MANAGEMENT THINKERS

Henri Fayol's

Henri Fayol (29 July 1841 – 19 November 1925) was a French mining engineer, mining
executive, author and director of mines who developed a general theory of business
administration that is often called Fayolism. He and his colleagues developed this theory
independently of scientific management but roughly contemporaneously. Like his
contemporary Frederick Winslow Taylor, he is widely acknowledged as a founder of
modern management methods.

Who Was Henri Fayol?

Fayol was an engineer who worked his way up to become manager of the Compagnie de
Commentry-Fourchambault-Decazeville mining company in France, at the tail end of the
industrial revolution. Under his watch, the struggling firm prospered.

He wrote, "When I assumed the responsibility for the restoration of Decazeville, I did not rely on
my technical superiority... I relied on my ability as an organizer [and my] skill in handling men."

Fayol's 14 Principles of Management identified the skills that were needed to manage well. As
well as inspiring much of today's management theory, they offer tips that you can still implement
in your organization. Fayol also created a list of the five primary Functions of Management,
which go hand in hand with the Principles

What Are Fayol's 14 Principles of Management?

1. Division of Work – Assign each employee a task that they can become proficient at.
Productivity increases as employees become more skilled, assured and efficient. Today,
experts still warn against multi-tasking .
2. Authority – Managers must possess the authority to give orders, and recognize that with
authority comes responsibility. As well as rank, Fayol argues that a manager's intelligence,
experience and values should command respect.
3. Discipline – Everyone should follow the rules . To help, you can make agreements
between the organization and employees clear for all to see.
4. Unity of Command – Fayol wrote that "an employee should receive orders from one
supervisor only." Otherwise, authority, discipline, order, and stability are threatened.
5. Unity of Direction – Teams with the same objective should be working under the
direction of one manager, using one plan. That, Fayol wrote, "is the condition essential to
unity of action, coordination of strength and focusing of effort."
6. Collective Interest Over Individual Interest – Individuals should pursue team interests
over personal ones – including managers.
7. Remuneration – Employee satisfaction depends on fair remuneration for everyone –
financial and non-financial. Fayol said pay should be fair and reward "well-directed effort."
8. Centralization – Balancing centralized decision making (from the top) with letting
employees make decisions. Or as Fayol wrote, "A place for everyone and everyone in his
place."
9. Scalar Chain – Employees should know where they stand in the organization's hierarchy
and who to speak to within a chain of command. Fayol suggested the now-familiar
organization chart as a way for employees to see this structure clearly.
10. Order – Fayol wrote that, "The right man in the right place" forms an effective social
order. He applied the same maxim to materials: right one, right place. Academics note that
this principle pre-empted the Just in Time  (JIT) strategy for efficient production.
11. Equity – Managers should be fair to all employees through a "combination of kindliness
and justice." Only then will the team "carry out its duties with... devotion and loyalty."
12. Stability of Tenure of Personnel – Organizations should minimize staff turnover  and
role changes to maximize efficiency. If people are secure and good at their jobs, they are
happier and more productive.
13. Initiative – Employees should be encouraged to develop and carry out plans for
improvement. As Fayol wrote, "At all levels of the organizational ladder, zeal and energy on
the part of employees are augmented by initiative."
14. Esprit de Corps – Organizations should strive to promote team spirit, unity, and morale.
What are Fayol's Five Functions of Management?

While Fayol's 14 Principles look at the detail of day-to-day management, his Five Functions of
Management provide the big picture of how managers should spend their time. They are:

1. Planning – the need "to assess the future and make provision for it." That includes a
flexible action plan that considers a firm's resources, work in progress, and future market
trends.
2. Organizing – laying out lines of authority and responsibility for employees. This covers
recruitment and training, coordinating activities, and making employees' duties clear.
3. Commanding – getting the most from people. So, managers must know their employees'
skills, delegate to tap into these skill sets, and set a good example.
4. Coordinating – in a well-coordinated organization, departments know their
responsibilities, the needs of other teams, and their obligations to them.
5. Controlling – continually checking that rules, plans and processes are working as well as
they should be.

Is Fayolism Still Relevant Today?

You only have to look at the language he used to see that Fayol was writing over 100 years ago.
For example, he refers to employees as "men."

But, as Daniel Wren writes, "Without the contributions of these pioneers, such as Fayol, we
would probably be teaching industrial engineering, sociology, economics, or perhaps ergonomics
to those who aspire to manage. To be doing so would push us back to the 19th century, when
technical know-how reigned supreme as a path to managerial responsibility."

And if you look closer, you'll discover that many of Fayol's points are fresh and relevant. Such
as:

 His Principles advocate teamwork and working together for the mutual benefit of the
business.

 The Five Functions reveal the need for organizations to plan and be agile  in the face of
changing market conditions.
 Fayol was one of the first people to recognize that management is a continuous process.

 Before human resources management, Fayol wrote about motivating people by inspiring
initiative, commanding respect through values, and ensuring that people have the time and
training they need to be happy and productive at work.
 The manager who is respected for their values, leads by example , makes time to get to
know their employees, and gives them the training they need, sounds a lot like a modern
manager.

Some of these ideas may seem a bit obvious, but at the time they were groundbreaking. And the
fact that they've stuck shows just how well Fayol's Principles work.

Criticism of Fayol's Principles of Management

That's not to say that everyone is a fan of Fayol's Administrative Theory. Some detractors claim
that:

It's unscientific – Fayol's critics question whether you can ground a theory in the observations
of one person. But Fayol stressed that he was laying a foundation for others to build on.
This is just what Luther Gulick and Lyndall Urwick did in 1937, when they used Fayol's ideas to
form their POSDCORB model  for working efficiently. And research shows that more modern
critics of Fayol – such as Mintzberg, Kotter  and Hales – in fact use many of his ideas.
It's too prescriptive – If some of Fayol's Principles look dated, there's a reason for that. Many
critics argue that one set of Principles can't govern all managers. In fact, Fayol wrote that his list
was "incomplete," and that the Principles were flexible and adaptable.
Today, academics have shown how Fayol's work can be updated to complement modern
management theorists, such as Porter.

It's cold and inhuman – Critics of historical management theories point to an emphasis on
efficiency over the social and psychological needs of workers. But managing with kindness,
instilling a sense of initiative, and building morale reveal a level of consideration for workers
that was enlightened at the time.
Key Points
Fayol highlighted the differences between managerial and technical skills.
 Frederick Winslow Taylor

Frederick Winslow Taylor (March 20, 1856 – March 21, 1915) was an American mechanical
engineer. He was widely known for his methods to improve industrial efficiency. He was one of
the first management consultants. In 1911, Taylor summed up his efficiency techniques in his
book The Principles of Scientific Management which, in 2001, Fellows of the Academy of
Management voted the most influential management book of the twentieth century. His
pioneering work in applying engineering principles to the work done on the factory floor was
instrumental in the creation and development of the branch of engineering that is now known
as industrial engineering. Taylor made his name, and was most proud of his work, in scientific
management; however, he made his fortune patenting steel-process improvements. Taylor was
also an athlete who competed nationally in tennis.

Historical Perspective

One of the earliest of these theorists was Frederick Winslow Taylor. He started the Scientific
Management movement, and he and his associates were the first people to study the work
process scientifically. They studied how work was performed, and they looked at how this
affected worker productivity. Taylor's philosophy focused on the belief that making people work
as hard as they could was not as efficient as optimizing the way the work was done.

In 1909, Taylor published "The Principles of Scientific Management." In this, he proposed that
by optimizing and simplifying jobs, productivity would increase. He also advanced the idea that
workers and managers needed to cooperate with one another. This was very different from the
way work was typically done in businesses beforehand. A factory manager at that time had very
little contact with the workers, and he left them on their own to produce the necessary product.
There was no standardization, and a worker's main motivation was often continued employment,
so there was no incentive to work as quickly or as efficiently as possible.
Taylor believed that all workers were motivated by money, so he promoted the idea of "a fair
day's pay for a fair day's work." In other words, if a worker didn't achieve enough in a day, he
didn't deserve to be paid as much as another worker who was highly productive.

With a background in mechanical engineering, Taylor was very interested in efficiency. While
advancing his career at a U.S. steel manufacturer, he designed workplace experiments to
determine optimal performance levels. In one, he experimented with shovel design until he had a
design that would allow workers to shovel for several hours straight. With bricklayers, he
experimented with the various motions required and developed an efficient way to lay bricks.
And he applied the scientific method to study the optimal way to do any type of workplace task.
As such, he found that by calculating the time needed for the various elements of a task, he could
develop the "best" way to complete that task.

These "time and motion" studies also led Taylor to conclude that certain people could work more
efficiently than others. These were the people whom managers should seek to hire where
possible. Therefore, selecting the right people for the job was another important part of
workplace efficiency. Taking what he learned from these workplace experiments, Taylor
developed four principles of scientific management. These principles are also known simply as
"Taylorism".

Four Principles of Scientific Management

Taylor's four principles are as follows:

1. Replace working by "rule of thumb," or simple habit and common sense, and instead use
the scientific method to study work and determine the most efficient way to perform specific
tasks.

2. Rather than simply assign workers to just any job, match workers to their jobs based on
capability and motivation, and train them to work at maximum efficiency.

3. Monitor worker performance, and provide instructions and supervision to ensure that
they're using the most efficient ways of working.

4. Allocate the work between managers and workers so that the managers spend their time
planning and training, allowing the workers to perform their tasks efficiently.

Critiques of Taylorism
Taylor's Scientific Management Theory promotes the idea that there is "one right way" to
do something. As such, it is at odds with current approaches such as MBO  (Management
By Objectives), Continuous Improvement  initiatives, BPR  (Business Process
Reengineering), and other tools like them. These promote individual responsibility, and
seek to push decision making through all levels of the organization.
The idea here is that workers are given as much autonomy as practically possible, so that they
can use the most appropriate approaches for the situation at hand. (Reflect here on your own
experience – are you happier and more motivated when you're following tightly controlled
procedures, or when you're working using your own judgment?) What's more, front line workers
need to show this sort of flexibility in a rapidly-changing environment. Rigid, rules-driven
organizations really struggle to adapt in these situations.

Teamwork is another area where pure Taylorism is in opposition to current practice. Essentially,
Taylorism breaks tasks down into tiny steps, and focuses on how each person can do his or her
specific series of steps best. Modern methodologies prefer to examine work systems more
holistically in order to evaluate efficiency and maximize productivity. The extreme specialization
that Taylorism promotes is contrary to modern ideals of how to provide a motivating and
satisfying workplace.

Where Taylorism separates manual from mental work, modern productivity enhancement
practices seek to incorporate worker's ideas, experience and knowledge into best practice.
Scientific management in its pure form focuses too much on the mechanics, and fails to value the
people side of work, whereby motivation and workplace satisfaction are key elements in an
efficient and productive organization.

Key Points

The Principles of Taylor's Scientific Management Theory became widely practiced, and the
resulting cooperation between workers and managers eventually developed into the teamwork
we enjoy today. While Taylorism in a pure sense isn't practiced much today, scientific
management did provide many significant contributions to the advancement of management
practice. It introduced systematic selection and training procedures, it provided a way to study
workplace efficiency, and it encouraged the idea of systematic organizational design.