Taylorism is an ideological shift towards production efficiency methodology that breaks every action, work, task or job into small particles or segments in order to complete them easily and without stress (Crown Online 2015). Taylorism, as developed by Frederick Taylor and other scholars of the scientific management school, introduced and popularised the concept to the field of management in the early 20th century. Taylorism has six main objectives:

It ultimately introduces time and motion study (Gilbreth & Gilbreth 1973) for optimum job performance, cost accounting and tool and workstation design, and create baselines that are useful when evaluating future procedures, changes and resources (Business Directory 2015; Harper & Mousa 2015).

In every governmental agency and department difficult work is broken into smaller tasks to increase efficiency and productivity. Division of such tasks enables the agency or department to function effectively (see the principles of division of labour by Karl Marx) by organising individuals and groups of employees to accomplish a task that only one person would have not been able to complete (the reason for public administration is to roll a stone that neither could roll alone) (Mundel & Danner 1994; Ndaguba 2014:18). Work procedure can thus also be seen as a planned activity, involving mental and physical effort established as an official way of achieving an action or line of actions in a systematic way (Reid 2012). The main purpose for the utilisation of work procedure can be understood in these five cardinal points of view: it enables systematic completion of a task by:

All work is structured, tailored to a certain goal. Hence, the work structure of an organisation determines what the organisation intends to achieve and the means through which such is achieved. In other words, it determines the vision of the organisation and the mission through which such visions are achieved. Therefore, there is a need to take cognisance of the structure of an organisation, because the structure determines to some or a large extent the procedures in the fulfilment of organisational tasks. Therefore, according to Allen (n.d.), work structure is a step-by-step method that identifies dysfunctional aspects of workflow, procedures and systems, and realigns them to fit current realities to realise the goals of the organisation. The focal point of work structure is to improve both the technical side and compassionate side of the organisation (Prabhu 2010). However, Connor (n.d.) argues that work structure must not be merely limited to mapping out an organisation’s total structure. Like Prabhu (2010), Connor argues that other aspects, such as functions, processes and strategies, as well as how these strategies, functions and processes are coordinated and harmonised, are necessary to achieve the overall objective of the organisation (Connor n.d.:1).

Work structure or design in the mechanistic realm is characterised by job functions which are ‘broken-down into specialist tasks that were “precisely defined”’ (Burns 1963:103; Connor n.d.:5). This model adopts the form of ‘rigidity’ because of the relatively stable business environment conditions in which it functions (Shafritz et al. 2011). Its major attributes include high rigidity, high levels of formalisation, low adaptive capabilities, high centralisation, high stratification, low complexity, high productivity and efficiency and low job satisfaction (Lunenburg 2012:4). See Figure 1 for more clarification of work procedure design.

Thus, the conditions for organisational success in the mechanistic approach include:

These conditions were first set out in The principles of scientific management by Frederick Taylor in 1911, but still remain relevant.

In 1911 Taylor published his book on The principles of scientific management, in which he spelt out the process of scientifically studying work to improve workers’ efficiency (Shafritz et al. 2015:68). The fundamental principle underlying Taylor’s theory shaped the notion of organisational performance, organisational compliance and efficiency theory in the 20th century and beyond. Taylor’s notion of work dealt significantly with, ‘… task specialization, assembly line production practices, job analysis, work design, incentive schemes, person-job fit, and production quotas and control’ (Giannantonio & Hurley-Hanson 2011:7; Rahman 2012:33). Taylor’s argument was that work procedures should be characterised by job functions, which are ‘broken-down into specialist tasks that were “precisely defined”’ (Ndaguba 2014). There was a clear separation from employee to final completion of a product in that every employee was meant to focus on a little aspect of the production line (Eyre 2015), thereby gaining expertise as a result of routinisation of functions and tasks. Of note was that employees’ performance was measured based on the number of tasks successfully completed (this notion has some similarities with the balance scorecard in monitoring and evaluation). However, employees completed their tasks with little or no knowledge as to the overall output of the product (Connor n.d.:5; Ndaguba 2014). This was one of the pitfalls of Taylorism, along with the notion that it sees employees as a cog in the wheel. However, one of the essential features of Taylorism is the close supervision of junior employees in task completion and, more so, the idea that only those who understand certain functions are meant to occupy such positions (square peg in square hole) (Burns 1963:103).

Taylorism has four underpinning principles, namely: to find the one ‘best way’ to perform each task, to carefully match each worker to each task, to closely supervise workers, and use reward and punishment as motivators, and finally to manage, plan and control (Walonick 1993).

These principles were seen in the early 20th century as being the only way through which employee performance could be measured accurately and the means through which productivity and efficiency could be improved. Although the notion of Taylorism was promulgated by an engineer, a core scientist, its ideas still remain relevant. Considering the nature of transdisciplinary research in social sciences and public administration, it would be misleading for one to disassociate Taylorism from understanding efficiency in the municipal system.

Research design is the master plan or the logic of any inquiry. It gives an understanding of how research is conducted by demonstrating the structure and research strategy. This study employs a quantitative method in collecting its data for the work procedure design in municipal organisation. The questionnaire was sampled amongst junior workers at the district municipality and its surrounding five local municipalities.

The most popular classification of research methods is qualitative and quantitative. At one level, qualitative and quantitative may refer to distinctions between the nature of knowledge and the researcher’s world view or the ultimate aim of the research. On another level, the terms refer to the way in which data are collected and analysed, and the type of generalisations and representations derived from such data (Brysman & Burgess 1999:45). This study adopts a quantitative technique for gathering data. It uses a survey questionnaire while using cross-tabulation and regression to determine the strength of the relationship between variables.

This article used a descriptive research design. A quantitative empirical research approach was adopted, distributing self-administered questionnaires with the assistance of 12 students in all 5 local municipalities (King Sabata Dalindyebo, Nyandeni, Ngquza Hill, Port St John’s and Mhlontlo local municipality) and the district municipalities in 2014. Over 1200 questionnaires were distributed and 754 were returned. From this 754, 593 were correctly completed by junior employees. In selecting the respondents for this study, the purposive sampling method was utilised for the simple fact that we needed junior employees.

In this article, the Likert scale developed by Rensis Likert (1932) was favoured as the instrument for data collection. This instrument gives a wide range of answers to the respondent, in other to have a fair view as to how work is carried out in the municipality. The Likert scale gives range of choices of level of agreement with each option: ‘every time’ (100%), ‘frequently’ (70% – 90%), ‘sometimes’ (50% – 60%), ‘rarely’(10% – 30%) and ‘never’. There are no right or wrong answers, since the idea is to procure the perceptions of the employees.

The questionnaires for the study were self-administered; guidance was given by the researcher where necessary. Interpretation was also facilitated by the researchers who are native speakers of isiXhosa. The study used an identical and standardised questionnaire for every respondent. The Likert scale questionnaire type was used to elicit a broad spectrum of perspectives of junior employees in these municipalities.

There are two major sources of data collection techniques: primary and secondary data collection techniques. While primary data collection was done through surveys, secondary data were gathered using the desktop approach.

This article adopted the primary technique of data collection on the basis that the topic is new to the municipality and to avoid speculations or assumptions about the state of affairs in the municipalities with regard to work procedure and work procedure design, and the usability of these procedures in the municipalities. Therefore, the best way forward to ascertain this was to use a survey questionnaire, and thereafter benchmark work procedure in the municipality by testing awareness, utilisation, attitude, type and design of work procedure in the municipalities.

Sampling simply means selecting participants who best yield knowledge without bias. Having that in mind, sampling refers to the statistical process of selecting and studying the characteristics of a relatively smaller number of items from a relatively larger population of such items in order to make statistical inference about the characteristics of the entire population. Thus, empirical (quantitative) analyses tend to establish results that can be generalised to a larger set beyond the sample studied. The population of a study can either be homogeneous (if all members are identical, e.g. line management at Port St. Johns) or heterogeneous (if all members of the population are different from one another, e.g. assistant managers, managers, supervisors and other top officials). The essence of sampling is to get a sample (a subset of the population).

There are two broad types of sampling design open to scholars in social sciences: non-probability sampling techniques and probability sampling techniques. For this study the non-probability technique is favoured, because senior managers have no chance of being selected in this study.

Non-probability sampling is a sampling technique which in the samples are gathered in a process that does not give all the individuals in the population equal chances of being selected (Crossman n.d.).

It is a sampling technique that is used to select participants premised on their knowledge of the study. To derive a sample, the judgmental or purposive sampling technique was utilised to avoid the inclusion of senior management in the research. Judgmental sampling refers to techniques used by the researcher to choose participants for research with the aim of achieving the research objectives.

Analysis for this study was carried out using R and triangulation of existing literature and the data set generated.

A referral kind of questioning was used, in which we asked similar questions in different ways. That protects the researcher, the research team, the research respondent and the environment from misconduct. Thereafter, a letter from the research institution through the principal investigator was sent to the gatekeeper informing the municipality of the period for the study. The major information that was addressed in the letter included:

A consent form stipulating the rights and privileges of the respondents was circulated to all participants; it was also explained in isiXhosa for non-English speaking employees.

One of the inadequacies of this study is that it did not take cognisance of all the negatives of Taylorism. We have used its positives in this argument because we strongly believe that Taylorism is an option for improving the efficiency of junior workers in municipalities in the area under review. The study is limited to junior workers in municipalities, so responses from management were not solicited. Nonetheless, this article nourishes the idea that certain approaches in Taylorism are vital in achieving organisational improvement, efficiency and productivity. This was the premise for using Taylorism to ensure the adoption and use of work procedures in municipalities in the Eastern Cape.

The article demonstrated that:

Cross-referencing the four principles of Taylorism against the findings of the article shows that there exists a way of or pattern for doing things in the public service in South Africa, though it is not necessarily the one best way.

The study suggests that management of these municipalities must develop the ‘one best way’, which should be revisited frequently to ensure that functions are tied to the objectives of the municipality.

The study suggests that municipalities with large numbers of staff in the lower echelon, performing routine functions, requiring low complexity and technicality in completing a tasks or functions in the municipality, could find certain elements and tenets of Taylorism useful in improving the performance of these workers.

Finally, for employees in the lower echelon in municipalities in the Eastern Cape to work in concert with the vision of the municipality, tasks need to be broken down and precisely defined. This will enable managers to exact accountability from junior employees of these municipalities. The notion of good governance is premised in relation to compliance to standard, openness, effective communication on decisions reached, information on service delivery, transparency in government business and accountability in the appropriation of government properties; these are at the centre of the ideal of Taylorism. Therefore, a skillful application of the tenets of Taylorism would result in an improved performance that reduces organisational conflict, government wastage, improper cost and chaos, and engender task completion that invariably improves the outcomes and performance of municipalities in delivering services to locals on the one hand and achieving the AGSA outcomes on the other hand.