Fayol and Administrative Management
Fayol’s view of the whole enterprise and his fourteen principles.
The whole enterprise rather than only the task
Henri Fayol was a French mining engineer and industrial executive. His administrative approach focused on managing the enterprise as a whole. Taylor concentrated more directly on organising work at the operational level; Fayol asked what managers must do to integrate an organisation. Their contributions overlap, but their principal levels of analysis differ.
Fayol’s five elements of management are planning, organising, commanding, coordinating and controlling. They describe managerial work. His fourteen principles are broader guides to organising relationships and conduct. A function identifies a kind of activity; a principle suggests how that activity or relationship should be arranged.
The fourteen principles explained
| Principle | Meaning and qualification |
|---|---|
| 1 Division of work | Specialisation can build skill and economy; excessive fragmentation increases coordination needs. |
| 2 Authority and responsibility | Power to act should be connected with duties and answerability. |
| 3 Discipline | Work depends on agreed obligations and their fair enforcement. |
| 4 Unity of command | An employee should receive orders from one superior; multiple directions require clarity. |
| 5 Unity of direction | Activities sharing an objective should have one head and one plan; this concerns coordinated purpose. |
| 6 General interest | Individual or sectional interests should not displace organisational purpose; public purposes must remain lawful. |
| 7 Remuneration | Payment should be fair and appropriate to the employment relationship. |
| 8 Centralisation | The degree of concentration and delegation should fit circumstances; it is not unlimited concentration. |
| 9 Scalar chain | A graded line of authority provides a route for communication and responsibility. |
| 10 Order | People and resources should be appropriately placed and available. |
| 11 Equity | Fairness in treatment helps sustain commitment and trust. |
| 12 Stability of tenure | Reasonable continuity allows learning and competent performance. |
| 13 Initiative | Employees need scope to propose and carry out useful action. |
| 14 Esprit de corps | Team spirit and unity support collective effort. |
Unity of command is not unity of direction
A district vaccination programme needs a coherent objective and plan: that is unity of direction. A particular employee also needs clarity about who can issue operational orders: that is unity of command. A common plan does not automatically eliminate conflicting instructions; a single reporting officer does not automatically create programme coherence.
Fayol’s inclusion of equity, tenure, initiative and team spirit also makes it inaccurate to say that classical thinkers said nothing about people. The stronger criticism is that their explanations remained heavily managerial and did not adequately analyse informal groups, conflict and context.
Paper II Unit 8 Civil Services provides applications in tenure and initiative. Paper II Unit 4 Union Government and Administration and Unit 6 State Government and Administration illustrate coordinated direction and defined responsibility.
How are unity of command and unity of direction different?
Answer direction Compare the employee-superior relationship with the grouping of activities under a common objective, and demonstrate the difference with one programme.
Previous: Note 11: Scientific Management: Criticism and Contemporary Use | Next: Note 13: Gulick, Urwick and Organisational Design
📣 Join our community