Where Is Fayols Model Today

Where is Fayol’s model today?

Caroll and Gillen (1987) quote Mintzberg (1973, 1989) and Kotter (1982) in stating that the usefulness of the classical functions has been called into question. Archer (1990) goes further and urges that the US return to the principles.

Archer (1990) argues that Fayol’s model began to be assaulted by academics in the US in the 1940s. He believes that the assault continued and grew into the 1960s until “motivational panaceas” such as needs theory and job enrichment displaced Fayol’s principles.

Could it be that the 1930s cost-cutting aftermath of the great recession followed by a lack of cost-consciousness during World War II and then the cost-overrun period of defence after World War II undermined the planning and control structure of Fayol’s principles? If the enabling structure of Fayol’s elements and principles was destroyed then that would surely explain why Mintzberg and Kotter were unable to find them in their studies.

Wren (1994) observes that the impact of the great recession on management thought has never been fully examined. However, he does note that, after 1929, Mayo-ists considered economic problems to be social problems. Despite this, Wren suggests that the Constance Storrs translation of Fayol’s work after World War II actually led to renewed interest in Fayol.

Yet others believe that Fayol’s elements and principles remain valid and in use today. Luthans et al. (1985) studied 52 managers at varying levels (Mintzberg observed five senior managers). They found that traditional management roles were frequently observed, particularly by successful managers at more senior levels.

Luthans’ et al. (1985) acknowledge the support that Mintzberg’s work has received. However, they cite several studies that identify potentially significant weaknesses with Mintzberg’s findings and suggest that the real value of his study is not the ten roles but rather the use of direct observations which provide insights into management behaviour. Their study also found considerable support for Kotter’s conclusions but noted that successful managers at top levels devoted more attention to the traditional roles such as planning and co-ordinating.

Luthans et al. (1988) studied 457 managers at various levels and from diverse organisations over a four-year period. They conclude that much of the manager’s time is doing what is described as traditional management.

This researcher believes that all of the management models discussed, including the classical Fayol model, are legitimate and valid today. Rather than competing, this researcher sees each as simply representing a different view, as suggested by Wren (1994).