Taylor’s scientific management

A is correct because motion study helps develop an efficient method by removing unnecessary movements. Time study can then set a standard time for that method, while fatigue study checks whether the pace and work conditions are sustainable.

A is correct because high output alone does not show whether production was cost-efficient. Inaccurate time or cost records can distort the calculation of the cost of producing that output.

A is correct because Taylor’s principle of cooperation requires management and workers to work together rather than rely on misunderstanding or conflict. Workers need clear instructions about standards to understand and follow them.

A is correct because these functional foremen have different duties: the repair boss keeps machinery and equipment in working order, while the inspector checks whether the output meets quality requirements.

A is correct because scientific management relies on systematic observation, measurement, and testing—not blind copying. A method should be checked against the actual conditions in which it will be used.

A is correct because rejected units may or may not count toward the paid quantity, depending on the stated policy. The basis—gross output or accepted output—must be clear to calculate wages consistently.

A is correct because simplification reduces unnecessary varieties of products or components. If frequent changes between variants are causing repeated setups, reducing that variety may lower setup effort and cost.

Accepted output is 107 − 2 = 105 units, which meets the 105-unit threshold for the high rate. Wage = 105 × ₹13 = ₹1,365.

A is correct because mental revolution calls for a change in the attitudes of both management and workers, encouraging mutual trust and recognition of shared interests. Mere absence of conflict does not ensure that workers accept the goals as cooperative ones.

A is correct because an unsuitable route can create unnecessary movement, handling, and waiting between tasks. The route clerk’s function is to determine an efficient route for the work, so training and good tools alone may not prevent delays.

A combines Taylor’s technical emphasis on scientific methods and standards with the human emphasis on training, cooperation, and fair incentives. The other choices do not combine these aspects.

Standardisation sets uniform specifications for inputs such as materials. Reducing the number of product variants is simplification; setting consistent material specifications is standardisation.

The task can produce 720 ÷ 16 = 45 units in total. Since 5 need rework, 45 − 5 = 40 units pass on the first attempt.

A new machine can change the method and time needed for the task. Management should reassess the standards so that the wage plan reflects the current method and realistic output expectations.

Taylor’s functional foremanship uses specialist supervisors, so their instructions need coordination. Clarifying priorities can prevent conflicting directions to workers.

Taylor’s principle of maximum prosperity concerns both employers and workers. Treating the system only as labour control overlooks the intended benefit to workers as well as the employer.

Option A is correct: when production becomes faster but the rejection rate rises, time-study results must be read together with inspection data. Time study measures how long a task takes or helps set a time standard. Inspection data shows whether the resulting goods meet quality requirements. Speed alone is not improvement if many units are rejected. Option A identifies exactly this conflict between productivity and quality. Option B, choosing product colour, is a design or marketing decision and does not require combining time study with rejection inspection. Option C, opening a bank account, is a financial and administrative activity unrelated to production time and quality. Option D, paying office rent, is an expense-management activity and also has no connection with process inspection. The correct management lesson is that a useful standard must balance efficiency with acceptable quality. The memory cue is: fast plus defective is not effective; whenever rejection rises, check time and inspection together.

A higher rate may encourage output, but workers also need instruction and training in the required method. Without that support, the incentive is not matched by the development needed to meet the standard.

Removing unnecessary models reduces variety, which is simplification. Setting uniform quality specifications for the remaining models is standardisation, so the scenario combines both techniques.

Scientific methods address how work is done, but Taylor also called for a mental revolution—a change from conflict to cooperation between management and workers. Their continued opposition shows that this human change has not been achieved.

The case brings together scientific analysis, standard-setting, standardised tools, worker training, and cooperation through gain-sharing. It therefore describes an integrated use of several Taylor-related practices, not just one wage system.

The established method can improve efficiency only if it is followed consistently. Conflicting instructions across shifts prevent uniform application of the standard method, so A is correct.

The worker produces more than the 130-unit standard, so the higher rate applies to all 132 units. Wage = 132 × ₹9 = ₹1,188; therefore, B is correct.

The route clerk plans the route and sequence of operations. Since the defect is caused by an incorrect sequence, the route clerk’s responsibility is most directly relevant, so C is correct.

Taylor’s approach calls for cooperation between management and workers, not merely punishment. Explaining and working toward scientific targets together supports that cooperation, so D is correct.