Taylor had faith that the best man for the job is to be chosen. He is required to possess the physical and intellectual qualities to attain the required output. However, it was up to the management to make it sure that the right people were chosen and trained. This forms the foundation for the quality circles.
Operatives congregate to deliberate on work related difficulties, prove into the reasons and solutions and take appropriate action. However, for this to work effectively, the involved operatives must be trained. Third one is to bring together the science of work and scientifically chosen and skilled personnel. The students are to visualize an anticipation of MacGregor here. What Taylor was actually, anxious to eliminate was the managerial mental block. Management, he discovered opposed his philosophy due to the fact that they visualize higher hourly rates of pay. What they did not visualize was the potential for much higher productivity. Fourth one is the persistent and intimate co-operation of management and men. Under this concept, R.C. Townsend always had a reference to the battle of Dienbienphu, where the French were defeated by an army where the colonels progressed with their men and lived with their men under the same conditions. He is quite well-known for three things. (the relevance of traditional management theories to the 21st Century)
Fayol contrary to this had recommended three organizational attributes. First, he recommended the six functional groups. Fayol recommended that all functions can be tuned to perform six basic functions. Those can be grouped as "Technical-production, manufacture, adaptation; Commercial- buying, selling, exchange; Financial - search for optimum use of capital; Security - protection of property and personnel; Accounting - stocktaking, balance sheets, costs, statistics - bean counting; Managerial activities - planning, organization, command, co-ordination and control." (the relevance of traditional management theories to the 21st Century) Secondly, he recommended the managerial factors. This was a reaction to the question as to what the management is. He indicated five elements such as Prevoyance- analyzing the future and chalking out of a plan of action- the factor of approach; to organize- construct the structure, both material and human, of the undertaking; to command- continuance of the functioning among the personnel; to co-ordinate - binding together, uniting and integrating all functions and efforts; to control - visualizing that everything stems in line with the established rule and expressed command. Out of this emerged the third contribution of Fayol, his 14 tenets.
However, he could admit that they were his rules, devised out of his own experience and did not essentially have general application or even longer continuance. (a) Division of work - the stress was on specific area for greater efficiency. This has been substituted by high levels of multi-skilling. (B) Authority - the power to endorse instructions. This must be in line with the liability for the consequences. There was no scope for vacillation in the Fayols environment and the approach of Lord Hurcombe depicting, 'we shall be criticized if'. This was the backdrop to Sir Michael Edwards widely accepted 'right to manage'. - Discipline - employees will only adhere to the instructions if management entails good leadership. (D) Unity of command - This concept is presently about 2000 years old. The old proverb is 'No man can be the slave of two masters'. As a result of its original legacy the tenets of Fayol one boss and no contradictory lines of command has discovered faithful adherents among managers. (E) Unity of Direction - while there is always the threat of rigidity, there must be a unity of purpose and goal resemblance. The plan is to be accepted and have the backing at all levels. Communication is very significant; both up and down the hierarchy. (the relevance of traditional management theories to the 21st Century)
F) Subordination of the individual interest to the corporate good. The objectives of the firm are always significant. There can be no scope for loose cannons on deck (G) Remuneration - Fayol believed in reality. He advocated from empirical evidence and finally, approved that there is no such thing as a perfect system. After sixty years, Charles Handy stressed that money was a precise, specifically quantifiable motivator. (H) Centralization / Decentralization - whatever were suitable. (I) Scalar chain - a hierarchy was essential for communication, but it is required to be flexible and no horizontal communication can be precluded from it. (J) Order - Fayol argued both material and social arrangement. It is quite probable in the former that he expected the ideas of MRP and JIT, necessary to the businesses of all scales. The JIT recommends quite a Darwinian approach to recruitment. As the choice of the good people is an ideal, sometimes small business may not have the option. It will not be able to sustain passengers that it will do to make the people grow.
K) Equity-- This is quite essential and devised by a combination of justice and awareness. In the words of Townsend, everybody is required to be evaluated as per his performance, not on his appearance, manners, personality or connections. A small business has the enough scope to be initiated from nothing meaningful and to build a system that is just. It is fascinating to note that there is no such reference of Vinnicombe and Colwell's the Essence of Women in Management nor is there any reference to Henri Fayol. (L) Stability of Tenure - the success leads to continue with more persistent managerial structures. There is definitely no place in the small, battling business for the frustrated chess player. (M) Initiative - the element of liberty to think and the capability to visualize beyond the existing horizon approaches closer to this. Small businesses are thought of on the basis of initiative they required to develop and become successful by persistently fostering the initiative and to a minimum a medium-term strategy to business solutions. (N) Esprit de corps- in order to persist the small business is required to foster high morale at all the times to come. This implies that the prioritized talent is required to have the ideas, along with the capability to pull people along with him. The effective ideas can fail if the ability to pilot the people is absent. (the relevance of traditional management theories to the 21st Century)
Taylor functioned primarily on the functional level, from the below of the organizational hierarchy upward. Fayol focused on the Managing director and emphasized on downward work flow. (Henri Fayol (1916) General and Industrial Management) Taylor laid emphasis on the efficiency of the production operation to enhance prosperity. As he lay down, the principle goal of the management is necessarily be to secure the maximum prosperity for the employer, along with the maximum prosperity for each employee that is the consequence of the greatest possible productivity of men and machines of the establishment. One is astonished to perceive as to what the work of Taylor would have perceived to be had he stressed on customer satisfaction. The existing standard most possibly would have condemned his attempts out of hand. Fayol contrary to this was basically interested in devising a rational organization that could show a profit. His goal was in a sense 'to clean the house within by indicating those organizational principles those are necessitated for a business to depict profit. (Amsden; Feratt; Amsden, 1996, p. 43)
Making the customer well contended that was complementary to his job was considered significant only to the possible extent that an organization is to satisfy the customer adequately to make a profit. Then after, Taylor analyzed the efficiency within the organization. Fayol tussled with restructuring of the organization to be dealt with gainfully. It is not out of place to mention here that Fayol inclined strongly towards the concept of the unity of command in that an employee should receive instructions from one superior only. In relation to the empowerment of the people, irrespective of the fact that Taylor emphasized on the maximum prosperity for each employee the fundamental respect for human dignity toward hourly workers was lacking. This is quite evident in his description of the selection and training of a man for the new pig iron loading methodology. Normally Taylor applied the scientific method on people. He did not regard the first-level workers adequately so as to ask them to apply it themselves. He has more emphasis on their strength than their brain.
Fayol could hold that the management is neither an exclusive privilege nor a peculiar liability of the head or senior members of the business; it is a functional distribution, as with all other activities, between head and members of the body corporate. This implies that all in the organization from CEO to line worker was to act as a manager. However, in reality this did not occur. A stringent distinction between hourly workers and management has always been diligently maintained in classical management. (Amsden; Feratt; Amsden, 1996,…