The essay will begin with a short biography of Lillian Gilbreth. We will then explore how various social, economic, political, and intellectual factors that existed during her lifetime affected both her and the advancement of her theories. However, it is important to acknowledge that her accomplishments would not have been possible without the assistance and support of her husband, Frank Gilbreth, who is recognized as the founder of motion study. Consequently, while examining Lillian Gilbreth’s contribution to the field of management, we will also touch upon Frank Gilbreth and recognize the significant role he played in Lillian’s life.
We will discuss the relevance of the theories to present-day managers after examining them. Lillian Gilbreth, known as a trailblazing woman in modern industrial management (Proffitt 1999), was an early 20th-century theorist who highlighted the significance of incorporating psychology into scientific management (Kelly & Kelly 1990). Born as Lillian Evelyn Moller on May 24th, 1879 in Oakland, California, she was the eldest of nine children of William and Annie Delger Moller (Proffitt 1999).
In 1904, Lillian married Frank Gilbreth and had twelve children, one of whom died from diphtheria at the age of six (Burns 1978; Wren & Bedeian 2009). With Frank’s support, Lillian successfully published The Psychology of Management in 1914, which is one of the earliest theses that contributed to understanding the human factor in the industry (Wren & Bedeian 2009). In 1915, she became the first woman to receive a doctorate in psychology, earning a PhD from Brown University (Yost, cited in Miller & Lemons 1998).
The Gilbreths were well-known for their partnership in scientific management (Wren & Bedeian 2009). After Frank’s death in 1924, Lillian Gilbreth took on the responsibility of providing for her children, marking the beginning of her independence as a working mother and establishing her own reputation (Browne 2000). She achieved another milestone in 1926 by becoming the first female member of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (Browne 2000). In 1935, she joined Purdue as a Professor of Management and became the first female professor in the engineering school (Wren & Bedeian 2009).
Lillian Gilbreth, who died in 1972 at the age of 92, left behind a lasting impact on productivity improvements and workplace psychology (Kelly & Kelly 1990). Her extensive achievements include receiving twenty-two doctorates, numerous Honorary Memberships in professional societies, and various medals and awards for her groundbreaking contributions (Burns 1978, Browne 2000). The collaboration between Lillian and Frank in their marriage led to the development of innovative ideas concerning worker efficiency and productivity (Browne 2000).
Frank, a well-known pioneer in scientific management, was already renowned for his work on motion studies. Lillian, with her expertise in workplace psychology, later contributed to the development of his work (Miller & Lemons 1998; Wren & Bedeian 2009). Although she was raised in a traditional family that believed women should focus on domestic responsibilities rather than seeking attention, Lillian believed it was appropriate to support her husband’s work (Burns 1978; Miller & Lemons 1998).
By collaborating, the Gilbreths expanded motion studies to include fatigue studies and vocational rehabilitation. They authored numerous articles and books, and even taught Scientific Management in their Summer Schools of Scientific Management, thereby connecting academic theories with practical applications for industrial issues. They also served as consultants, advocating the incorporation of psychological principles and human factors in scientific management.
Frederick Taylor had a significant influence on the Gilbreths, particularly Frank. Frank’s early research on motion study aligned with Frederick Taylor’s time study, as they both aimed to eliminate unnecessary movements to reduce fatigue and enhance productivity (Wren & Bedeian, 2009). Therefore, when Frank and Taylor met in 1907, they quickly formed a strong bond and became close friends. Subsequently, Frank became a strong supporter of Taylorism (Wren & Bedeian, 2009).
In 1975, Lillian voiced her opinion that Taylor’s work needed to incorporate more psychological principles and consideration for the human element (Schroyer 1975). When Lillian became Frank’s partner in both marriage and work, they integrated human factors into the development of their scientific management theories, resulting in a more holistic approach (Schroyer 1975; Burns 1978). Over time, their differing management techniques caused a rift in the Gilbreth-Taylor working relationship (Schroyer 1975; Wren & Bedeian 2009). Years after Taylor’s death, in 1920, the Gilbreths published “An indictment of the Stop Watch Time Study” to address the shortcomings of stop watch time studies but refrained from criticizing Taylor as an early founder of scientific management (Schroyer, 1975). During this period, the economy was experiencing the Second Industrial Revolution, characterized by technological and economic advancements through new inventions (Stearns 1998). One of the essential inventions during this era was film, which played a significant role in the Gilbreths’ Motion Study (Wren & Bedeian 2009).
Using a movie camera, the ability to capture every movement of a job on film allowed Frank to repeatedly analyze a large number of motions (Wren & Bedeian 2009). The utilization of small lights and time-lapse photography in motion study also resulted in the development of the “chronocyclegraph” method for recording movement (Wren & Bedeian 2009). Despite the Industrial Revolution leading to more job opportunities, working conditions were often harsh and required long hours of labor (Stearns 1998).
Management treated their workers like machines, expecting them to work non-stop all day without any concern for the workers’ health (Wren & Bedeian 2009). As a result, workers easily became fatigued due to overwork. The Gilbreths became interested in using motion studies to investigate fatigue because Frank believed that every motion caused fatigue, and therefore eliminating motions would reduce fatigue (Wren & Bedeian 2009). Through extensive research, the Gilbreths discovered that fatigue could be reduced by incorporating proper rest breaks and improving the working environment (Wren & Bedeian 2009).
This greatly impacted the advancement of ergonomics, which focuses on how to design the job, equipment, and workplace to minimize stress on the human body (Scott & Spencer 1998; Wren & Bedeian 2009). Consequently, modern managers must recognize that unlike machines, people can become fatigued. Therefore, they need to acknowledge the significance of psychology in maintaining workplace safety and protecting the organization’s most valuable assets – its employees (Scott & Spencer 1998).
For instance, studies on fatigue continue to be utilized in order to determine the factors that contribute to fatigue in working environments that involve long hours of shift work, such as fire-fighters and bus drivers (Takeyama et al. 2005; Biggs, Dingsdag & Stenson 2009). Additionally, the Gilbreths were driven to expand motion studies to include vocational rehabilitation due to changing economic, political, and social factors. During World War I, millions of soldiers in both Europe and America were experiencing physical disabilities (McFarland 1944; Gotcher 1992).
Despite industrial accidents being the primary cause of physical disabilities in workers, World War I exacerbated the issue in terms of both quantity and urgency (McFarland 1944, Burns 1978). Frank expressed great distress at the extensive number of wounded soldiers who struggled to find employment post-war (Gilbreth & Gilbreth, cited in Gotcher 1992, p. 6). Furthermore, the economy at that time was unable to sufficiently support the millions of injured soldiers (Gotcher 1992).
The Gilbreths saw it as a great tragedy to disregard the remnants of a person’s life because of injuries sustained while fulfilling their duty to their country (Gotcher 1992). Afterwards, Frank experienced a severe bout of rheumatism, which resulted in him being paralyzed from the neck down (Gotcher 1992). Edna Yost (quoted in Gotcher 1992) observed that this caused the Gilbreths to empathize with how disabled soldiers must have felt – mentally vibrant but physically unable to be productive.
The Gilbreths believed that motion study could simplify work for disabled workers, making it possible for them to perform tasks normally done by able-bodied individuals. Their efforts in vocational rehabilitation have been successful and are still being used today. Vocational rehabilitation programs continue to evolve and are offered in several countries including the US, Australia, and Canada.
The Nebraska Vocational Rehabilitation program has been assisting individuals with disabilities in entering the workforce since 1921. A team of experts offers direct employment services for both employers and individuals with disabilities (Nebraska Department of Education, 1921). Additionally, there are other resources available such as Vocational Rehabilitation Disability Insurance from Social Security, federal grants, and government loans to support individuals with disabilities (Federal Grants Wire, 2009).
Companies in the food industry are increasingly adopting non-traditional hiring practices. They believe that hiring employees with disabilities will actually benefit the company rather than hinder its operations (Nation’s Restaurant News, March 20, 2006, p. 25). Following Frank’s passing, Lillian carried on his work and made efforts to further vocational rehabilitation to assist disabled individuals in accomplishing their job tasks efficiently while maintaining life activities (Burns, 1978; Gotcher, 1992).
Drawing on her experiences as both a mother and an engineer, she applied psychological principles to the field of home economics. This involved using scientific management to address the inefficiencies of household chores (Miller & Lemons 1998; Gotcher 1992). In addition, she collaborated with General Electric and other companies as a consultant, aiming to enhance the design of kitchens and household appliances (Gilbreths, as cited in Gotcher 1992, p. 10). Moreover, she developed innovative techniques to assist disabled women in completing everyday tasks within their homes. This extended the study of motion to the realm of home economics (Burns, 1978; Gotcher 1992; Miller & Lemons 1998).
Re-engineering housewives’ motions and mentalities proved difficult due to a social stigma that placed the complete responsibility for housework on women (Graham 1990). Utility companies have been actively promoting new appliances, like refrigerators, since the early 1920s. They achieved this by establishing home service departments and building demonstration kitchens at their offices, where women paid their monthly utility bills. The aim was to stimulate consumer demand and encourage a fair distribution of housework (Graham 1990). Even today, demonstrations are still conducted at leading supermarkets and appliance stores.
These demonstrations continue to have the same purpose as previously mentioned, which is to stimulate demand and address women’s uncertainty about their changing circumstances. In summary, Lillian Gilbreth made significant contributions to management, industrial design, time and motion studies, humanizing management principles, and integrating science and management principles. As mentioned above, many of her theories are still being applied today.
She is undoubtedly regarded as one of the pioneers of contemporary industrial management. Her primary aim was to enhance workers’ efficiency and ease their workload. Most importantly, she was a dedicated scientist who aimed to educate managers about the need to constantly scrutinize every aspect of the workplace and consistently embrace improvements. Her contributions further elevated the value of tending to workers’ needs and emphasized that by taking care of individuals, the overall purpose would be better fulfilled.
