Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
items (objects, names, values, categories, etc.) in which the items are represented as being
"above," "below," or "at the same level as" one another. In other words A hierarchy is a
system or organization in which people or groups are ranked one above the other
according to status or authority.A hierarchy can link entities either directly or indirectly,
and either vertically or diagonally. The only direct links in a hierarchy, insofar as they are
system that is largely hierarchical can also incorporate alternative hierarchies. Indirect
hierarchical links can extend "vertically" upwards or downwards via multiple links in the
same direction, following a path. All parts of the hierarchy which are not linked vertically to
one another nevertheless can be "horizontally" linked through a path by traveling up the
hierarchy to find a common direct or indirect superior, and then down again. This is akin to
two co-workers or colleagues; each reports to a common superior, but they have the same
relative amount of authority. Organizational forms exist that are both alternative and
Administration
Let us define the principle in the words of Nicholas Henry: Span of control means that a
manager can properly control only a limited number of subordinates, after a certain number is
1
exceeded, communication of commands grows increasingly garbed and control becomes
increasingly ineffective and loose. In other words, there is a limit to everything and in public
The concept was originally applied in military department and later on the
subsequently it was found that the idea or process was wrong. The authority could increase
the number of subordinates but that failed to make any impact upon the improvement of the
organisation.
After prolonged experimentation it was found that there was a limit to the
span of control which means that an executive can never control the activities of unlimited
employees. Peter Self argues, The most specific of the principles of the scientific school
was that the span of direct supervision should be limited .It has been suggested that a chief
executive can control at most six subordinates and if more employees are put under his
supervision that will lead to chaos or mismanagement. It has been maintained that even an
officer with high degree of efficiency and large amount of administrative knowledge cannot
control large number of workers. The concept, practically, wants to say this.
Peter Self enumerates some factors that are relevant for this principle.
These are:
(a) The time and attention which a supervisor can give to the control of his subordinates. In
other words, a supervisor cannot have unlimited energy and power. He can supervise only a
2
(b) The effectiveness of control depends upon the quality and intelligence of the workers. A
supervisor cannot control large number of workers whose intelligence is miserably low.
(c) Span of control, again, depends upon another factor which is nature of work. This implies
that if the work is of complicated nature and requires special management skill an executive
Moreover, the specialists are of the view that the principle of span of control has a close link
with the quality and nature of control or supervision. The control may be closed or
large number of workers. But if the executive is empowered to supervise superficially he can
The supporters of the span of control must take this aspect into account. It has also been said
that the effectiveness of control to a large extent depends upon the internal condition or
management of the organisation. If the management is of high standard and there exists a
good deal of coordination and good relation among the employees a chief executive can
easily control a large number of workers. But if the opposite situation prevails the supervising
power of the executive will face troubles. The mentality, outlook, behaviour etc. of the
workers must also be brought under active consideration while analysing the principle of
span of control.
Evaluation:
Critics of the span of control do not lay great faith on this principle. Herbert Simon says, a
restricted span of control inevitably produces excessive red tape, for each contact between
organisation and members must be carried upward until a common superior is found
(Simon). Critics further say that if the principle is strictly followed that will inevitably result
3
in red-tapeism which will harm the management and development of the organisation. If the
organisation is quite large and if it is divided into a number of sections, and if there is a head
in every sectionit will be very difficult for the organisation to arrive at a decision. Even the
Simon has suggested that for effectiveness of the principle the span of control must
be extended as far as possible. But here is again a problem. If the span of control is extended
liberally it may not work up to satisfaction. The organisation will face serious problems.
Taking of decision will take long time. Apart from this an executive has limit to his power or
capacity. It is not possible to manage a large number of employees. There will arise a
But there is a basic difference between military administration and public administration. In
any civil administration there is very little strictness of rule whereas in military
administration the strictness in principle is followed. This difference puts the principle in a lot
management of an organisation. For better discipline and improved management it has been
suggested by Fayol that an employee will be responsible only to one master or boss and no
one else. It is mainly due to the fact that if an employee is compelled to carry out the orders
4
The organisation will be plunged into problem. The term unity of command does not admit of
any difference of opinion in the administration. It implies that in management there shall be
transparency and when the chief executive issues command or order this shall be treated as
final.
Henri Fayol thought that for the better and efficient management it is essential that unity of
command should be strictly followed. Fayol has said that there are three things in the idea of
unity of command the person who issues command or order, the employee who carries out
the command that is executes the order and, finally, if the organisation is being managed in
accordance with the order. Fayol observed that in the French military department the
principle of unity of command was strictly followed and according to Fayol that produced
good results.
Still today in many states (in some departments this principle is strictly followed) the
existence of this principle comes to our notice. Henri Fayol was quite eager to implement this
principle in the management world of France and from the history of public administration
we come to know that it achieved success. In the opinion of Fayol the crucial aspects of unity
of command are- there must exist an authority who has the power or right to issue order, the
A number of objections have been raised against this principle and one such has been made
by some specialists such as Dimock and Dimock. They are of opinion that if the organisation
is small in size the principle will have some practical importance that is it may or will be
executed. Even in military department the unity of command has been fruitfully
implemented. But in general public administration or civil administration the principle cannot
be implemented. Particularly if the organisation happens to be large, there is not one person
to give orders.
5
A worker may have to serve more than one master and in that case he will carry out the
orders of whom. This relates to the structure of one management. In that situation an
employee cannot say that he will carry out the order of a particular boss and not other bosses.
In many organisations there is a group of managers and all of them are authorised to issue
command. The unity of command principle will create confusion in such an organisation.
Some people say that in Fayols time there was no existence of large organisation.
There is another drawback of this principle. For better or efficient management the principle
of coordination should be strictly-followed. But some critics say that in their principle the
work is sincerely followed. But many critics are of opinion that there is conflict between
unity of command and division of labour or division of work. The size of the organisation is
expanding day after day and in this background the utility of this principle is decreasing
gradually. There must exist strict and effective coordination among all the departments of an
organisation.
Simon in his Administrative Behaviour has vehemently criticised this principle. He does not
contribute to the idea that if the principle of unity of command is sincerely followed that will
result in the efficiency and better management of the organisation. The whole idea is
exaggerated.
Simon has said that the efficiency of a management depends on a number of factors and the
unity of command is one of them. But this is not an important one. Simon has further said
that the unity of command is against the well-known principle of specialisation. Let us quote
him: The real fault that must be found with this principle is that it is incompatible with the
principle of specialisation.
6
It is said that for the better management of any modern organisation both specialisation and
unity of command are indispensible and in that case both cannot co-exist. He has further
observed that the unity of command is an over simplified principle. Modern organisation is
too complex to apply it. Simon has said that when the specialisation and unity of command
Peter Self has criticised it from another standpoint. He says that the principle in its full form
is unworkable. Let us see what he says: The modified unity of command model is more
often accepted in theory, but the coordinative and arbitrative power of the line supervisors is
often much less than the theory suggests. Unity of command often suggest no more than the
reject the principle. To speak the truth no principle of public administration is free from
defects and the unity of command is no exception. Instead of saying unity of command it is
DECENTRALIZATION
people or things away from a central location or authority. While centralization, especially in
the governmental sphere, is widely studied and practiced, there is no common definition or
of the different ways it is applied. Concepts of decentralization have been applied to group
dynamics and management science in private businesses and organizations, political science,
7
ADMINISTRATIVE DECENTRALIZATION
financial resources for providing public services among different levels of government. It
is the transfer of responsibility for the planning, financing and management of certain
public functions from the central government and its agencies to field units of
making authority and financial and management responsibilities among different levels
of the central government. It can merely shift responsibilities from central government
officials in the capital city to those working in regions, provinces or districts, or it can
create strong field administration or local administrative capacity under the supervision
Usually these organizations have a great deal of discretion in decision-making. They may
be exempt from constraints on regular civil service personnel and may be able to charge
8
Devolution. A third type of administrative decentralization is devolution. When
governments devolve functions, they transfer authority for decision-making, finance, and
Devolution usually transfers responsibilities for services to municipalities that elect their
own mayors and councils, raise their own revenues, and have independent authority to
make investment decisions. In a devolved system, local governments have clear and
legally recognized geographical boundaries over which they exercise authority and within
which they perform public functions. It is this type of administrative decentralization that
Civil service reform is usually a supporting strategy for more general decentralization in
government operations or service delivery. One does not decentralize the civil service as
an end in itself -- one does so in order to provide services better, manage resources
more efficiently, or support other general outcome goals. The civil service as a whole can
be seen as one of the main instruments with which the government fulfills its
obligations. In the context of decentralization, this tool must often be reshaped in order
to perform a new set of duties efficiently, equitably, and effectively. Reform of the civil
service, therefore, is the process of modifying rules and incentives to obtain a more
environment.
This note will first discuss the various civil service issues that sectoral or general
decentralization strategies raise. It will then focus on various reform priorities to cope
9
Civil services at all levels of government need a capable, motivated, and efficient staff in
order to deliver quality services to its citizens. When civil service functions and
and accountability are shifted. Decentralization thus intensifies the need for capable staff
changes the location of power and jobs. Movement geographically or across tiers of
government is often impeded by issues related to statute, prestige and poor labor
the central state and the emergence of representative government at local and
programs and mechanisms for inter-post mobility, which compound the costs of
but it also gives subnational governments more room to fail if specific steps are not
information which they receive (feedback from their constituencies) may have different
preferences than workers at the next higher level. This divergence in views and
convictions can create conflict within the civil service that will require mechanisms to
manage effectively.
relaxes national control and creates the potential for more regional variation in civil
10
service conditions. Some room for variation allows regions the flexibility to hire a civil
service that matches a communitys needs and budget constraints. National salary,
eligibility, and performance standards can ensure consistent quality, but they can also
lead to personnel expenditures (especially for locally administered education and health
sectors) beyond some local capacities; grant transfer systems will need to take different
financing capacities into account in these and other types of mandated expenditures. The
Philippines, Indonesia, and Pakistan are examples of decentralized states with essentially
uniform terms and conditions of service for government employees in different regions.
Types of Decentralization
Historians have described the history of governments and empires in terms of centralization
and decentralization. In his 1910 The History of Nations Henry Cabot Lodge wrote that
Persian king Darius I (550-486 BCE) was a master of organization and for the first time in
history centralization becomes a political fact. He also noted that this contrasted with the
decentralization of Ancient Greece.Since the 1980s a number of scholars have written about
cycles of centralization and decentralizations. Stephen K. Sanderson wrote that over the last
4000 years chiefdoms and actual states have gone through sequences of centralization and
decentralization of economic, political and social power.Yildiz Atasoy writes this process has
been going on since the Stone Age through not just chiefdoms and states, but empires and
todays hegemonic core states. Christopher K. Chase-Dunn and Thomas D. Hall review
other works that detail these cycles, including works which analyze the concept of core elites
which compete with state accumulation of wealth and how their "intra-ruling-class
competition accounts for the rise and fall of states" and of their phases of centralization and
decentralization.
Rising government expenditures, poor economic performance and the rise of free market-
11
competition within their services, to contract out to private firms operating in the market, and
decentralization may be territorial, moving power from a central city to other localities, and it
may be functional, moving decision-making from the top administrator of any branch of
privatization. It has been called the "new public management" which has been described as
Political Decentralization
Political decentralization aims to give citizens or their elected representatives more power. It
may be associated with pluralistic politics and representative government, but it also means
implementation of laws and policies. Depending on the country, this may require
constitutional or statutory reforms, the development of new political parties, increased power
for legislatures, the creation of local political units, and encouragement of advocacy groups.[
The European Union follows the principle of subsidiary, which holds that decision-making
should be made by the most local competent authority. The EU should decide only on
enumerated issues that a local or member state authority cannot address themselves.
In Finland, the Centre Party explicitly supports decentralization. For example, government
departments have been moved from the capital Helsinki to the provinces. The Centre supports
substantial subsidies that limit potential economic and political centralization to Helsinki .
12
Administrative decentralization
making, finance and implementation of certain public functions from officials of central
governments to those in existing districts or, if necessary, new ones under direct control of
central government, but ultimately accountable to it. It involves the creation of public-
All of them will have a great deal of decision-making discretion and they may be exempt
from civil service requirements and may be permitted to charge users for services.
certain public functions to the sub-national level, such as a regional, local, or state
government.
Divestment, also called privatization, may mean merely contracting out services to private
finance and implementation of certain public functions. Facilities will be sold off, workers
provide the services. Many of these functions originally were done by private individuals,
companies, or associations and later taken over by the government, either directly, or by
regulating out of business entities which competed with newly created government
programs.
13
Fiscal decentralization
a lower level of government while maintaining financial responsibility. While this process
usually is called fiscal federalism it may be relevant to unitary, federal and confederal
governments. Fiscal federalism also concerns the "vertical imbalances" where the central
government gives too much or too little money to the lower levels. It actually can be a way of
Fiscal decentralization can be achieved through user fees, user participation through
transfers of central government tax monies to local governments through transfer payments or
grants, and authorization of municipal borrowing with national government loan guarantees.
them.
Economic decentralization can be done through privatization of public owned functions and
businesses, as described briefly above. But it also is done through deregulation, the abolition
services, schools, garbage collection. Even as private companies and corporations have
worked to have such services contracted out to or privatized by them, others have worked to
Since the 1970s there has been deregulation of some industries, like banking, trucking,
airlines and telecommunications which resulted generally in more competition and lower
14
prices.According to Cato Institute, an American libertarian think-tank, some industries
that hurt consumers, the electricity industry being a prime example.For example, in banking,
Cato Institute believes some deregulation allowed banks to compete across state lines,
increasing consumer choice, while an actual increase in regulators and regulations forced
banks to do business the way central government regulators commanded, including making
loans to individuals incapable of repaying them, leading eventually to the financial crisis of
20072008.
production agents. An example of this method in practice is in Kerala, India which started in
Some argue that government standardisation in areas from commodity market, inspection and
testing procurement bidding, Building codes, professional and vocational education, trade
certification, safety, etc. are necessary.Emmanuelle Auriol and Michel Benaim write about
standards. They find that while there may be a need for public regulation if public safety is at
stake, private creation of standards usually is better because "regulators or 'experts' might
misrepresent consumers' tastes and needs." As long as companies are averse to incompatible
Environmental decentralization
15
Central governments themselves may own large tracts of land and control the forest, water,
mineral, wildlife and other resources they contain. They may manage them through
government operations or leasing them to private businesses; or they may neglect them to be
exploited by individuals or groups who defy non-enforced laws against exploitation. It also
may control most private land through land-use, zoning, environmental and other
relinquish control, but such programs can face public scrutiny because of fear of a loss of
has been found to be an effective way of dealing with these concerns. Such decentralization
Centralisation
become concentrated within a particular location or group, keeping all of the important
decision-making powers within the head office or the center of the organization.
The term has a variety of meanings in several fields. In political science, centralisation
centralisation in management
16
2. Execution decided by the top level management with the help from the other levels of
management.
3. Lower levels management do the jobs which directed and controlled by the top managers.
Centralisation Is Suitable For Small Firms - Managers are easy to look after overall activities
personally.
Centralisation Facilitates Unified Decision - All decisions made by top managers, gathering
Centralisation Simplifies Structure - The structure is simple and clear, involving two levels -
Centralisation Facilitates Quicker Decision - One make final decision and others provide
Economy In Operation - Minimising the operation cost by laying off the amount of managers
employees.(Accountlearning.blogspot.co.uk, 2013)
operating levels in the management system, which means top managers may not effectively
Managers are overburdened - Top manager is the centre of the organisation and worries about
each and every activity in the organisation, which tends to decrease working efficiency of the
organisation.
17
Possibility of power misuse - If top managers lack enough skills and abilities, they may exercise
their powers on the basis of their personal judgement, leading to misuse of authority.
Low morale motivation - Middle and lower level managers may feel passive while doing their
assignments as their personality and ability may not be expressed. The lack of motivation leads to
environment
Inappropriate for routine decision - Top managers can only devote most time in taking
part.(Accountlearning.blogspot.co.uk, 2013)[
Today's managers have access to an amazing array of resources which they can use to
improve their skills. But what about those managers who were leading the way forward 100
years ago?
Managers in the early 1900s had very few external resources to draw upon to guide and
develop their management practice. But thanks to early theorists like Henri Fayol (1841-
18
1925), managers began to get the tools they needed to lead and manage more effectively.
Fayol, and others like him, are responsible for building the foundations of modern
management theory.
Background
Henri Fayol was born in Istanbul in 1841. When he was 19, he began working as an engineer
at a large mining company in France. He eventually became the director, at a time when the
Through the years, Fayol began to develop what he considered to be the 14 most important
principles of management. Essentially, these explained how managers should organize and
In 1916, two years before he stepped down as director, he published his "14 Principles of
Management" in the book "Administration Industrielle et Gnrale." Fayol also created a list
of the six primary functions of management, which go hand in hand with the Principles.
Fayol's "14 Principles" was one of the earliest theories of management to be created, and
remains one of the most comprehensive. He's considered to be among the most influential
contributors to the modern concept of management, even though people don't refer to "The 14
The theory falls under the Administrative Management school of thought (as opposed to the
19
1. Division of Work When employees are specialized, output can increase because they
2. Authority Managers must have the authority to give orders, but they must also keep in
3. Discipline Discipline must be upheld in organizations, but methods for doing so can vary.
5. Unity of Direction Teams with the same objective should be working under the direction
of one manager, using one plan. This will ensure that action is properly coordinated.
employee should not be allowed to become more important than those of the group. This
includes managers.
8. Centralization This principle refers to how close employees are to the decision-making
9. Scalar Chain Employees should be aware of where they stand in the organization's
10. Order The workplace facilities must be clean, tidy and safe for employees. Everything
11. Equity Managers should be fair to staff at all times, both maintaining discipline as
12. Stability of Tenure of Personnel Managers should strive to minimize employee turnover.
13. Initiative Employees should be given the necessary level of freedom to create and carry
out plans.
14. Esprit de Corps Organizations should strive to promote team spirit and unity.
20
Fayol's Six Functions of Management
Fayol's six primary functions of management, which go hand in hand with the Principles, are
as follows:
1. Forecasting.
2. Planning.
3. Organizing.
4. Commanding.
5. Coordinating.
6. Controlling.
Key Points
KEY POINTS
Henri Fayol's "14 Principles of Management" have been a significant influence on modern
management theory. His practical list of principles helped early 20th century managers learn
Although the 14 Principles aren't widely used today, they can still offer guidance for today's
managers. Many of the principles are now considered to be common sense, but at the time
21