relations Theory:

Management Theory Prior to Human Relations

Just prior to Human Relations Theory, in the late 1800s to early 1900s, the management theories of Frederick Winslow Taylor, Max Weber, Henri Fayol, and others were most prominent. They all shared a similarity with Human Relations in that they were a departure from managerial norms in favor of improvement. That said, they did have their differences:

Taylor, who is known as the father of Scientific Management, used science to determine “the most effective and efficient way to accomplish a given task.” Instead of focusing on the performer of the task (i.e. the employee) as in Human Relations, this approach focused primarily on the task itself.

Weber, who is known as the father of Sociology, developed the Principles of the Ideal Bureaucracy, which provide justification of and rules for management decisions. This theory shared a focus on the individual with Human Relations, but approached things from a management and leadership perspective rather than a worker’s perspective.

Fayol, who is known for Fayolism or Administrative Theory, developed the 14 Principles of Management, which detail the responsibilities of managers. This theory considered human needs and relationships between parties in the workplace like Human Relations, but it focused primarily on administrative rather than psychological aspects.

Management Theories Developed Alongside Human Relations

As Human Relations Theory was gaining popularity, the management theories of Chester Barnard and Mary Parker Follett were gaining ground as well.

Barnard is best known for his work called “the zone of indifference.” This work examined what could make a worker disobey orders, thus focusing on the individual like Human Relations. Conversely, unlike Human Relations, his theory promoted logical rather than social or emotional influences on behavior.

Follett is best known for her work on conflict resolution. In particular, she showed that social concerns were important to employee relations and that integrative solutions were paramount. While her work differed by having a more Taylor-like foundation, her work also focused on social and emotional influences like Human Relations.

In What Ways Is Human Relations Theory Relevant Today?

Despite originating in the late 1920s, Human Relations principles are still very relevant.

First, since organizations are still made up of people, understanding how individual factors influence motivation is important. In addition to utilizing the psychology of motivation, caring for employees through internal and external benefits — like parental leave, onsite wellness and healthcare services, fitness centers, personal and professional development, and more at Google — is still effective at improving employee productivity (as many studies³ have shown).

Second, while the use of remote technology and groups continues to grow internationally⁴, producing in groups is still the norm in business. Thus, it is still true that organizations must foster positive group dynamics in order to produce teamwork and positive employee attitudes and behaviors.

Third, over time, it has become more and more apparent⁵ that effective leadership is critical to an organization’s success. This must be true given that managers across industries spend about 75% of their time in verbal interaction, most often with subordinates. Therefore, it is still important that an organization ensures managers and supervisors are equipped to support and motivate employees.

Finally, it is clear that organizations still must create working conditions that allow for/promote increased individual and group attitudes toward work. A great example of establishing positive individual and group working conditions is the work flexibility offered by Cisco. There, you can time swap 20% or 100% of your job on a temporary or permanent basis and work across various business groups within the company.

Through these and other types of initiatives, businesses are certain to have a more fulfilled workforce who will perform better and remain loyal to their company.

What came after Human Relations Theory

Human Relations opened the door to the behavioral school of management. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Douglas McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y both build on the idea that workers want more from work than a paycheck.

Keep reading:

• Elton Mayo’s management theories, including what each of the Hawthorne studies found
• Taylor’s Scientific Management, the approach Human Relations pushed back on
• Henri Fayol’s management theory and Max Weber’s bureaucracy
• All management theories, summarized