Henri Fayol – Modern approach to general management theory through the management process
Henri Fayol – Modern approach to general management theory through the management process
Max Weber – Bureaucracy to provide a formal approach to organization theory
Jules Henri Fayol was born to French parents in Constantinople.
Jules Henri Fayol was born to French parents in Constantinople.
His experiences as the Managing Director of Comambault formed his conception of management as the general activity of integrating functions of the firm in order to intelligently use resources to attain the objectives of the firm.
While Taylor was more production oriented, Fayol’s viewpoint was that of general management.
Managerial abilities differed from technical ones, and the success of the firm depended to a greater degree on good managers than good technicians.
Managerial abilities differed from technical ones, and the success of the firm depended to a greater degree on good managers than good technicians.
Fayol felt that every organization required management regardless of whether it was “commercial, industry, politics, religion, war, …”
This statement suggests the universality of management in that this activity is necessary in all organizations.
It does not mean that managers are universal.
Physical qualities: health, vigor, address
Physical qualities: health, vigor, address
Mental qualities: ability to understand and learn, judgment, mental vigor, and adaptability
Moral qualities: energy, firmness, willingness to accept responsibility, initiative, loyalty, tact dignity
General education: general acquaintance with matters not belonging exclusively to the function performed
Special knowledge: that peculiar to the function, be it technical, commercial, financial, managerial, etc.
Experience: knowledge arising from the work proper; the recollection of lessons a person has derived from things
Managerial abilities become more important as a person moves up in the hierarchy.
Managerial abilities become more important as a person moves up in the hierarchy.
Technical abilities are less essential for upper level managers.
Management could be taught in schools and universities but was not because of the absence of management theory.
Fayol defined management theory as “a collection of principles, rules, methods,
and procedures tried and checked
by general experience.”
(Fayol, 1949, p. 15)
Division of work
Division of work
Authority
Discipline
Unity of command
Unity of direction
Subordination of individual interests to the general interest
Remuneration
Centralization
Scalar Chain
Order
Equity
Stability of tenure of personnel
Initiative
Esprit de corp
Keep in mind Fayol’s disclaimer that there is nothing rigid in management. Fayol’s principles were guides, not absolutes or universals.
Keep in mind Fayol’s disclaimer that there is nothing rigid in management. Fayol’s principles were guides, not absolutes or universals.
We will not stress each principle…the following is a discussion of a few key ones.
Division of Labor – Fayol is rather traditional here regarding work design. However, he also used job enlargement when appropriate.
Division of Labor – Fayol is rather traditional here regarding work design. However, he also used job enlargement when appropriate.
Authority – Fayol distinguished between formal authority and personal authority. He was aware of the need to combine and complement the authority of position with leadership qualities.
Authority must be commensurate with responsibility.
Unity of command – Fayol felt that employees should receive supervision from only one person.
Unity of command – Fayol felt that employees should receive supervision from only one person.
Unity of direction – “one head and one plan for a group of activities having the same objective” (Fayol, 1949, p. 32). This is still good advice for many organizations today.
Centralization – This is not centralized decision making. Instead it is finding where decisions should be made depending on the factors Fayol mentioned. (See Wren text for Fayol’s excellent discussion.)
The “gangplank” is a means for providing lateral communications. (Fayol used the French term passerelle)
The “gangplank” is a means for providing lateral communications. (Fayol used the French term passerelle)
The Foreman (F) wishing to communicate with Foreman (P) without reporting upward through the President (A) can use a “gangplank to bypass organizational red tape.
Planning (could also be translated as foresight)
Planning (could also be translated as foresight)
Plans depended on the firm’s resources, work in process, and future trends that could not be predetermined (resembled a strategic audit).
Plans needed to have the characteristics of unity, continuity, flexibility, and precisions.
Long range planning was a unique idea for his time but a valuable contribution to the evolution of strategic management.
Organizing – Fayol included both the design of the organization and the staffing job of the manager in this element.
Organizing – Fayol included both the design of the organization and the staffing job of the manager in this element.
Structure of the organization had to be consistent with the objectives, resources, and requirements of the firm
Functional (horizontal) and scalar (vertical) growth
Span of control – narrow at the top but greater at lower levels
Staff – advisory personnel are needed by line managers
Staffing (separate issue from staff above) – involved selection, evaluation, and training of personnel.
Command – Fayol’s term for directing, leading, supervising, etc.
Command – Fayol’s term for directing, leading, supervising, etc.
Coordination – harmonizing the activities of the organization
Control – checking on performance to identify and make corrections if necessary
Fayol spent relatively little time discussing command, coordination, and control.
Fayol spent relatively little time discussing command, coordination, and control.
Planning, organizing, and staffing set the stage for where we are going and when and how we intend to get there.
These plans, people, and resources are activated, led, motivated, and coordinated.
As our information system brings us performance data, the control element enables management to renew the elements by reorganizing or whatever is indicated by our control system.
Management is a continuous process, not a neat set of discrete elements and functions that are performed without coordination of other elements.
Management is a continuous process, not a neat set of discrete elements and functions that are performed without coordination of other elements.
Fayol’s perspective was that of a strategist.
What remnants of Fayol's ideas exist today in management theory and practice? How did Henri Fayol's approach to management compare with Taylor's?
What remnants of Fayol's ideas exist today in management theory and practice? How did Henri Fayol's approach to management compare with Taylor's?
Weber’s Germany was characterized by cartels which limited competition (anti-trust laws limited this in the U.S.).
Weber’s Germany was characterized by cartels which limited competition (anti-trust laws limited this in the U.S.).
To Weber, capitalism in the US encouraged innovation and competition.
His interest in the U.S. Capitalistic spirit led him to ask:
His interest in the U.S. Capitalistic spirit led him to ask:
If a market oriented society could operate large organizations on some rational, systematic basis?
It was management by the office not by a person.
It was management by the office not by a person.
It was an “ideal,” the “pure form” of organization but this did not mean that it was the most desirable.
Weber is suggested as the “Founder of Organization Theory.”
Rational-legal – “right of those elevated to authority…to issue commands.”
Rational-legal – “right of those elevated to authority…to issue commands.”
Traditional – rested on the belief “in the sanctity of immemorial traditions and the legitimacy of the status of those exercising authority under them.”
Charismatic – based on “devotion to the specific and exceptional sanctity, heroism, or exemplary character of an individual person.” (Weber, 1947, p. 328)
Weber believed that rational type of authority must be the basis for a bureaucracy.
The division of labor and authority and responsibility were clearly defined for each member and were legitimatized as official duties.
The division of labor and authority and responsibility were clearly defined for each member and were legitimatized as official duties.
Offices or positions were organized in a hierarchy of authority resulting in a chain of command or the scalar principle.
All organizational members were selected on the basis of technical qualifications through formal examinations or by virtue of training or education.
Officials were appointed, not elected.
Officials were appointed, not elected.
Administrative officials worked for fixed salaries and were career officials.
Administrative officials were not owners of the units they administered.
Administrators were subject to strict rules, discipline, and controls regarding the conduct of their official duties. These rules and controls were impersonal and uniformly applied in all cases.
The emergence of management and organization theory had two forms:
The emergence of management and organization theory had two forms:
Fayol’s principles and elements of management
Weber’s rationalized organization structure for efficiency
Fayol stressed: planning and organizing , and education for management.
Weber sought leadership based on rational-legal authority, not tradition or charisma.
