Max Webber vs Henri Fayol

Max Webber and Henri Fayol were both key figures of the 20th century and had similar ideas of administrative management theories. Both took the scientific theory that was founded by Frederick Taylor and improved it in their own way. Each one also had different strategies to achieve the same goals. They both were able to provide appropriate sets of guidelines that were very clear. These are guidelines that managers can use to create a work setting that is efficient and effective and in a way that managers can follow. Weber created a formal system of organizations and administration designed to ensure effective and efficient practices called principles of bureaucracy. The principles of bureaucracy are based off five principles that are similar to Henri Fayol’s system of management which is based off fourteen principles. Both state that it is critical to have authority to lead the employees and to hold them accountable for their actions. Max Weber's fourth principle states that “Authority can be exercised effectively in an organization when positions are arranged hierarchically, so employees know whom to report to and who reports to them.”(p.50). this is similar to a principle that Fayol had. Fayol stated in his Line of authority that “The length of the chain of command that extends from the top to the bottom of an organization should be limited” (p.52). If this is known and a chain of command is stated then it can be determined who needs to report to whom with decisions. Both men also showed concern for equity. These two had systems for performance that led to rewards. Between motivation and leadership, many similar themes are possible. Both analyzed jobs, positions, and individuals. They believed that authority needed to lead employees and hold people accountable for actions. Although these men had many similar “theories”, each had their own perspective and interpretation of things, even if some were relatively similar. Weber believed in a theory of