Essay on Annotated Bibliographies; Henri Fayol's Work Relevance

Critically discuss the extent to which Fayol's classical analysis of the management function has largely been made redundant by the more recent empirical studies of what managers actually do, such as that favoured by Mintzberg.

Management is a very complex field. Not only must managers pay attention to what is best for the organization, but they also have to do what is best for their customers. At the same time, the manager must satisfy the need of their employees. Henri Fayol developed fourteen principles of management in 1916 that organisations are recommended to apply to order to run properly. This paper will show how some of Fayols

Now that the issues have been identified, it is time to take action; for this case study, we will be focusing in on Henri Fayol’s Theory of Classical Management. This theory is composed of five elements: Planning, Organization, Command, Coordination, and Control; which suggest what a manager,

The purpose of this academic essay is to compare and contrast two management theorists in their individual fields of work and further more discuss how these theorists made contributions to the field of management. The author of this academic essay plans to use parameters to discuss their findings through books, journal articles and credible online resources. The theorists the author plans to discuss are Frederick Winslow Taylor and Henri Fayol.

Henry Fayol was working in France at a mining company as an engineer who later became the director of the company when it employed more than 1,000 people. He came up with the theory of management functions from his observations and experience while working in the company. He also established and published 14 important principles of management. However, Henry Mintzberg dismissed Fayol’s management functions claiming that managers nowadays apply little planning or not at all, hence, their work is unpredictable (Bateman, 2012). Mintzberg came up with three broad categories of managerial roles. These two theories are seen as competing views where one seems to be the base of the other.

According tot the Administrative Management Theory, management is the process of getting certain tasks completed through the use of people. In this theory developed by Henri Fayol, he believes that it was very important to have the use of a multiplied of people instead of just relying on one person alone. Henri Fayol is known today as the “Father of Modern Management”, his theory has shaped what is know today as the Administrative Model, which relies on Fayols fourteen principles of management. These principles have been a significant influence on modern management; they have helped early 20th century manager learn how to organize and interact with their employees in a productive way. Fayols principles of management were the ground work in which his theory was formed. He believed highly in the division of work throughout a project and within the project he believed that the task at hand had to be done with a certain level of discipline in order for the division of work to be able to run smoothly without error.

Academics for years have been pondering the effectiveness of classical approaches to newer conceptualizations within management functions. Are the classical functions put forward by Henri Fayol in 1949 still valid and true today?, or are the theories put forward by other academics such as Mintzberg more valid?, or would the scientific type management concepts be more fitting?. To answer such questions this report examines two Journal journals, “Are the classical management functions useful in describing managerial work?” (Journal 1) and “Some effects of Fayolism” (Journal 2). By analyzing the different arguments put forward, I aim to conclude which theory is more appropriate to management study today.

Early management theories adopted by such proponents as Henri Fayol, Mary Parker Follett and Max Weber are relevant in todays’ world. In this essay I am going to discuss about all three theorists and how their theories are still relevant for managers in the 21st century in meeting the challenges. In the classical approach to management there are three branches under it. They are, scientific management, administrative principles and bureaucratic organisation. Henry Fayol and Mary Parker Follett developed theories for administrative principles and Max Weber developed a theory for bureaucratic organisation (Schermerhorn et al. 2014, p.36). First we will be going through Henri Fayol and then Mary Parker Follett as they both made theories

Throughout this essay I will be looking at the management structure Henry Fayol had discovered from his research and how it is still present today and how it has affected our perspective on how we believe managers operate. Moreover, I will analyse Fayol’s work and look at what other theorists such as Mintzberg have said concerning what effective management is. Also I will look at the Human Relations theorists and see how they play an important role in management and how they differ from the theory of classical theorists. Taking this into account I will then give my views on what I think is important to managing effectively and what I believe is true management and compromise all the information to help me conduct my

Henri Fayol (1841-1925), was ‘’famous for the classical school of management, which emphasises command and control’’. (Robinson, 2005) He is deemed to be one of the founders of general management; also referred to as the administrative theory and later on becoming known as ‘Fayolism’.

While the subject of management has proven a popular topic, especially during the last 25 years, the subject is certainly not exclusive to latter part of the 20th century (Donkin, 1998). Henri Fayol, a turn-of-the-century French mining engineer and eventual management executive is often credited with becoming one of the first to develop and write about the now popular topic.

Henri Fayol was one of the most influential contributors to modern concepts of management. His career began as a mining engineer, later moving into research geology for Comambault. The company was struggling however, Fayol turned the operation round. Upon retiring he published his works – a comprehensive theory of administration.

Today the business community considers Fayol 's classical management theory as a relevant guide to productively managing staff. It would be safe to assume that Henri Fayol 's Principles of Management are going to be around for a long time and have an enormous impact on the lives of many people.

He argued that management was a universal process that consisting of functions, which he termed planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling. Fayol believed that all managers performed these functions and that the functions distinguished management as a separate discipline of study apart from accounting, finance, and production. [2] Fayol also presented fourteen principles of management, which included; the division of work, authority and responsibility, unity of command and direction, centralization, subordinate initiative, team spirit/espirit de corps, initiative, stability of personnel, order, equity, discipline, unity of direction, remuneration/ fair compensation, scalar chain/chain of command.

Henry Fayol has come to be recognized as the founding father of the classical management theory during the XX and XXI century. His theories, which are very famous all around the world, have been over the years the framework in the development of what is known as modern management. According to Van (2011) “Fayol gained world-wide fame for his 14 general principles of management. He distinguished six general activities for industrial enterprises: technical, commercial, financial, security, accounting and managerial. He defined five functions of management for the management component and these are still seen as relevant to organizations today”. Despite the fact that Fayol’s theories about management and administration ware born early 1900s, nowadays many directors and managers relay on such concepts to drive their organization towards success.