Compare And Contrast Henry Fayol And Mintzberg

2048 Words5 Pages

Henri Mintzberg considers the image of management which was developed from the work of Henry Fayol as one of folklore rather than fact. However, it could be argued that the image portrayed by Fayol is superior to that of Mintzberg, and the latter’s description is of rather ineffective management! Who do think is right?

Over 50 years ago, English-speaking managers were directly introduced to Henry Fayol’s theory in management. His treatise, General and Industrial Management (1949), has had a great effect on managers and the practice of management around the world. However, 24 years after the English translation of Fayol, Henri Mintzberg in the Nature of Managerial Work (1973) developed another theory and stated that Fayol’s work was just “folklores”. …show more content…

He supposed that those were not what a manager actually did in his day to day work. However, there are some empirical studies supporting Fayol’s functions when showing that managers spend time in these functions. Mahoney, Jerdee, and Carroll (1963, 1965) reported that managers’ time could be allocated into eight basic managerial functions including planning, representing, negotiating, evaluating, investigating, supervising, cooperating and staffing. Those functions were actually expanded from Fayol’s five functions. This study of 452 managers also indicated that all managers in various jobs and level categories had different time patterns with respect to these functions. This study was developed in a study by Penfield (1973) and a study by Haas, Porat, and Vaughan (1969). They also pointed out that it was possible to relate managers’ day to day activities to these functions simply by asking them why they were carrying those particular activities. In another study by Allen (1981), 932 managers questioned reported a variety of planning and controlling activities, though this study did not indicate the amount of time spent on those activities. It indicated that 80 percent of the sample managers were involved in formal activities such as developing forecasts and preparing budgets, 70 percent had …show more content…

However, while the functions that Fayol regarded as the most important elements of managerial work are not what can be observed from managers’ day to day activities, Mintzberg made some problems in his method of study to find out the nature of management. Also, while Fayol failed to draw a picture of management work in reality, Mintzberg was unsuccessful in giving an idea about what managers should do to be successful and effective. To some extent, Fayol and Mintzberd did not develop competing theories but theories about different dimensions of managerial work. In terms of gaining effectiveness in management, Fayol was performed better by indicating what managers should do to rather than just responding to the pressure of their job as what Mintzberg described. Therefore, it can be concluded that Fayol’s work is superior to Mintzberg’s and the latter is of rather ineffective

Open Document