Mary Parker Follett's "The Giving of Orders": A Critical Review
This paper critically examines Mary Parker Follett's 1926 essay "The Giving of Orders," situating it within the Taylor school of scientific management. The paper explores Follett's argument that effective management requires depersonalizing orders to reduce psychological resistance and foster habitual obedience rather than addressing structural workplace inequities. It analyzes her views on authority, worker psychology, and the symbolic concealment of managerial power, while offering a critique of her dismissal of legitimate worker grievances. The paper concludes by contrasting Follett's approach with modern participatory management models that treat employees as valued contributors rather than subjects to be habituated into compliance.
- Introduction: Follett and Scientific Management: Follett's roots in Taylorist scientific management
- Depersonalizing Orders and Worker Psychology: Removing personality from authority to improve compliance
- Authority, Obedience, and Labor Unrest: Follett dismisses structural causes of labor conflict
- Concealing Power Through Symbolic Management: Framing orders as worker choice to mask control
- Critique and Modern Relevance: Contrasting Follett with participatory modern management
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds its analysis firmly in Follett's own words, using direct quotations to support each interpretive claim rather than relying on paraphrase alone.
- Maintains a consistent critical perspective throughout, evaluating Follett's ideas against their historical context and modern management practice.
- Moves logically from exposition of Follett's argument to ideological critique, giving the essay a clear intellectual arc.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates close critical reading of a primary source. Rather than simply summarizing Follett's positions, the author interrogates the ideological assumptions underlying them — particularly the treatment of worker resistance as a psychological problem rather than a legitimate grievance — and situates those assumptions within the broader framework of Taylorist scientific management.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by placing Follett in her intellectual tradition (scientific management), then unpacks her core argument about depersonalizing orders. It next examines her treatment of labor unrest and her concept of symbolic authority before concluding with a critique that contrasts her views with contemporary management philosophy. Each section builds naturally on the last, maintaining a coherent evaluative thread from start to finish.
Introduction: Follett and Scientific Management
Mary Parker Follett's "The Giving of Orders" (1926) is a classic of managerial literature written in the early half of the twentieth century. Follett argues that improving employee motivation is a matter of fostering new habits rather than creating a more just or equitable workplace.
This reflects Follett's orientation within the Taylor school of scientific management, which stresses the need to transform the management of human labor into a machine-like enterprise in order to maximize organizational efficiency. According to the scientific management school, every movement of every worker should be optimized for efficiency and turned into a standard operating procedure or habit. Follett believes the same approach should be taken when giving orders to workers, even regarding orders of a non-technical nature.
Depersonalizing Orders and Worker Psychology
Follett writes that although the goal may be altering worker habits, giving orders requires an astute understanding of personal psychology. A child may be more responsive to an order from a school friend than to the words of a teacher. Simply because someone holds more formal authority and power does not mean that he or she will accomplish objectives more effectively — the outcome depends on the nature of the orders, the situation, and the personality involved. "My solution is to depersonalize the giving of orders," she writes, to reduce the tendency of context to interfere with obedience.1
According to Follett, orders should be depersonalized so that there is no overbearing sense of authority, nor any fear of exercising it. The orders then become focused on the objective rather than on the personality of the manager exercising authority over the workplace.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.