There is a disconnect in academia, if not in practice, with regards to understanding the relevance of Fayol's work to modern managers. In the literature oriented to quality control, management systems and production management, there is little doubt that Fayol retains a direct influence on management practice. Fayol was instrumental in introducing scientific methods of inquiry to the management function. This has lead to the entire discipline of quality management, such that all modern QM concepts have at their roots in Fayol's understanding of the management function (de Mast & Does, 2006). Authors critical of Fayol's influence tend to be oriented towards softer forms of management. Such authors fail to see the relevance of Fayol's work in their conception of management as a people-oriented discipline predicated on driving creativity, innovation and oriented towards motivation.
Yet even the people-centric view of management owes a debt to Fayol. Such schools of management eschew the terminology associated with Fayol -- especially "command" and "control" yet those functions are still conducted. Where it may traditionally be viewed that "command" means literally to give orders, two points must be made. The first is that people still do that. Most business is conducted on the basis of command. There is no protracted negotiation undertaken to motivate an administrative assistant to photocopy files -- this is done by command. The second point is that even where the command function has evolved away from giving orders, managers are still giving commands, albeit using different psychological techniques. Managers are still finding ways to request that employees behave in a certain way, or perform certain functions. Motivation and inspiration may be required to drive creativity at an organization, but management does so because there are specific needs that must be met (such as new product introduction targets)....
Motivation is little more than a touchy-feely version of "command." The significant change is that the language of management has become politicized (French, 2009).
Despite the shifts in language and six decades' refinement of managerial thought, Fayol's understanding of the management function remains relevant for managers today. In part, this is more due to the obviousness of what he observed than it is due to any great insight on his part. He merely observed what management did, and on that level management still performs those basic functions. His influence is perhaps more strongly felt in production management, where planning, coordinating and controlling are still the cornerstones of the discipline. Yet, his influence is also felt in the management of people, including softer notions such as motivation and stimulating creativity. Management is still based around the idea that managers can use relatively scientific means to achieve specific ends. The simplicity of Fayol's ideas has allowed them to be enduring, and allowed them to be applied to any number of management theories that have emerged in the subsequent decades.
Works Cited:
Brunsson, K. (2008). Some effects of Fayolism. International Studies of Management and Organization. Vol. 38 (1) 30-47.
De Mast, J. (2007). Integrating the many facets of Six Sigma. Quality Engineering. Vol. 19 (4) 353-361.
De Mast, J. & Does, R. (2006). Industrial statistics: A discipline with opportunities and challenges. Statistica Neerlandica. Vol. 60 (3) 270-282.
Fells, M. (2000). Fayol stands the test of time. Journal of Management History Vol 6 (8) 345-360.
French, S. (2009). Critiquing the language of strategic management. Journal of Management Development. Vol. 28 (1) 6-17.
Yoo, J., Lemak, D., Choi, Y. (2006). Principles of management and competitive strategies: Using Fayol…
