The This essay will take post-capitalism to mean

The study and understanding of
management, aims to predict human behaviour and even control it (Brooks 2009
p.2). Fayol’s (1949) model was bureacratic, and is part of the classical
management movement (Boddy 2011 p49-50). Its made up of 14 “principles”,
including Division of Work, Unity of
Direction, and Espirit de corps.
Fayol (1949) emphasised that these principles should be flexible and adaptable
(Fells, 2000). Alongside these were further five “elements” of management: Planning, Organising, Co-ordinating,
Commanding and Controlling. This essay will take post-capitalism to mean
the management theory that has been developed in the past 40 years. During this
time there has been a sudden shift in demand, (Burnes, 2009 p168-169), with, “a
sea of change has taken place over the last 30 years in terms of how we view
organisations”. Froebel et al, (1980) argue a two-part change has taken place.
Firstly atomisation, and computerization, which are eliminating labour.
Secondly, where that is not possible, the movement of production to parts of
the world with lower-wages (Burnes 2009 p168-169).  This will address how the principles stand up
against broader ideas of the changes in our society and specifically compare
the principles to the work of the post-capitalist theories Mintzberg and
Luthans. This essay refers to a select few of the principles that best explain
the relevance of Fayol’s principles of management.


In reviewing the
relevance of Fayol’s (1949) principles of management to post-capitalist ideas
of management it is logical to expect there to have been changes in how the
principles are interpreted, yet this does not render them irrelevant. Rodrigues (2001) explains Fayol’s
(1949) 14 Principles of Management, showing how they are can be intepretated
with relevance to 21st-century society and business thus he effectively gives a
“contemporary general management framework”. 
Rodrigues (2001) points out that since Fayol’s time, much of the US’s
manufacturing industry has been transferred to other countries with the
maturity of America’s workforce now employed in services roles. Rodrigues
(2001) highlights that modern interpretations of the principles, are largely
directed by, movement to a “knowledge industry”. Rodrigues (2001) accurately
interprets how all, 14 principles apply to modern business, explaining that,
“effective managers today…especially in service-based and high-tech
organisation, interpret the 14 principles…quite differently”, but that they
nonetheless use them, and thus they remain relevant. Rodrigues (2001) presents
the principles as relevant not because they all direct apply to modern
industry, but that despite views on each individual principle shifting through
time the principles remain critical points of reference for managers. Rodrigues
(2001) focuses on Principle 12, “stability of tenure of personnel” (Fayol, 1949,
p38). Fells (2000) explains this principle as Fayol’s acknowledgement of the
need for personnel to develop nessessary job skills to succeed at performing
their duties. Expressing how critical on-going employee training and development
programs are today. Such programs keep employee’s skills “in tune with the
times” and Rodrigues (2001) explains that this can result in fewer downsizing
activities and when downsizing is necessary for employees to easily transfer
elsewhere. This characterises the change in
management in this post capitalism era. Bang, Cleemann and Bramming, (2010)
explain that in this “new world” value productions characteristics are no
longer “land, capital and labor”, but “information and knowledge”(Drucker, 1993).
Thus in the past 40 years we’ve moved to a knowledge economy, characterised by
a moving away from the most of work being production and distribution, to the
majority of work being concerned with applying knowledge. (Drucker 1993 and
Bang, Cleemann and Bramming, 2010). This change in industry style requires employees
to have some level of specialization, as presented in Fayol’s (1949) principle
of Division of Work. Interestingly with many specialized skills becoming
automised through robots there is an argument that fewer physical employees in
companised requires greater generalization Rodrigues

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now


Rondell (2010)
writes about post capitalism and the “digital revolution”, hand in hand,
explaining the revolution “goes beyond being just a shift in economic and
business behaviour … to a social and cultural, revolution.” By this argument
Fayol’s writing, largely focused around his experiences coal minding industry
(Reid 1995 a), is not relevant as it fails to account for this change in
“social and cultural” life. However Rodrigues
(2001) argues that technology companies none-the-less can apply the principles
in light of modern interpretations. For example, Google, voted the world’s most
attractive employer in 2015 (Gillett 2015), has many personal welfare systems in place, which
can be interpreted as Fayol’s (1949) “Espirit de Corps”. That is they help to
create “union” and develop “keenness” in employees (Fells 2000)Thus there is an argument that despite
both the change to the “knowledge economy” and the “digital revolution” in our
post-capitalist society, Fayol’s (1949) principles of management remain


In accessing Fayol’s (1949) principles of management they can be seen to
have been replaced by the works of post capitalists management theoriests such
as of Mintzberg (1990), and Luthans (1988). 
Simon (1946) has argued that, the Fayol’sprinciples are like proverbs,
“unclear and ambiguous, containing poorly defined terms”. Simons argues they
are not scientific, pointing out that the principles were not the result of
empirical research. This is one of the main arguments used by critics of Fayol
(1949), who view his work as ungrouded. Mintzberg (1990), decribes how Fayol’s
(1949) description of a manager as “planning, organising, coordinating or controlling”,
tells us “little about what managers actually do”.  Mintzberg (1990) argues against Fayol’s
(1949), and more broadly classical management’s, view, that managers need
“aggregated information”, best provided through a formal system. Mintzberg (1990)
comments that this classical view is clearly wrong when held against research
and observation of what managers actually do. Mintzberg (1990) refers to work
activity studies in order to demonstrate that manager’s jobs are far more about
pace, interruption, variety, fragmentation and critically verbal communication
(Pugh 2007 p30-31). Mintzberg (1990) presented an alternative management view
in which verbal communication is paramount, determining that information is
stored in the brains of managers rather than in the “files of the
organisation”, meaning the “strategic bank of the organisation” is in the
mangers mind. Mintzberg declares that it is “fokelore” that the manager is “a
reflective, systematic planner”. This undermines Fayol’s (1949) principles of
Planning, and Organising and to some extent Co-ordinating, in which he presents
such a manager. Following the work of Mintzberg (1990).

Luthans (1988) developed management theory derived from empirical
research.  Luthans (1988) argues that,
what Fayol (1949) describes in his principles and his explanation of a manager,
in fact represent only one quarter of a managers role. Luthans (1988) free
observation studies expanded on the studies by both Mintzberg (1990) and Kotter (1982) to include a greater range of mangers, making
the sample and results more applicable and generalisable.  Luthans (1988) established four “real manager
activities”: Communication, Traditional Management, Networking and Human
Resource management. Luthans (1988) addressed the difference in time spent on
each activity by “effective” verses “successful” managers, that is managers who
have high performing teams and satisfied and committed workers, verses those
who are promoted quickly. He established that “success” in management is determined
by, ‘Networking’ and at
higher levels, more time spent on, Fayol like, ‘Taditional Management Activities’
(Luthans 1988, Fells 2000).  In turn, he determined that
effective managers day-to-day activities, consisted of more ‘communication’ and
‘human resource management’ activities and establishing that ‘networking’ and
‘traditional management’ made by far the least relative contribution to
managers effectiveness. The statistical research, based on controlled study,
shows that Fayolian (1949) ideas of ‘traditional management’ did not correlate
with the effectiveness of real managers. That said Luthans (1988) none the less pointed out the role for tradition,
Fayolian management showing some relevance fore them to his post capitalist
ideas of management (Fells 2000).  

Post Capitalist management theory views
such as Luthans (1988) and Mintzberg (1990), who’s work is grounded in
emprical research, is view is often seen to have
replaced Fayol’s (1949). Thus some authors have been quick to dismiss Fayol’s
work as irrelevant (Mintberg
1990, Kotter 1982). However, Wren
(1994) has offered an alternative suggestion, that the work of Fayol  (1949) and Mintzberg (1990) offer different
rather than competing views.  For example
Fells (2000) writes that “Mintzberg’s (1973) model maps very well to the
classical view”. Specifically likeing Mintzberg’s (1973) “disturbance handler”
to Fayol’s (1949) “controlling”, “commanding” and “co-ordiating”. Which perhaps
support Fayol’s (1949) principles of Espirit
de Corps, Equality and Authority and
Responsibility.  If
Mintzberg (1990) does not mark Fayol (1949) as
incorrect, then it stands that Fayol can still be seen as relevant. This
reconciliation is noted, in theory, by several authors (Wren 1994, Hales 1993
p.13, Tsoukas 1994, Lamond (in press) and Fells 2000) and
demonstrated empirically by Lamond (2004). That said the work of
post-capitalist management theorist such as Mintzberg, and Luthans offer
alternative theories, which are seen to clash and displace Fayolian management
ideas by many.


In conclusion this
essay agrees with Reid (1995 b) in arguing for the appeal of Fayolism,
expressing that decades of academic critique hasn’t changed its appeal. It
seems clear that despite a movement towards more empirical research and assessment,
post capitalism ideas of management, when assessing the idea of relevance,
remain closely intertwined with Fayol’s principles. That they offer
complementoray rather than competing ideas, as presented by many authors (Wren
1994, Hales 1993 p.13, Tsoukas 1994, Lamond (in press and 2004) and Fells 2000). This is
emphasized by Pugh (2007 p.101) whom writes
“there can have been few writer since who have not been influenced by it”. Furthermore, despite a movement to a knowledge economy Fayol’s
principles continue to encompass critical post-capitalist ideas of management
such as long term training, and co-ordinating. Thus in critical analysis of
Fayol’s principles of management it seems clears that they remain relevant, if
some what less directly applicable, to post-capitalist ideas of management.