14 Principles of Management described by Henri Fayol.

1. Division of Labor
a. Henry Fayol has stressed on the specialization of jobs.
b. He recommended that work of all kinds must be divided & subdivided and allotted
to various persons according to their expertise in a particular area.
c. Subdivision of work makes it simpler and results in efficiency.
d. It also helps the individual in acquiring speed, accuracy in his performance.
e. Specialization leads to efficiency & economy in spheres of business.
2. Party of Authority & Responsibility

a. Authority & responsibility are co-existing.

b. If authority is given to a person, he should also be made responsible.
c. In a same way, if anyone is made responsible for any job, he should also have
concerned authority.
d. Authority refers to the right of superiors to get exactness from their sub-ordinates
whereas responsibility means obligation for the performance of the job assigned.
e. There should be a balance between the two i.e. they must go hand in hand.
f. Authority without responsibility leads to irresponsible behavior whereas
responsibility without authority makes the person ineffective.
3. Principle of One Boss

a. A sub-ordinate should receive orders and be accountable to one and only one
boss at a time.
b. In other words, a sub-ordinate should not receive instructions from more than one
person because -

- It undermines authority
- Weakens discipline
- Divides loyalty
- Creates confusion
- Delays and chaos
- Escaping responsibilities
- Duplication of work
- Overlapping of efforts

c. Therefore, dual sub-ordination should be avoided unless and until it is absolutely

essential.
d. Unity of command provides the enterprise a disciplined, stable & orderly existence.
e. It creates harmonious relationship between superiors and sub-ordinates.
4. Unity of Direction

a. Fayol advocates one head one plan which means that there should be one plan
for a group of activities having similar objectives.
b. Related activities should be grouped together. There should be one plan of action
for them and they should be under the charge of a particular manager.
c. According to this principle, efforts of all the members of the organization should be
directed towards common goal.
d. Without unity of direction, unity of action cannot be achieved.
e. In fact, unity of command is not possible without unity of direction.
Basis Unity of command Unity of direction

Meaning It implies that a sub-ordinate should It means one head, one plan for a
receive orders & instructions from only group of activities having similar
one boss. objectives.

Nature It is related to the functioning of It is related to the functioning of

personnel’s. departments, or organization as a
whole.

Necessity It is necessary for fixing responsibility of It is necessary for sound organization.

each subordinates.

Advantage It It avoids duplication of efforts and

avoids conflicts, confusion & chaos. wastage of resources.

Result It leads to better superior sub-ordinate It leads to smooth running of the

relationship. enterprise.

Therefore it is obvious that they are different from each other but they are dependent on each other
i.e. unity of direction is a pre-requisite for unity of command. But it does not automatically come
from the unity of direction.

5. Equity
a. Equity means combination of fairness, kindness & justice.
b. The employees should be treated with kindness & equity if devotion is expected of
them.
c. It implies that managers should be fair and impartial while dealing with the
subordinates.
d. They should give similar treatment to people of similar position.
e. They should not discriminate with respect to age, caste, sex, religion, relation etc.
f. Equity is essential to create and maintain cordial relations between the managers
and sub-ordinate.
g. But equity does not mean total absence of harshness.
h. Fayol was of opinion that, “at times force and harshness might become necessary
for the sake of equity”.
6. Order

a. This principle is concerned with proper & systematic arrangement of things and
people.
b. Arrangement of things is called material order and placement of people is called
social order.
c. Material order- There should be safe, appropriate and specific place for every
article and every place to be effectively used for specific activity and commodity.
d. Social order- Selection and appointment of most suitable person on the suitable
job. There should be a specific place for every one and everyone should have a
specific place so that they can easily be contacted whenever need arises.
7. Discipline

a. According to Fayol, “Discipline means sincerity, obedience, respect of authority &

observance of rules and regulations of the enterprise”.
b. This principle applies that subordinate should respect their superiors and obey
their order.
c. It is an important requisite for smooth running of the enterprise.
d. Discipline is not only required on path of subordinates but also on the part of
management.
e. Discipline can be enforced if -

- There are good superiors at all levels.

- There are clear & fair agreements with workers.
- Sanctions (punishments) are judiciously applied.

8. Initiative
a. Workers should be encouraged to take initiative in the work assigned to them.
b. It means eagerness to initiate actions without being asked to do so.
c. Fayol advised that management should provide opportunity to its employees to
suggest ideas, experiences& new method of work.
d. It helps in developing an atmosphere of trust and understanding.
e. People then enjoy working in the organization because it adds to their zeal and
energy.
f. To suggest improvement in formulation & implementation of place.
g. They can be encouraged with the help of monetary & non-monetary incentives.
9. Fair Remuneration

a. The quantum and method of remuneration to be paid to the workers should be fair,
reasonable, satisfactory & rewarding of the efforts.
b. As far as possible it should accord satisfaction to both employer and the
employees.
c. Wages should be determined on the basis of cost of living, work assigned,
financial position of the business, wage rate prevailing etc.
d. Logical & appropriate wage rates and methods of their payment reduce tension &
differences between workers & management creates harmonious relationship and
pleasing atmosphere of work.
e. Fayol also recommended provision of other benefits such as free education,
medical & residential facilities to workers.
10. Stability of Tenure

a. Fayol emphasized that employees should not be moved frequently from one job
position to another i.e. the period of service in a job should be fixed.
b. Therefore employees should be appointed after keeping in view principles of
recruitment & selection but once they are appointed their services should be
served.
c. According to Fayol. “Time is required for an employee to get used to a new work &
succeed to doing it well but if he is removed before that he will not be able to
render worthwhile services”.
d. As a result, the time, effort and money spent on training the worker will go waste.
e. Stability of job creates team spirit and a sense of belongingness among workers
which ultimately increase the quality as well as quantity of work.
11. Scalar Chain
 a. Fayol defines scalar chain as ’The chain of superiors ranging from the ultimate
authority to the lowest”.
b. Every orders, instructions, messages, requests, explanation etc. has to pass
through Scalar chain.
c. But, for the sake of convenience & urgency, this path can be cut shirt and this
short cut is known as Gang Plank.
d. A Gang Plank is a temporary arrangement between two different points to
facilitate quick & easy communication as explained below:

In the figure given, if D has to communicate with G he will first send the
communication upwards with the help of C, B to A and then downwards with the
help of E and F to G which will take quite some time and by that time, it may not
be worth therefore a gang plank has been developed between the two.

e. Gang Plank clarifies that management principles are not rigid rather they are very
flexible. They can be moulded and modified as per the requirements of situations
12. Sub-Ordination of Individual Interest to General Interest

a. An organization is much bigger than the individual it constitutes therefore interest

of the undertaking should prevail in all circumstances.
b. As far as possible, reconciliation should be achieved between individual and group
interests.
c. But in case of conflict, individual must sacrifice for bigger interests.
d. In order to achieve this attitude, it is essential that -

- Employees should be honest & sincere.

- Proper & regular supervision of work.
- Reconciliation of mutual differences and clashes by mutual agreement.
For example, for change of location of plant, for change of profit sharing
ratio, etc.

13. Espirit De’ Corps (can be achieved through unity of command)

a. It refers to team spirit i.e. harmony in the work groups and mutual understanding
among the members.
b. Spirit De’ Corps inspires workers to work harder.
c. Fayol cautioned the managers against dividing the employees into competing
groups because it might damage the moral of the workers and interest of the
undertaking in the long run.
d. To inculcate Espirit De’ Corps following steps should be undertaken -
 There should be proper co-ordination of work at all levels
 Subordinates should be encouraged to develop informal relations among
themselves.
 Efforts should be made to create enthusiasm and keenness among
subordinates so that they can work to the maximum ability.
 Efficient employees should be rewarded and those who are not up to the
mark should be given a chance to improve their performance.
 Subordinates should be made conscious of that whatever they are doing
is of great importance to the business & society.
e. He also cautioned against the more use of Britain communication to the
subordinates i.e. face to face communication should be developed. The managers
 should infuse team spirit & belongingness. There should be no place for
misunderstanding. People then enjoy working in the organization & offer their best
towards the organization.
14. Centralization & De-Centralization

a. Centralization means concentration of authority at the top level. In other words,

centralization is a situation in which top management retains most of the decision
making authority.
b. Decentralization means disposal of decision making authority to all the levels of
the organization. In other words, sharing authority downwards is decentralization.
c. According to Fayol, “Degree of centralization or decentralization depends on no. of
factors like size of business, experience of superiors, dependability & ability of
subordinates etc.
d. Anything which increases the role of subordinate is decentralization & anything
which decreases it is centralization.
e. Fayol suggested that absolute centralization or decentralization is not feasible. An
organization should strike to achieve a lot between the two.

PRINCIPLES OF MANAGEMENT:
1. DIVISION OF WORK: Work should be divided among individuals and groups to ensure
that effort and attention are focused on special portions of the task. Fayol presented work
specialization as the best way to use the human resources of the organization.

2. AUTHORITY: The concepts of Authority and responsibility are closely related. Authority
was defined by Fayol as the right to give orders and the power to exact obedience.
Responsibility involves being accountable, and is therefore naturally associated with
authority. Whoever assumes authority also assumes responsibility.

3. DISCIPLINE: A successful organization requires the common effort of workers. Penalties

should be applied judiciously to encourage this common effort.

4. UNITY OF COMMAND: Workers should receive orders from only one manager.

5. UNITY OF DIRECTION: The entire organization should be moving towards a common

objective in a common direction.

6. SUBORDINATION OF INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS TO THE GENERAL INTERESTS :

The interests of one person should not take priority over the interests of the organization
as a whole.

7. REMUNERATION: Many variables, such as cost of living, supply of qualified personnel,

general business conditions, and success of the business, should be considered in
determining a worker’s rate of pay.

8. CENTRALIZATION: Fayol defined centralization as lowering the importance of the

subordinate role. Decentralization is increasing the importance. The degree to which
centralization or decentralization should be adopted depends on the specific organization
in which the manager is working.
 9. SCALAR CHAIN: Managers in hierarchies are part of a chain like authority scale. Each
manager, from the first line supervisor to the president, possess certain amounts of
authority. The President possesses the most authority; the first line supervisor the least.
Lower level managers should always keep upper level managers informed of their work
activities. The existence of a scalar chain and adherence to it are necessary if the
organization is to be successful.

10. ORDER: For the sake of efficiency and coordination, all materials and people related to a
specific kind of work should be treated as equally as possible.

11. EQUITY: All employees should be treated as equally as possible.

12. STABILITY OF TENURE OF PERSONNEL: Retaining productive employees should

always be a high priority of management. Recruitment and Selection Costs, as well as
increased product-reject rates are usually associated with hiring new workers.

13. INITIATIVE: Management should take steps to encourage worker initiative, which is
defined as new or additional work activity undertaken through self direction.

14. ESPIRIT DE CORPS: Management should encourage harmony and general good
feelings among employees.

Management theoretician Henri Fayol’s 14 principles discussed

Principle 1: Division of work
The idea of division of work, or as Adam Smith called it “division of labour”, in 1776 probably goes
back to the beginning of work itself. Fayol recognizes this in considering specialization as part of
“the natural order” comparing it to the organs of the body . “The object of division of work is to
produce more and better work with the same effort”, Fayol describes.

This very objective has not been altered in today’s labor. In a sense this principle is the
fundamental feature of modern economy, allowing for the largest increases of productivity. Peter F.
Drucker informs us, that the 20th century has seen a rate of 3% productivity increase per year,
hence productivity has risen 50 fold since the time of Frederick Taylor, who acted as a catalyst in
the development of division of work .

An example of this fact can come from early industrialization, namely the Ford motor company ,
where Taylor’s system of a scientific approach was applied. Taylor was interested in skill
development by means of standardization and functional specialization . One worker would
assemble the dashboard, another would assemble the wheels, and yet another would paint the
exterior. The effects of this are well known and lead to Ford becoming not just the predominant car
maker but also the inventor of the conveyer-belt production system- revolutionizing many
industries.

However, one could argue that extremes of division of work could lead to undesired effects.
Division of labor can ultimately reduce productivity and increase costs to produce units. Several
reasons as causes for reduction in productivity can be thought of. For example, productivity can
suffer when workers become bored with the constant repetition of a task. Additionally, productivity
can be affected when workers lose pride in their work because they are not producing an entire
product they can identify as their own work.
Principle 2: Authority and Responsibility
Fayol defines authority as the “right to give orders”, but he emphasizes that responsibility arises
with it . He “demands high moral character, impartiality and firmness.” Fayol thinks of responsibility
as something that is “feared as much as authority is sought after”. This fear, he explains can lead
to a paralysis and must be counter-acted by personal integrity and a “particularly high moral
character”. These qualities may be rewarded monetarily, Fayol argues.

Fayol himself apparently has not merely preached high morals but lived them too, when in the
position of a CEO . He for example purchased no shares in Commentry-Fourchambault, where he
served, in order to avoid a dependence on the board, so he could subordinate his interests to the
common good .

When looking at these standards, Fayol arguably should be followed as a leading example. In the
light of current developments in regards to the financial crisis of the year 2009 and onwards, one
notices a discrepancy between today’s leadership moral and Fayol’s demands.

Principle 3: Discipline
Discipline Fayol understood as obedience and outward marks of respect between the firm and its
employees . He considered it as an absolute prerequisite in order to assure a smooth running of
the business. “Without it”, he says, “no enterprise could prosper”.

Interestingly, Fayol emphasizes discipline not merely as something the employee owes the
management, but rather as something that “depends essentially on the worthiness of its leaders”,
in other words on the respect employees have for their leader. He continues in describing the
reasons for defects in employee and management relationships by stating: “the ill mostly results
from the ineptitude of the leaders” .

Respect for a leader increases with the leader possessing the appropriate qualifications for the
position, i.e. with their perceived “worthiness” . In this respect, Fayol has a somewhat more
behavioral approach to the problem of discipline than for instance Taylor, who points to “soldiering”,
(i.e. the agreement between workers to low standards of work in order to protect their own
interests) as something one can recognize as a lack of discipline . This lack of discipline, Taylor
suggests, can be counter-acted by applying various techniques, none of which clearly addresses
the interaction between worker and manager, other than, what he calls “heartily cooperation”.

Principle 4: Unity of Command

This rule requires that an “employee should receive orders from one superior only” . Dual
command must not necessarily derive from an intentional organizational design, but can occur
coincidently, for instance if departments are not clearly demarcated, responsibilities and authorities
are not clearly defined, or relationship dynamics (e.g. amongst friends, family etc) lead to someone
assuming authority that was not originally associated with this individual.

Similar to Fayol’s argument that specialization, and hence division of work is a natural state, one
could make the point that a single leader is an evolutionary requirement. Simple speaking: social
groups of animals often are organized in a way that resembles the hierarchy of companies, so
called dominance hierarchies . This is especially true in primates.
Some argue that our ability as well as our proneness to hierarchies with a clear leadership and the
connected aggression, with which we search to establish such hierarchical structures, is imbedded
into our brains due to our evolution.

Hence unity of command is a principle we find applied in the military just as much as in rather
modern and alternatively run companies like Google Inc., which is run by three CEOs (Sergey, Eric
and Larry) . Google claims to have flat hierarchies and maintain a small-business feel . However,
there still must be a leader, a decision maker, one who carries the largest responsibility, or, as in
the case of Google, a team of leaders.

Principle 5: Unity of Direction

Fayol summarizes this principle with the words: “one head and one plan for a group” . Hence, this
point is naturally closely connected to the unity of command principle.

Again Sloan and GM can serve as an example. Sloan introduced a wide variety of metrics in order
to measure the performance of departments and the firms that were part of the GM concern. His
attitude is summarized in his words: “We have such control over this ship [the GM corporation] that
we know exactly where we are at all times” . Or as Fayol said: “Unity of direction is provided for by
sound organization of the body corporate…” .

That means first one must know where to take the company and subsequently constantly assure
that the plan is still on track. The success story of GM under Sloan exemplifies the validity of this
principle.

Principle 6: Subordination of individual interest to general interest

Fayol points out, that personal interests and company interests must be reconciled. Generally
speaking however, the companies’ interests must be put ahead of personal interests . The struggle
of interest can be exemplified by the worker rights movements and unions. Fayol was not at all
opposed to such organizations as unions. In fact, he believed in granting benefits to workers .

We see, Fayol did not mean to suppress workers interests but rather that every worker must
compromise with the interests of the collective, i.e. the corporation. Interestingly, Fayol suggests
“constant supervision” as one measure to restrict unwanted egoistic effects, like selfishness,
laziness and others, which cloud the vision for the company’s interests .

This indicates, that with the demand for subordination of individual interest to general interest Fayol
included another principle in his catalogue that has not lost its validity today.

Principle 7: Remuneration of Personnel

In discussing how to apply fair modes of payment, Fayol mentions several still used strategies, e.g.
time rates, job rates, and piece rates . Most interestingly he also mentions the aforementioned
bonuses and profit sharing. He emphasizes that there should be no overpayment “beyond
reasonable limits”.

One can only speculate how Fayol would think about the bonus practice of banks today. As Fayol
explains himself, in his time bonuses and profit-sharing were still rather new concepts. And he
wonders what would happen with bonuses in lean times, pointing out, that a salary entirely
depending on profit-sharing would lead to a loss of salary under certain circumstances.
Revisiting the banks’ situation of today we see how Fayol’s thoughts on remuneration are largely
ignored in regards to the example of the hotly debated banker-bonuses. Additionally, he describes
salary policies as important in maintenance of “relative social quiet”, as he calls it .

This attitude echoes like a warning for today’s management leaders, whose remuneration practice
is perceived as socially unsustainable and hence immoral, and Fayol’s suggestion is thereby
proven to be a relevant principle also today.

Principle 8: Centralization
Centralization is understood by Fayol as the necessity to have control over processes in a central
place, and compares this concept with the brain where centrally control is exhibited over the body.
Fayol is flexible on the concept of centralization though. He suggests that the degree of
centralization must fit the design and size of the corporation . Possibly larger firms, with longer
chains of command do better with more centralization and vice versa.

In today’s corporate world IT has contributed to an easier approach to centralization. At the same
time has the fact that large corporations act globally led to adjustments that can best be performed
locally. In other words, a company must be able to do both. For different business aspects, different
solutions must be found.

This concept can be exemplified by Michael Hammer’s approach who goes so far as to claim that
“the key structural issue is no longer centralization versus decentralization- it’s process
standardization versus process diversity” . However, in a traditional administrative approach the
examples mentioned by Hammer exemplify the dichotomy modern management is facing.

A revealing example mentioned by Hammer is that of Johnson & Johnson. The company
standardized (centralized the process aspect in other words) R&D activities and manages these
efforts as a single research portfolio. At the same time the sales and manufacturing processes are
dealt with decentralized in order to enable decisions to be taken tailored to the specific
circumstances and products.

Concluding, Fayol’s flexible approach regarding centralization is absolutely of relevance for today’s
businesses.

Principle 9: Scalar Chain

In many organizations, the scalar chain principle is still very much alive. However, some have
argued that modern management demands new approaches. It has been argued that with ever
increasing size of globally acting companies the scalar chain is increasing in length, thus
increasing the cost of coordination .

With the changing environment, globally operating companies find themselves exposed to in the
twenty-first century, some adopt structures that emphasize flexibility and quick response to change
(as discussed with Google above).

Many organizations attempt to place decision-making authority in the organizational structure with
those who can most effectively and efficiently respond to environmental demands. This reminds of
Michael Hammer’s theory of the process enterprise .
Hammer states, that case managers, with heightened autonomy would lead to a more productive
work process. He repeatedly emphasizes the usage of modern IT in order to simplify, unify and
increase efficiency of processes. At first sight this may contradict Fayol’s principle. But if we take a
closer look, we see that this new approach also demands a close communication base. As Justin
Longnecker puts it, discussions and meetings, contact managers and their subordinates have, may
improve or harm the effectiveness of the direct report relationships in the chain of command .

In other words, it is still compulsory for companies to have a clearly defined hierarchy of
communication that incorporates a “respect for the line of authority”, which is being “reconciled with
the need for swift action”, as Fayol himself put it .

A problem associated with the scalar chain, as Fayol observes it, occurs when a subordinate
bypasses a manager in either the communication of information or the making of a decision. This
would undermine the authority and position of the manager who is bypassed. If this would be
allowed, morale of the managers would decline.

A modern example can be found in two personal examples. When working as a chemical
technician it was of crucial importance that both, information and orders were passed along a well
defined chain of command, in order to assure a smooth production process. In this specific case it
was also necessary in order to avoid wrong decision taking that could have had physical
consequences in a dangerous work environment.

Principle 10: Order

In discussing, what he calls material order, Fayol points to lost time and an increase of mistakes as
a main disadvantage of disorder . He also points to social order and the risks attached to a lack
thereof, namely, a reduction of productivity.

The control of order is a paramount interest in Fayol’s opinion, but he warns that “real order” does
not simply mean that things have the appearance of order. “Perfect order presupposes a
judiciously chosen place and the appearance of order is merely a false or imperfect image of real
order”, he states. For social order he demands “the right man in the right place”, in order to achieve
the maximum possible outcome of the employee’s applied skills.

Modern corollaries of how this principle can be applied can be found in the fact that every larger
company today has a human resources department that to the largest part deals with the question
of how to find the right employees . Hence, the modern answer to Fayol’s problem to find the “right
man” is a specialized department that addresses this aspect of social order.

Furthermore, the material order is being addressed by a range of strategies, which are designed to
maintain or achieve order. Ultimately, material order is a question of “quality management”. The
international organization for standardization (ISO) is one modern example of how today’s
management attempts to achieve order. The ISO has developed guidelines that intent to help
management to achieve order and the correlated high level of quality of leadership, production and
documentation . The ISO certifications, which are designed to test a companies’ compliance with
the ISO principles, are a fixed part of literally every business undertaking there is.

The principle of order that Fayol mentioned is thereby taken very seriously in today’s business
world.
Principle 11: Equity
“Equity and equality of treatment are aspirations to be taken into account in dealing with
employees”, Fayol says. Clearly, this standard is not easily achieved, however, today’s work
environment is arguably more equipped to tackle this issue than previous generations of
corporations.

One indication for this claim is to be found in the fact that most companies have appointed officials
who deal with complaints of employees against the management, for instance the so-called
ombudsman . However, this system is naturally not fool proof and private organizations attempt to
draw attention to the victims of mistreatment. One example is an organization taking care of claims
of victims of mobbing within the company Novartis .

While the problem still persists, Fayol’s principle is being recognized by corporations and enhanced
by the public opinion and most importantly the lawmakers . Several nations, e.g. Germany, Sweden
and others, intend to tackle the problem of unequal treatment by passing laws that intend to
establish a juridical basis for people who fell victim of inequality.

Principle 12: Stability of Tenure of Personnel

It is Fayol’s opinion that it is better to have a “mediocre manager who stays” than “outstanding
mangers who merely come and go” . Fayol does not only apply this idea to management though,
he also points to negative effects of a lack of stability when it comes to employees.

While this point might be debatable to some extend it is clear that stability contributes to better
planning possibilities. It also allows for a psychologically beneficial state of mind of the employees,
hence certainly improving efficiency and the willingness to perform well for the corporation’s good.

Apparently however, this rule of requirement has not sunken in generally. This is demonstrated by
the fact that most countries have passed employee protection regulations when it comes to the
reasons why people can be laid off. Internationally the International Labor Organization, a section
of the United Nations, watches over various aspects of employment and also deals with unfair
dismissals of employees .

While from an employee perspective the protection laws make sense, employers may occasionally
view this issue differently. In fact, it is easy to find web-blogs with advice how to fire workers without
ensuing lawsuit and some influential individuals, for instance Chandrajit Banerjee, head of the
Confederation of the Indian Industry , demands it to become easier to hire and fire in India .

Maybe a way out of this dilemma and back to following Fayol’s principle can derive from an
example Henry Chesbrough gave when discussing differences in culture between the USA and
Japan .

Principle 13: Initiative

Fayol summarizes the need for employees to show initiative in the saying, that “the initiative of all,
added to that of the manager…represents a great source of strength for businesses” . He suggests
to management to “inspire and maintain everyone’s initiative”.

Some modernly run companies have come to find their special ways in order to ensure employee
satisfaction, and, concomitantly their initiative. One example is again Google and their policy of
“20% time” . This policy implies that employees get a large part of their time to invest in projects of
their choosing. While these projects are not necessarily connected to their immediate work tasks
experience has shown, that they often built the basis for spin-off ideas that benefit the firm.

Principle 14: Esprit de Corps

This principle unifies a number of demands that can best be summarized with Fayol’s own words:
“Union is strength”. This principle deals with the personnel being united in their direction and in
regards to the correlating efforts to achieve the set goals, in translation, to reveal team spirit.

Fayol emphasizes the importance of meetings and personal communication over written
communications. The importance of teamwork is mentioned, and Fayol warns managers against
believing they could achieve their goals by the strategy “divide an rule”.

Again modern IT companies can be utilized as living example of this principle. A survey looking at
approval ratings for CEOs and overall employee satisfaction shows companies like Apple and
Google in top positions. Companies, in other words, which are famed, to emphasize and nurture
team spirit. This circumstantial evidence hints to a confirmation of Fayol’s assumption, i.e. that
companies who strive to become successful must strengthen team spirit.