Explain Fayol's 4 functions of management

Henri Fayol (1841-1925), praised as father of modern administrative management, focused

on general and attitudes theories of managers' practice. Fayol was the first to discover the
specific managerial functions of planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating and
controlling (Davidson et al, 2009 p.42). However, it has comprised of only four functions
nowadays (planning, coordinating, leading and controlling). These functions have become the
solid foundation and core management process, playing important roles in diverse
organisations. Accordingly, this essay will further elaborates the Fayol's functions and
convince of its great influence within the contemporary management practices.

However, errors and biases decision making such as overconfidence and sink costs might
cause corporate crisis and scandal (Robbins et al, 2009 p.232). Port Klang Free Zone project
(PKFZ) in Malaysia, has bring on a failure planning. Advisory firm Pricewaterhousecoopers
(2009 p.11) has revealed PKFZ project actual cost had rose up from RM1,957 billion, predict
to reach RM12,453 billion cumulative deficits in over time. Report further indicated that
failure planning included weak governance and project management, lands purchased exceed
market value, low project actual occupancy and so on. It is apparent that the management
team are holding unrealistically positive view, tend to obtain reward and to avoid immediate
costs. PKFZ project also failure to adjust adequately for subsequent information. Thereby,
decision-makers ought to not be heuristics thus simplify.

Fayol's coordinating function still emphasises in current management practice. Coordinating

linking and allocating the organisational activities and resources to ensure efforts are
effectively (Davidson et al, 2009 p.280). Coordinating approaches consist of job
specialisation, departmentalisation, allocating authority and also organising activities. These
purposes are to maximising performance practices, and establish sustainable competitive
advantages.

For this example, Malaysia former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad has a great
effort on coordinated civil servants. He initiated civil service reform in his governance time,
suggested paradigm shift needed from the civil servants in their attitude and approach

towards their duties. Hereby in Mahathir theory, stated that "civil service should more
customers focused, responsive, results and performance oriented, accountable and
innovative, with the capacity and capability of providing quality services" (Ho and Chin, 2001
p.22). As a result, reform has increased the efficiency and effectiveness in the civil service
administration and management.

Besides, Malaysia Airlines (MAS) was another example to demonstrate the important of
coordinating. Reformation MAS adopt to join global airline alliance to cut short their deficit
flight lines and feed to alliance airline (Sia, 2007). Simultaneously, collaborate airlines would
also allocate the regional flights to MAS. Therefore, both have equal advantages, despite
MAS flights reduced but made more money.

Leading is another element of Fayol's function. Organisational manager should have

leadership skills to lead employee. Robbins (2009 p.577) stated that a good leader should
have clear goals, relevant skills, mutual trust and support, negotiating skills and unified
commitment. Furthermore, effective communication increase productivity and avoid distrust
between employees. As Mahathir (2004 p.118) outlined that explanations is one of the
important jobs of a leader, because "leader (manager) have to sell the idea to people
(subordinates)". Thereby, good communication should a leader have.

However, Milne and Mauzy (1999 p.3) argued that the most important leadership traits are
not discernible by looking at the leader alone but by looking at interactive leader-follower
relations. It makes clear that leader should also be sensitive to what followers think. For
instance, Asia leading low-cost carrier, Air Asia, has an extraordinary leading style. The
management prefers casual and team-work approach, with less authority symbolises and
allows employees to share opinion (AFP, 2004). The crew members clean the plane without
regard for rank, and the top manager frequent get down operations with subordinates. CEO
Tony Fernandes has further explained this is a way to motivate his staff (Kang, 2003).

The forth Fayol's functions are controlling. Controlling means "restricting organizational
activities to same targeted element of performance remain within acceptable limits"

(Davidson et al, 2009 p.318). Controlling is an indicator and it helps to ensure the process of
implementing goal was in right direction, with comparing and evaluating its performance. In
reality, due to goal perform is an ongoing process, contingency are often surround and occur
during process, therefore, controlling provide the critical link back to planning. Well
controlling will make productivity efficiency and achieve effectiveness goal.

Air Asia as a low-cost airline has to constant looking of their cost and expenses. For
example, Air Asia decides buying single type aircraft, which is Airbus A320. CEO Tony
Fernandes (2007) make clear that Airbus A320 is cost economics than others aircraft,
superior reliability and fuel efficient. Due to this, keeping single aircraft type reduces
maintenance fees and staff training expenses. It is apparent that Air Asia has made
effective control through cost-efficient.

On the other hand, organisation without control managing ignoring of the target and what
future happens to take, lastly cause failure management. Port Klang Free Zone project
(PKFZ) as stated above, was also result in weak finance controlling. The report (2009 p.40)
has illustrated PKFZ purchased land with exceeds market value, and twice to accept higher
interest rates loan than originally contracted without reason, despite management team
discovered financial statement facing deficit.

In sum, overwhelming evidences make clear that Fayol's functions involve great influence to
contemporary organisational management practice. Planning, coordinating, leading and
controlling are incurred reciprocal condition, interdependent and interaction. Managers have
to engage in different activities and different management process well simultaneously.
Without Fayol's functions nowadays, Malaysia Airlines might be termination, dissolution or
take over by others. Also, entirely low-cost airlines organisations even many low-cost
industries cannot survive. PKFZ project is not without planning, but a weakness planning and
controlling. If plans and controls in satisfactory, it might be a flourish regional trade,
distribution and procurement centres. Hence, it could therefore be concluded with practice
well of Fayol's functions, although goal cannot assure be success but can minimise the
challenges and drawbacks among the approach.

Henri Fayol
Henri Fayol (born 1841 in Istanbul; died 1925 in Paris) was a French management theorist.
Henri Fayol was one of the most influential contributors to modern concepts of
management, having proposed that there are five primary functions of management:
1. Planning,
2. Organizing,
3. Commanding,
4. Coordinating, and
5. Controlling (Fayol, 1949, 1987).
Controlling is described in the sense that a manager must receive feedback on a process in
order to make necessary adjustments. Fayol's work has stood the test of time and has been
shown to be relevant and appropriate to contemporary management. Many of today's
management texts including Daft (2005) have reduced the five functions to four: (1)
planning, (2) organizing, (3) leading, and (4) controlling. Daft's text is organized around
Fayol's four functions.
Fayol believed management theories could be developed, then taught. His theories were
published in a monograph titled General and Industrial Management (1916). This is an
extraordinary little book that offers the first theory of general management and
statement of management principles.
Fayol suggested that it is important to have unity of command: a concept that suggests
there should be only one supervisor for each person in an organization. Like Socrates, Fayol
suggested that management is a universal human activity that applies equally well to the
family as it does to the corporation.
Fayol has been described as the father of modern operational management theory (George,
p. 146). Although his ideas have become a universal part of the modern management
concepts, some writers continue to associate him with Frederick Winslow Taylor. Taylor's
scientific management deals with the efficient organisation of production in the context of
a competitive enterprise that has to control its production costs. That was only one of the

many areas that Fayol addressed. Perhaps the connection with Taylor is more one of time,
than of perspective. According to Claude George (1968), a primary difference between
Fayol and Taylor was that Taylor viewed management processes from the bottom up, while
Fayol viewed it from the top down. George's comment may have originated from Fayol
himself. In the classic General and Industrial Management Fayol wrote that "Taylor's
approach differs from the one we have outlined in that he examines the firm from the
"bottom up." He starts with the most elemental units of activity the workers' actions
then studies the effects of their actions on productivity, devises new methods for making
them more efficient, and applies what he learns at lower levels to the hierarchy(Fayol,
1987, p. 43)." He suggests that Taylor has staff analysts and advisors working with
individuals at lower levels of the organization to identify the ways to improve efficiency.
According to Fayol, the approach results in a "negation of the principle of unity of command
(p. 44)." Fayol criticized Taylor's functional management in this way. The most marked
outward characteristics of functional management lies in the fact that each workman,
instead of coming in direct contact with the management at one point only, receives his daily
orders and help from eight different bosses(Fayol, 1949, p. 68.) Those eight, Fayol said,
were (1) route clerks, (2) instruction card men, (3) cost and time clerks, (4) gang bosses, (5)
speed bosses, (6) inspectors, (7) repair bosses, and the (8) shop disciplinarian (p. 68). This,
he said, was an unworkable situation, and that Taylor must have somehow reconciled the
dichotomy in some way not described in Taylor's works.
Fayol graduated from the mining academy of St. Etienne (Ecole des Mines de SaintEtienne) in 1860. The nineteen-year old engineer started at the mining company Compagnie
de Commentry-Fourchambeau-Decazeville, ultimately acting as its managing director from
1888 to 1918. Based largely on his own management experience, Fayol developed his concept
of administration. The 14 principles of management were discussed in detail in his book
published in 1917, Administration industrielle et gerale. It was first published in English as
General and Industrial Management in 1949 and is widely considered a foundational work in
classical management theory. In 1987 Irwin Gray edited and published a revised version of
Fayol's classic that was intended to free the reader from the difficulties of sifting through

language and thought that are limited to the time and place of composition (Fayol, 1987, p.
ix). Gray retained the 14 points shown below.

Fayol 14 Principles of Management

1. Specialization of labour. Specializing encourages continuous improvement in skills and
the development of improvements in methods.
2. Authority. The right to give orders and the power to exact obedience.
3. Discipline. No slacking, bending of rules. The workers should be obedient and respectful
of the organization.
4. Unity of command. Each employee has one and only one boss.
5. Unity of direction. A single mind generates a single plan and all play their part in that
plan.
6. Subordination of Individual Interests. When at work, only work things should be
pursued or thought about.
7. Remuneration. Employees receive fair payment for services, not what the company can
get away with.
8. Centralization. Consolidation of management functions. Decisions are made from the top.
9. Chain of Superiors (line of authority). Formal chain of command running from top to
bottom of the organization, like military
10. Order. All materials and personnel have a prescribed place, and they must remain
there.
11. Equity. Equality of treatment (but not necessarily identical treatment)
12. Personnel Tenure. Limited turnover of personnel. Lifetime employment for good
workers.
13. Initiative. Thinking out a plan and do what it takes to make it happen.
14. Esprit de corps. Harmony, cohesion among personnel. It's a great source of strength in
the organisation. Fayol stated that for promoting esprit de corps, the principle of unity of
command should be observed and the dangers of divide and rule and the abuse of written
communication should be avoided.

References
http://www.bola.biz/competence/fayol.html
http://www.analytictech.com/mb021/fayol.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Fayol

Compare and contrast the management theories of Frederick Taylor, Henri

Fayol, Elton Mayo and Douglas McGregor. In what sense(s) are these theories
similar and/or compatible? In what sense(s) are these theories dissimilar
and/or incompatible? How would a contingency theorist reconcile the points of
dissimilarity and/or incompatibility between these approaches?
The twentieth century has brought in a number of management theories which have helped
shaped our view of management in the present business environment. These emerging
theories have enabled managers to appreciate new patterns of thinking, new ways of
organising and new ways of managing organisations and people. Over the years these
different theories have enabled the study of trends that have taken place in the
management field. The major management viewpoints- which include the classical,
behavioural and contingency approaches- have assisted in the formation of the
contemporary twenty-first century management theory and techniques (S. C. Certo & S. T.
Certo, 2006). Although, there are significant differences among all these approaches they
seem to be unified by the efforts of improving an organisations efficiency in terms of
proper human resources management. Furthermore, the dissimilarities seen in these
approaches are due to the always changing organisations and environments which demand
new management practices and techniques be applied to maintain the efficiency of an
organisation.
The classical approach to management was the result of an effort to develop a body of
management thinking and the management theorists who participated in this effort are
considered the pioneers of management study. The classical viewpoint emphasises
efficiency in managing work and organisations in order to increase production (S. C. Certo &
S. T. Certo, 2006). The classical approach to management can be categorised into three
areas: scientific, administrative and bureaucratic management. Frederick Taylor,...
..
Fayol marked out 4 main functions of management that became universally recognized.
1. Planning-a manager should work out definite future prospects regarding his project, that
shouldn't be just imagined dreams.
2.Arrangement-a manager should setup the structure that will satisfy the requirements at
most.
3. Motivation-skillfully organize and motivate employers to work towards the goal and
maximum result of the project.
4.Supervision-do not lower the attention and control over the work.

Fayols Four Functions of Management

Relating to An Interviewed Manager
The Commonwealth Bank is a large-scale multinational organisation based in Australia, it has
been in operation since 1912 and specializes in financial services. The bank currently employs
over 38,000 employees and has over 1000 branches nationally. It has been a publicly listed
company since 1991 after previously being government owned (Commonwealth Bank). A
management questionnaire was recently conducted with a female front line manager from a
Commonwealth Bank branch. This questionnaire focused on how the manager coordinates and
oversees the work activity of others so that their activities are completed efficiently and
effectively (Robbins, Bergman, Stagg and Coulter, 2009, p.10) in relation to Fayols four
functions of management (planning, organizing, leading, controlling). Although the manager is
discussed in terms of Fayols functions other theories are also discussed such as
Mintzbergs approach to management (management roles). This comparison of management
theories may enable the bank managers actions to be understood as part of management
when they do not fall under Fayols functions.
The first of Fayols functions is an important one as stated by Carroll. S, J and Gillen. D, J
(1987) Skill in planning was one of the strongest predictors of managerial success. As
planning is such a pivotal function (used 19% of managers time (Carroll, S & Gillen, D. 1987
p.41) it is used extensively by the interviewed manager in their approach to management. By
definition planning is the management function that involves defining goals, establishing
strategies for achieving those goals and developing plans to integrate and coordinate
activities. (Robbins, Bergman, Stagg and Coulter, 2009, p.12) The interviewed manager uses
each part of the management function of planning for her small group of people (5-19). As a
front-line manager she is required to be involved in this...

The Four Functions of Management

Management is the process of working with other and capital to achieve organizational goals.
Also management is defining as creative problem solving. This creative problem solving is
accomplished through the four functions of management: planning, organizing, leading and
controlling. The intended result is the use of an organization's resources in a way that finish
its mission and objectives. Every good manager, supervisor or leader does those tings both
effectively and efficiently.
At the present time in MEDDAC-Japan the organization in which I am employ, is working to
reorganize some the way they offers services to the military community. Very interesting
it is to see as the four functions of management in action.
In the business world today, the great executives not only adapt to changing conditions but
also apply fanatically, rigorously, consistently and with discipline the fundamental
management principles. These fundamentals include the four traditional functions of
management. They remain as relevant as ever, and they still provide the fundamentals that
are needed in star ups as much as in established corporations.
Management success is expanding through accomplishment of mission and objectives of the
organization. Managers and leaders fail when they do not achieve mission and objectives
established. Success and failure are attached in a straight line to the reasons for being in
business, mission and objectives. On the other hand, accomplishing mission and objectives is
not enough. Success requires equally effectiveness and efficiency. Managers, leaders and
supervisor who achieve their mission and objectives are believed to be effective. Efficiency
describes the connection between the amount of resources used (the input) and the amount
to which objectives were accomplished (the output). However, management is complete only
if the manager or team leader has become familiar with the specific situation in which he...
[continues]

Abstract
The four functions of management, planning, organizing, leading, and controlling, are very
essential in building strong organizations and even stronger more effective teams. Planning,
organizing, leading, and controlling are the functions of management. These function
activities must be preformed my all managers regardless of their industry level, title, or the
task they have at hand. These four management skill are used when ever a project or a task
is at hand. Even in the field we are working in, many of us may have been using the four
management functions and not noticed what they were, or we may have been a part of a
team that was lead by the functions of management and not noticed what was going on.

Functions of Management

The Four Functions of Management:

Planning, Organizing, Leading, and Controlling

The functions of management are defining the roles and responsibility of each and ever
team member. I will define the functions and explain how each function is used at my work
place. My role in the functions of management in the work place is a team member where I
have a Business Department Chair and my team member and I are the business instructors
where we take care of the student who are enrolled in Business Office Applications, Web
Design, Business Diploma Programs, and Technical Support and Networking.
Planning
Planning is defined as setting goals and deciding the course of actions we need to take to be
successful, putting together the rules and procedures on reaching our goal, putting together
the plans on how we must proceed with our process, and deciding where you want the work
place to be in the future. The planning stage is where all the other pats of management
begin from and it is important at all levels of management.
The way planning is used at the college where I work, is after each semester or during the
break in-between each semester we have a departmental meeting where we sit and discuss
what happened during the... [continues]

The Four Functions of Management

"Henri Fayol was the 1st to describe the Four Functions of Management when he was Chief
Executive Officer of a large mining company in the late 1800's. He noted that managers at
all levels operating in a for profit or not for profit organization must perform each of the
functions of management." (Miller, 2005, pg. 5-9) These four functions of management
consist of planning, organizing, leading and controlling. These four functions will be
addressed as well as how they relate to the company in which I am employed and the role in
which I play within that company.
Planning in management is the process used to identify and select appropriate goals and
courses of actions for an organization. "Planning is the thinking that precedes the doing."
(Maddux, 1998, p 4) During the process of planning, to ensure that it will be effective, a
determination needs to be made on the goals to be pursued, how to attain the goals and how
resources will be allocated. This first function of management determines how effective
and efficient the organization is and helps to determine the agency's strategy. The agency
in which I work has been effective for many years in establishing goals and allocating
resources. They are one of the frontrunners in the space industry and very often are able
to strategize more effectively than other agency counterparts. In my organization, my
managers require that we have weekly planning meetings that allow us to establish goals for
the week and determinations on how those weekly goals will be met. It is my responsibility,
along with the other logistics specialists to work to meet the weekly goals established and
make reports of the progress or the lack thereof.
In the organizing function of management, managers create the structure of working
relationships between company employees that best allows them to work together and
achieve goals. This allows for the setting up of departments according to... [continues]

UNIVERSALITY OF MANAGEMENT
he universality of management is an important concept to consider in modern management
thought. When describing management as universal, we refer to the widespread practice of
management in all types of organizations. As noted before, one cannot bring a group of
people together, regardless of the nature of the endeavor, and expect them to accomplish
objectives unless their efforts are coordinated. Among other things, plans must be outlined,
task identified, authority relationship specified, lines of communication established, and
leadership excercised. Management, therefore, is required before any organization can
expect to be effective.
Although management is universal, we should not assume that all managers are the same; if,
for no other reason, diffrences exist because no two individuals are alike. However, all
managers perform broad groups of duties that are smiliar. These groups of duties are the
functions of planning, organizing, actuating, and controlling. Although the responsibilities
associated with performing the functions vary among levels of authority, managers at all
material resouces. Since the management functions must be performed to some degree in
order to achieve dsdired goals, we can say that there is, indeed, a universality of
management.

The universal nature of management also implies that managerial skills are transferable
from one type of organization to another. If this is the case, a manager should expect to
exverience few problems in moving from one industry to another, from the military to
business, from business to government, from education to business, or from one department
to another within the same organization. There are certainly persons who have been
succesful in making such moves. Other, however, have failed. For example. Laurence J.Peter
cites numerous cases that show promotions in an organization often accompliesh little
beyond pointing out the incompetencies of those persons who have been promoted.

Although proven perfermance in one management position is no guarantee of success in

another, various issues should still be explored. First, managerial success depends on how
well managers do their jobs - that is, how well they perform the management functions in
meeting their responsbilities. Rememeber that manager is not a narrow technical specialist,

but a person who must plan, organize, actuate, and control. Again, this does not overlook the
need for technical information in the decision-making process. Technological, social,
political, and economic factors must be considered in most decisions. At the same time,
managers must recognize the importance of balancing the needs and goals various
organizational members. This, in turn, requires an ability to understand the overall nature of
an organization's operations.

A second factor to consider conserns to need for flexibility when adjusting to a new
organizational environment. All organizations have uniqe differences. Thus, for managers to
be successful in moving from one organization to another, they must be capable of adapting
to change. In addition, initiative, motivation to achieve, and the courage to accept and
overcome setbacks are important personal characteristics. When moving from large to
smaller organizations, these latter characteristics appear to be especially critical. Perhaps
this is due to the fact that smaller organizations do not have the technical specialists and
staff support groups found in their large counterparts. In any event, career movements
from small organizations to larger ones seem to present fewer problems.

Saturday
UNIVERSALITY OF MANAGEMENT

The universality of management is an important concept to consider in modern management

thought. When describing management as universal, we refer to the widespread practice of
management in all types of organizations. As noted before, one cannot bring a group of
people together, regardless of the nature of the endeavor, and expect them to accomplish
objectives unless their efforts are coordinated. Among other things, plans must be outlined,
task identified, authority relationship specified, lines of communication established, and
leadership excercised. Management, therefore, is required before any organization can
expect to be effective.

Although management is universal, we should not assume that all managers are the same; if,
for no other reason, diffrences exist because no two individuals are alike. However, all
managers perform broad groups of duties that are smiliar. These groups of duties are the
functions of planning, organizing, actuating, and controlling. Although the responsibilities
associated with performing the functions vary among levels of authority, managers at all
material resouces. Since the management functions must be performed to some degree in
order to achieve dsdired goals, we can say that there is, indeed, a universality of
management.

The universal nature of management also implies that managerial skills are transferable
from one type of organization to another. If this is the case, a manager should expect to
exverience few problems in moving from one industry to another, from the military to
business, from business to government, from education to business, or from one department
to another within the same organization. There are certainly persons who have been
successful in making such moves. Other, however, have failed. For example. Laurence
J.Peter cites numerous cases that show promotions in an organization often accompliesh
little beyond pointing out the incompetencies of those persons who have been promoted.

Although proven performance in one management position is no guarantee of success in

another, various issues should still be explored. First, managerial success depends on how
well managers do their jobs - that is, how well they perform the management functions in
meeting their responsbilities. Rememeber that manager is not a narrow technical specialist,
but a person who must plan, organize, actuate, and control. Again, this does not overlook the
need for technical information in the decision-making process. Technological, social,
political, and economic factors must be considered in most decisions. At the same time,
managers must recognize the importance of balancing the needs and goals various
organizational members. This, in turn, requires an ability to understand the overall nature of
an organization's operations.

A second factor to consider conserns to need for flexibility when adjusting to a new
organizational environment. All organizations have uniqe differences. Thus, for managers to
be successful in moving from one organization to another, they must be capable of adapting
to change. In addition, initiative, motivation to achieve, and the courage to accept and
overcome setbacks are important personal characteristics. When moving from large to
smaller organizations, these latter characteristics appear to be especially critical. Perhaps
this is due to the fact that smaller organizations do not have the technical specialists and
staff support groups found in their large counterparts. In any event, career movements
from small organizations to larger ones seem to present fewer problems.

What is universality of management? Yahoo Q&A

Answer:Universality of management refers to the transferability of its principle,

techniques, functions and skills from one time, place or job to another. All these
management practices are equally practicable and applicable everywhere in the world
irrespective of the nature of the job, differences in customs, habits and social laws.
Managerial functions and techniques can be practiced in every organized effort. Whether it
is a business, shop, industry, government office, educational, social, profitable or nonprofitable organization, management principles, functions and techniques are profitably and
productively applied. A successful manager of a company or a field can be equally successful
in the other. That is why a manger of a company can be safely transferred from one
department, company or area to another. In Pakistan it is a routine practice of transferring
bureaucrats from one department, institution to another with quite different work.
Universality of management can be judged from the fact that an army general can
efficiently hold a position of a company or a country, although the nature of technical work
is quite different in both places ; but the principles of performing the jobs are same
According to Fayol and Urwick, management has some principles, like unity of command or
division of work which can be ignored nowhere. Universality never means that one particular
job should be performed by every manager. But it means that all jobs have principles in
common that must be followed by every type of manager.

UNIVERSALITY OF MANAGEMENT & MANAGEMENT SKILLThursday, Dec 4 2008

All sectors and Education and For Entrepreneurs and For Large Corporates and Government
& Not for Profit and SME Sector and Uncategorized MANAGEMENT, management
roles, management skills, managerial skills managementinnovations 7:28 am
Management principle are universal; that is why, the apply to all types of organizations
including but not limited to FOR PROFIT AND NOT FOR PROFIT ones like businesses,
churches,sororities, athletic teams, hospitals and so on.
Managers jobs vary somewhat from one type of organization to another because each
organizational type requires the use of specialized knowledge, exists in a unique working and
political environment, and uses different technology. However, there are job similarities
across organizations because the basic management activities planning, organizing,
influencing, and controlling are common to all organizations.
The basic ingredients of successful management are applicable to all organizations.
MANAGEMENT SKILL:
Management skill is the ability to carry out the process of reaching organization goals by
working with and through people and other organizational resources.
Learning about management skill and focusing on developing it are of critical importance
since possessing such skill is generally considered to be the prerequisite for management
success.
Katz indicates that 3 types of skills are important for successful management performance:
technical, human and conceptual skills.
* TECHNICAL SKILLS:
Technical skills are skills involving the ability to apply specialized knowledge and expertise
to work related techniques and procedures.
Examples of these skills are engineering, computer programming, and accounting. Technical
skills are mostly related to working with things processes or physical objects.

HUMAN SKILLS:
Human skills are skill that build cooperation with the team being led. They involve working
with attitudes and communication, individual and group interests in short, working with
people.
CONCEPTUAL SKILLS:
Conceptual Skills involve the ability to see the organization as a whole. A manager with
conceptual skills is able to understand how various functions of the organization complement
one another, how the organization relates to its environment, and how changes in one part of
the organization affect the rest of the organization.
As a manager grows, the need for conceptual skills increases.
Human skills are required at all levels.
MANAGEMENT SKILL: A contemporary View:
The major activities that the modern managers typically perform are of 3 basic types:
1.

Task Related Activities:

Task related activities are management efforts aimed at carrying out critical
management related duties in organizations. Such activities include short term
planning, clarifying objectives of jobs in organizations, and monitoring operations and
performance.

2.

People Related Activities:

People related activities are management efforts aimed at managing people in
organizations. Such activities include providing support and encouragement to others,
providing recognition for achievements and contributions,developing skill and
confidence or organization members,consulting when making decisions, and empowering
others to solve problem.

3.

Change Related Activities:

Change related activities are management efforts aimed at modifying

organizational components. Such activities include monitoring organizations external

environment, proposing new strategies and vision, encouraging innovative thinking, and
taking risks to promote needed change.
To increase the probability of being successful, managers should have competence in :

Clarifying Roles

Monitoring Operations

Short term Planning

Consulting

Supporting

Recognizing

Dveloping

Empowering

Envisioning Change

Taking risks for Change

Encourge Innovative Thinking

External Monitoring

UNIVERSALITY OF MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES

Is the managers job universal? Are the principles of management universally applicable?
It has already been stated that managing is found in all types, functions, levels and sizes of
organisations. Management can be applied to all organised human efforts whether they are
in business, government, educational, social, religious or other fields. Universality of
management suggests that the manager uses the same managerial skills and principles in
each managerial position held in various organisations. Accordingly an industrial manager
could manage a philanthropic organisation, a retired army general could manage a university,
a civil servant could manage an industrial organisation, and so on.
Universality implies transferability of managerial skills across industries, countries. It
means that management is generic in content and is applicable to all types of organisations.
Lawrence A. Appley declared that He who can manage, can manage anything. Let us examine

the factors that have contibuted to the universal application of management in every level
of organisation and at every level of organisation.
Arguments for Universality
1.

Same functions. Quite often it is erroneously thought that management exists only

in a business and not in other enterprises. The fact is, however, that when acting in their
respective managerial capacities not only the company president but also the office
supervisor perform the fundamental functions of management. The difference lies in such
things as the breadth of the objectives, the magnitude of the decisions taken, the
organisation relationships affected, and so on. Managers perform essentially the same
functions irrespective of their level in the organisation, industry or country.
2.

Universal principles. Classical writers (Fayol, Urwick and others) believed that there

are certain principles in management which are universally applicablee. These are the
principles of departmentation, principles of division of labour, principle of span of control,
the scalar principle, principle of unity of command, etc. Such principles as one man one boss,
division of work to improve speed and efficiency, limiting the number of persons to be
supervised so that managers can concentrate on exceptional problems, the principles
governing motivation theory have certainly proved their worth up to a point, and these
principles have been translated into practice for a long time. These principles have found
universal expression of the nature and level of management in organisations.
3.

Fundamentals are same, the techniques employed and practices followed are

different. Managing occurs in parks, ranches, hospitals, farms, universities, cities, police,
agencies, churches, airports and community organisations, industries, and so on. The
fundamentals governing the management of a business, a church or a university are same:
the difference lies in the techniques employed and practices followed. All managers arc
accountable for performance of other people: they plan, make decisions, organise work,
motivate people and implement controls and so forth. In order to accomplish things, the
techniques employed might differ depending on situational factors like : culture, tradition,
attitude, etc. Same is the case with management practices. An automobile designed for use

in deserts or jungles will be markedly different from the one that is designed for city
traffic. The design principles governing both models are the same. The generic content of
management fundamentals is such that they can be applied universally : practices and
techniques employed may differ depending on the nature of industry, the organisational
level where these are applied, etc.
4.

Practical evidence. Managing is found in all types, functions, levels and sizes of

organisations. The fact that managers regularly move from public to private sector
organisations bears ample testimony to the fact that management concepts are universal
across organisational types. For example, D. D. Ensenhower went from a general in the U.S.
Army to President of Columbia University and to President of the United States. Again Sri
P.L. Tandon. the former Chairman of Hindustan Lever Ltd, has managed the PNB, STC and
the NCAER successfully during his tenure as the Chairman in these organisations. The basic
concepts of management propagated by American writers have found expression even in
communist countries. According to Drucker. the rapid development of Brazil, the rapid
development of non-communist countries, that is, of Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan, the
rapid development of so poor and backward a peasant country as Iran are all traceable to
the impact of management.
Arguments Against Universality
1.

Complete substitutability is impossible. It is true that the managers job becomes

most universal in content at the upper echelons of organisations. The higher one moves in an
organisation the more he or she performs the generic functions of management planning,
organising, leading and controlling and the less he or she is involved in day-to-day technical
matters. The relationship between performance and functions entrusted becomes more
intense as one moves lower down the order. For example, the success of a drilling supervisor
of an oil rig depends to a large extent on his technical knowledge of drilling. On the other
hand, the president of an oil company does not need to have much of the technical
intricacies of drilling for oil or how to refine it. Before tossing the universality argument,
we must apply brakes and qualify the statement. Generic in content does not imply complete
substitutability.

2.

Organisational philosophies differ. Universality presupposes the existence of

predictability regarding the outcome of management actions. A manager working in Firm A

must be able to predict the likely consequences of his actions in Firm B where he is likely to
join. He may have to face insurmountable difficulties in case the underlying philosophies of
these organisations were to differ. For instance, in one organisation the emphasis is on
profit maximisation and in the other the emphasis is on social responsibilities. Such
conflicting demands affect managerial actions and what a manager could apply with success
in one organisation may not find a meaningful expression in the other organisation where the
underlying philosophy is different. As pointed out by Dale, no individual could be a good
administrator in religious, academic, military, and business institutions of both communist
and democratic countries because the philosophies that underlie each are drastically
different and one person could not encompass so much.
3.

Universality of principles: A Ridiculous Statement? Classical management principles

were written by practitioners in management and were based on personal experience and
limited observation only. They have only tried to pass on their ideas as universal truths. In
the absence of a rigorous scientific basis, no wonder, Simon dubbed the principles as
proverbs, comparable to folklore and folk-wisdom. Moreover, these principles are vague and
too general and , as a result, are very difficult to apply to a specific organisation. They
often overlap and are sometimes incompatible with one another. The terminology universal
principles, universal truths is quite unfortunate.
4.

Management is a product of the culture. Managers have to operate within the broad

constraints operating in an economy: culture, tradition, organisational philosophies, etc.

Managerial behaviour in a deeply traditional, religious economy is bound to be different
from the advanced and scientifically-oriented economy. It is fruitful to search for a
common set of principles or absolutes or determinate solutions where managers have to
operate in highly diverse cultures. A career in management is, by itself, not a preparation
for major political office....or for leadership in the armed forces, the church or a university.
The writers who argue that management principles are culture bound seem to ignore that
the fundamentals governing the management of enterprises in India, Japan, U.S.A., and

Brazil are the same. and they are applicable and adaptable in various cultures. Otherwise, it
would not have been possible for Indian Managers doing successful business in Great Britain.
Chinese management thinkers teaching in America, and Japanese managers working
successfully in Brazil and Hong kong. The universality of management thesis is well
supported by several research studies by Hair, Porter, Negandhi and Richman etc.
According to these researchers, cultural and situational factors may influence the way in
which a manager discharges his functions but the fundamentals of management remain
unchanged..

The principles and concepts of management have universal application. It means that
managerial knowledge may be transferred from one country to another and from one
organization to another within the same country. The concept of universality of management
is, therefore, subject to the following two connotations.

(1) Management principles can be successfully applied to different kinds of enterprises such
as business enterprises, clubs, hospitals and so on.

(2) Management principles are applicable to different economic systems of the world. They
have world wide utility.

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF UNIVERSALITY:

Arguments in favour of the universality concept are as follows:

1. Common Problems of Effective Use of Inputs:

Although objectives differ, all organizations require certain common principles, concepts
and skills of management for allocating scarce resources such as time, human resources,
capital and so on. Managers shift from one company to another and from one industry to
another. Such shifts indicate that there are general skills and principles of management at
work.

2. Distinction between Fundamentals and Techniques:

Management fundamentals and management techniques are not alike. Management

fundamentals are the basic principles and theories, while management techniques are the
tools for performing managerial functions. The application of management fundamentals may
vary in different situations, but not the fundamentals themselves. The principles, concepts
and skills of management are universal, only the practices change.

3. Management as a Process:

Management as a process is universal. It means that the fundamental functions of planning,

organizing, leading and controlling are basic and are performed by all managers regardless
of the type of enterprise.

ARGUMENTS AGAINTS UNIVERSALITY:

Management is entirely situational and there is nothing like universal principles of

management. This argument is based on the following factors:

1. Differences in Philosophies:
Philosophy means an attitude towards various activities. Differences in philosophies of
various enterprises may not allow a person to be an effective manager in all types of
enterprises. Differences in philosophy of various organizations require different kinds of
managerial techniques. This philosophy will exert different kinds of influence on
productivity.

2. Differences in Objectives:
The objective of an organization determines the type of management required. Because of
difference in objectives, the competence, the skills and the experience in management can
not as such be transferred and applied from one organization to another. It therefore,
implies that a person cannot demonstrate equal effectiveness in different types of
organizations.

3. Differences in Culture:
Culture means attitudes, beliefs and values of society. Identifiable cultural differences
bring variations in managerial behaviour patterns. Management philosophy is culture-bound
and hence it is not universally applicable. If a country has a strong traditional, religious and
cultural bias towards non-scientific behaviour, it will be difficult to introduce modem
methods of management