My view on why few of the Henry Fayol’s management principles needs to be revisited?

Henry Fayol's management principles are a set of 14 guidelines for effective management that were developed in the early 20th century.

1. Division of Work, 2. Authority and Responsibility, 3. Discipline, 4. Unity of Command, 5. Unity of Direction, 6. Subordination of Individual Interest, 7. Remuneration, 8. Centralization, 9. Scalar Chain, 10. Order, 11. Equity, 12. Stability, 13. Initiative, 14. Esprit de Corps

These principles are still widely taught and applied today, but there are some aspects of Fayol's principles that may need to be revised in light of modern technology and the changing nature of work.

One reason Fayol's principles may need to be rewritten is that the modern workplace is often characterized by knowledge work and innovation in the world of Information Technology, rather than the industrial work that Fayol was primarily concerned with. Knowledge workers, who often work with complex, constantly changing information and may require a different approach to management than workers in a more traditional industrial setting.

Modern technology has transformed the way that work is done, and this may require a different approach to management. For example, the use of remote work and virtual teams has increased dramatically in the past 3 years and this may require new strategies for communication and collaboration. The modern workplace is often more diverse and global, with people from a variety of different cultures and backgrounds working together in the teams. This may require a different approach to leadership and management in order to effectively bring people together and work towards common goals.

While Fayol's management principles are still valuable and relevant today, they may need to be adapted and revised in order to be effective in the modern technology-driven workplace.

Let me share few thoughts on 2 principles ‘Authority & Responsibilities’ and ‘Unity of Command’ and why it is needed to revisit in a diverse environment           

The command and control management style, also known as top-down management, involves a hierarchical structure in which decisions are made by top-level managers and then communicated to lower-level employees, who are expected to follow them without question. This style of management may not be effective in the current generation of diverse, global technology workforce for a number of reasons:

1. Lack of flexibility: The command and control style can be inflexible and may not allow for the kind of adaptability and innovation that is often needed in the fast-paced and constantly evolving technology industry. Certain level of autonomy is necessary for the teams to come up with great ideas when the organizations is focussed on more of innovation and generating business values.

2. Decreased creativity: This style of management can stifle creativity and individuality, as employees are expected to follow orders rather than think for themselves or bring new ideas to the table.

3. Decreased motivation: The command and control style can lead to decreased motivation and engagement among employees, as they may feel that their opinions and ideas are not valued and that they have little autonomy in their work.

4. Decreased diversity: The command and control style may not be effective in a diverse, global workforce, as it may not take into account the unique perspectives and needs of different cultures and backgrounds.

5. Decreased collaboration: The top-down nature of the command and control style may discourage collaboration and hinder the sharing of ideas and knowledge within the organization.

The command and control management style may be necessary at certain level but may not be truly effective in the current generation of diverse mainly working with the knowledge workers in the current global technology workforce.