Fayol vs. Mintzberg
Introduction
Henri Fayol (born 1841) who is a classical management theorist, and published (in 1916) his ideas of a management style that seems to categorise labour as capital, and sets out distinct titles of activities and roles that a manager should follow. Fayol’s theory has, supposedly, been heavily opposed by Henry Mintzberg’s (born 1939) differing views on management, portraying managers as critical strategic players (Brooks, 2009) and investigating what people are motivated by other than money, he also developed his theories upon Fayols.
I intend to investigate both of these men, who are prolific names within management and organisational theory, and have some contrasting views, but also some similarities and development on Fayol’s theories. I will look at the pros and cons of each argument, and the similarities, then explain my view on the more effective management style.
Henri Fayol
Fayol first publicised his ideas and discoveries (in 1916), titled ‘Administration Industrielle et Générale’; but it wasn’t until 1949 that it was translated into English. This shows us that his work was not well renowned until later on in his life, this could be due to its coincidence with both world wars, and the fact that many people were very concerned, rather than noticing Fayols work. When the Second World War had ‘finished’ there was much rebuilding and recovery to be done. As businesses began to recuperate they needed capable leaders to help bring cities back to life, this could have been when Fayols book was noticed and translated into English 4 years after the ‘end’ of World War II. His five defining roles of management, along with 14 principles of management allowed managers to initiate a fresh approach to their leadership of their company and its
Henri Fayol (born 1841) who is a classical management theorist, and published (in 1916) his ideas of a management style that seems to categorise labour as capital, and sets out distinct titles of activities and roles that a manager should follow. Fayol’s theory has, supposedly, been heavily opposed by Henry Mintzberg’s (born 1939) differing views on management, portraying managers as critical strategic players (Brooks, 2009) and investigating what people are motivated by other than money, he also developed his theories upon Fayols.
I intend to investigate both of these men, who are prolific names within management and organisational theory, and have some contrasting views, but also some similarities and development on Fayol’s theories. I will look at the pros and cons of each argument, and the similarities, then explain my view on the more effective management style.
Henri Fayol
Fayol first publicised his ideas and discoveries (in 1916), titled ‘Administration Industrielle et Générale’; but it wasn’t until 1949 that it was translated into English. This shows us that his work was not well renowned until later on in his life, this could be due to its coincidence with both world wars, and the fact that many people were very concerned, rather than noticing Fayols work. When the Second World War had ‘finished’ there was much rebuilding and recovery to be done. As businesses began to recuperate they needed capable leaders to help bring cities back to life, this could have been when Fayols book was noticed and translated into English 4 years after the ‘end’ of World War II. His five defining roles of management, along with 14 principles of management allowed managers to initiate a fresh approach to their leadership of their company and its