Henri_Fayol’s centre for administrative studies.pdf

Journal of Management History (Archive)Emerald Article: Henri Fayol's Centre for Administrative StudiesJohn D. Breeze

Article information:

To cite this document: John D. Breeze, (1995),"Henri Fayol's Centre for Administrative Studies", Journal of Management History (Archive), Vol. 1 Iss: 3 pp. 37 - 62

Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552529510095152

Downloaded on: 21-07-2012

Citations: This document has been cited by 5 other documents

To copy this document: [email protected]

This document has been downloaded 3377 times since 2005. *

Users who downloaded this Article also downloaded: *

Brian J. Cook, (1997),"Administration as a civic institution in the political thought of Woodrow Wilson", Journal of Management History (Archive), Vol. 3 Iss: 4 pp. 287 - 297http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13552529710191126

Shana Wagger, Randi Park, Denise Ann Dowding Bedford, (2010),"Lessons learned in content architecture harmonization and metadata models", Aslib Proceedings, Vol. 62 Iss: 4 pp. 387 - 405http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00012531011074645

Fang Shuqiong, Yang Baoan, Yu Yin, (2008),"Construction of evaluation index system of national energy security based on CAS theory and PSR model", Kybernetes, Vol. 37 Iss: 9 pp. 1297 - 1307http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03684920810907580

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by DEAKIN UNIVERSITY

For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service. Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comWith over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Henri Fayol’sCentre

37

Henri Fayol’s Centre forAdministrative Studies

John D. BreezeConsultant, Calgary, Canada

Background and historyHenri Fayol spent his entire 58-year working life[1-4] with the mining andsmelting company Commentry-Fourchambault[5]. His professional and publiclife can be reviewed in four distinctly separate phases, defined and delimited bythe nature of his publications and recorded public appearances:

(1) his technical publications;

(2) publication of Administration Industrielle et Générale and its precedingdevelopmental speeches;

(3) the promotion of the Doctrine Administrative, and related publications;

(4) his management consulting reports.

Many authorities regard his contributions to the field of business and publicadministration to have been of the highest rank, and he has often been identifiedas one of the true pioneers of scientific management[6-8], in the sense of applyingproven principles to defined situations. Chambers[9] referred to himas “Europe’s greatest management pioneer” and suggested that “…Fayol…[has]equal claim with Taylor to the title of the ‘father of modern management’”[9, p. 51].

Fayol’s best known publication is Administration Industrielle et Générale,which first appeared in 1916 as a complete edition of a technical journal[10]. Itcreated such a level of interest that it was shortly thereafter published as acomplete book in its own right[11], and has by now sold more than 60,000 copiesin the original French. Three separate English translations have beenpublished[12-14], and the work is referenced regularly in serious publications onthe history and development of management thought and businessadministration throughout the English-speaking world. Based on hisassessment of Fayol’s analysis of administration as a series of tasks, duties andprinciples, Urwick[15] wrote that Fayol was “…probably of successfulindustrialists the most advanced thinker of the last fifty years on the general

The author is pleased to record his appreciation of the advice and support given, on manyoccasions, by Daniel Wren. The author also thanks Morris Brodie for assisting him by graciouslygiving of his time and experience, by showing him Fayol memorabilia from his personalcollection, and by answering questions about his own search for information about Henri Fayoland his work. Significant improvements in this article have been made as a result of valuablecriticism by several anonymous reviewers, whose contributions are hereby gratefullyacknowledged.

Journal of Management HistoryVol. 1 No. 3, 1995, pp. 37-62.

© MCB University Press,1355-252X

JMH1,3

38

question of administration” and that he was “…[one] of those persons who, inthe opinion of the International Committee [of Scientific Management], havemade original and outstanding contributions to the world body of knowledgeabout the subjects of management and/or administration”[7, p. xi]. This articlewill provide some visibility into one of Fayol’s contributions to the body ofknowledge by presenting some of the work and publications in the area ofmanagement and administration which were sponsored by his Centre forAdministrative Studies (CAS), together with the details of its founding in 1917.

The first phase of Fayol’s professional career comprises his technical andengineering work while he was initially a young engineer and, subsequently, a linemanager during the period 1874-1888. The publications from this period consist ofseveral technical papers[16,17] on the subject of the reinforcement of mineshaftsand galleries and on the causes and prevention of fires in mines. He also publisheda series of papers on the geological formations in the region of France in which hiscompany operated. In 1888 he published a more extensive paper on the “Theory ofdeltas”, and then added a major three-volume work on the entire coal miningregion[18]. These technical works won him a solid reputation in the engineeringprofession and, in 1893, the French Academy of Sciences awarded him the DelessePrize for his geological studies, paying particular tribute to his “…powers ofobservation, his skills as an experimenter, his capacity to enlist the interest of hisown engineers and workers…and his ability to secure the collaboration ofdistinguished scientists”[19]. These words are extremely relevant to and propheticof his later achievements as a manager, observer, theorist and promoter of effectivemanagement and administrative practices.

From reading these publications or their summaries[17,19], it is apparent thatFayol was a more than competent exponent of the methods of observation,scientific analysis and experimentation which are often referred to as the“scientific method”. His attention to these methods will be seen as an importantelement in the foundation and early work of the CAS.

The second phase of Fayol’s life, a complete departure from the first, coversthe period from approximately 1888-1916 and comprises the publication of hisseminal work, Administration Industrielle et Générale (hereafter referred to as“AIG”) and its preceding speech in 1900[20] and his 1908 paper[20,21].

In 1888, Fayol was 47 years old and had been with the company for 28 yearsin a variety of positions of increasing responsibility. His performance must havebeen impressive, for in that year he was appointed managing director of theentire company, a position he continued to hold with distinction and successuntil his retirement 30 years later. Although he was initially appointed at a timeof impending commercial disaster to oversee the closure of inefficient plantsand mines, he succeeded in restoring the prosperity of the company withouthaving to perform any such drastic surgery. Fayol himself later commented,“…the change which occurred in…the firm…cannot be attributed…to themetallurgical ability of the new managing director, which was zero. Thisincompetence put in sharp relief the importance of administrative ability underthe circumstances”[6, p. 48].


39

On his appointment as managing director, Fayol ceased publishing (with theexception of the completion of the geological work mentioned above) until hewas almost ready to retire. It is known that he kept diaries[22-23] and madeextensive notes of his observations as a manager[24-26]. These observationswould eventually lead him to publish AIG in 1916, almost two years before hisactual retirement from the company. It becomes apparent, when reading the textof Fayol’s speech in 1900, the introduction to AIG and several of his otherpapers and speeches[11, preface; 27], that Fayol also applied his analyticalabilities and disciplines to the study of management activities based on hisobservation, throughout his working life, of management activities anddecision-making events. This analytical bent and his desire to link conclusionsto observations as he had done in his technical studies, were driving forces inthe founding of the CAS and its efforts to establish a “doctrine administrative”based on a body of knowledge which could be used to guide managementactions. As many observers[6-9,15,19] have noted, although the publication ofAIG was itself a landmark in the development of management thought, it wasonly a step in a long process of evolution in which Fayol played only a part.Phase two, therefore, includes this period of observation and culminates in thepublication of AIG in 1916, when Fayol was 75 years old.

The third phase of Fayol’s career, covering the years 1916-1923, was a periodof intensive writing, speech making and publication of material derived directlyfrom AIG which represent his efforts to promote and implement the developingtheory of management for which AIG was the wellspring. This phase startedvirtually from the day of initial publication of AIG and ended at the time whenhis own energies and activities started to wind down. After the publication ofAIG, Henri Fayol embarked on a course of what might be described asaggressively active retirement, setting himself the mission of bringing hismanagement principles into both private and public spheres. In addition tolecturing, writing and publishing articles, and busily promoting managementas a discipline which should be taught in schools, he also founded the Centre d’ Etudes Administratives (CAS). The CAS, which attracted students andpractitioners from many fields and served as a launching pad for thepropagation of Fayol’s management doctrine by him and several disciples,notably Carlioz, Devinat and Vanuxem, is the primary focus of this article.

The third phase therefore includes most of Fayol’s publications from 1916until his death in 1925, with the exception of the published reports of hisconsulting work for the French Government, which are associated with phasefour.

The fourth phase, from 1921 until Fayol’s death in 1925, partially overlapsphase three and covers the periods when Fayol was working as a consultant tothe French Government, first, performing a study of the Post Office andTelecommunications Department (the PTT) and, second, a study of the tobaccoand match monopoly[19, pp. 16-31]. These studies can be seen as attempts toapply his own principles to situations in the public service that had many of thecharacteristics of a business enterprise.

JMH1,3

40

It is probably fair to conclude that although the contents of Fayol’s articlespublished during this phase included many good ideas and recommendationswhich were soundly based on his own observations as a manager in privatebusiness, and although the principles which he espoused made inherently goodsense for application in the public sector, Fayol was almost completelyinsensitive to the political realities of actually introducing significant changesinto public sector operations and was, therefore, extremely frustrated in hisattempts to promote and provoke positive changes, at least during his lifetime.It might also be argued that his somewhat confrontational approach may havein some way limited the effectiveness of the CAS and its associates. Forexample, although his report of the study of the PTT was published in 1921[28]when there was no significant action taken by the Government to implementany of the reforms which he had proposed, he published an article[29] in 1923which criticized the Government for its lack of action and again proposedspecific steps that could and should be taken to improve the general level ofperformance and efficiency in the PTT. In that same year, he became a memberof a commission which had been appointed to look into complaints about thetobacco and match monopolies. Following almost a full year of investigation,the commission wrote a report which was published in 1925[30], but Fayolwrote a separate memorandum of his own which was included as an Annex tothe main report in which he summarized the commission’s main findings andcriticized his colleagues strongly for failing to address the fundamental issue ofwhether there was a need for a monopoly in the first place.

The founding of the Centre for Administrative StudiesDuring the third phase of his career, Fayol achieved a local celebrity status whichcan be compared with that of Peters and Waterman with their publication of InSearch of Excellence[31]. In Fayol’s case, the appearance of his own book and itstimely arrival during the Great War sparked a public debate which caused himto make the transition from CEO to management guru almost overnight, and heembarked on what was, for him, an unprecedented series of public appearancesand publications which occupied him for almost all of the remainder of hislife[32]. It was at almost the start of this period that he founded the Centre forAdministrative Studies which forms the focus of this article and through whichmany of his own subsequent writings were published.

The timing of the founding of the Centre can be related to several factors,including: the development and progress of Fayol’s publications and his owncareer as an engineer and as a manager which have been discussed above; thehistorical situation of French industry and the state of the Great War; and thecontemporary interest in and adoption of some of the principles of scientificmanagement which were being vigorously promoted by the European disciplesof Frederick Taylor.

The year 1916 had been one of the worst periods of wartime known tomankind, and it was said that “To live in Paris during World War I was to livevirtually at the front line”[33]. The year 1916 saw two of the longest and worst


41

of the battles on the western front. Some 650,000 men died at Verdun and morethan one million at the Somme[34]. In 1917, the year that the USA entered thewar, more than 500,000 men died at Passchendaele, just 15 miles over theFrench-Belgian border and again approximately 150 miles from Paris. In total,France herself lost 1,300,000 men, and another 500,000 were interned in Germanprisoner-of-war camps. In addition, the number of wounded and permanentlyhandicapped would have been at least three times the totals above. (In 1995 wecan scarcely imagine the effects that the knowledge of this level of slaughter,and its utter uselessness, must have had on men like Fayol. At the time Fayolactually completed AIG the war had barely started, and was expected to be overin a few months. It has been suggested[35] that AIG might have been publishedin 1914 had the onset of the war not have caused a sudden shortage of paper forpublishing.) The period 1916-1917 also brought chronic shortages of basicsupplies to France. “Between March and May 1917 the prices of vegetables, coaland rice doubled in France. The outcome was the largest and angriest May Daydemonstration of the war in Paris, followed by a series of bitter strikes, whichstarted in the clothing industry but spread to bank employees, telegraphmessengers and finally to munitions workers”[33, p. 193].

In this situation, it is perhaps not unexpected that instead of publishing part3 and writing part 4 of his book, Fayol should decide to focus his energies onpromoting his ideas more actively and contributing to the national effort ofrebuilding the country after the war. As most readers will recall, Fayol wrote atthe start of AIG:

My work will be divided in four parts: 1st part – The necessity and possibility of teachingadministration; 2nd part – Principles and elements of administration; 3rd part – Personalobservations and experiences; 4th part – Lessons from the War…The third and fourth partswill be the subject of a second volume that will be published soon[11, p. vii; 36].

At the very end of the book Fayol promised: “In the third part, I shall show howI accumulated, over a long career in industry, the material used in this study. Inthe fourth part, I shall draw on recent information to prove again the usefulnessof teaching administration”[11, p. 137].

As published, AIG contained the first and second parts, and he neverpublished Parts 3 and 4. It is known that he prepared a substantial manuscriptentitled “Personal observations and experiences” which appears to have been adraft for Part 3 of his book, but this was never published[26,37]. Rather, as willbe shown below, he decided that there was an even more valuable contributionto be made in revitalizing French industry and public life, namely the foundingof an organization that would involve more than just himself in the promotionof his ideas and their potential benefits. To this end, he established the Centred’Etudes Administratives, or Centre for Administrative Studies (CAS), in Paris,and published a collection of articles and lectures entitled AdministrationIndustrielle et Générale: L’Eveil de l’Esprit Public (hereafter referred to asL’ Eveil)[38,39]. These two items form the main topic of this article.

JMH1,3

42

In the preface to L’Eveil [38], Fayol clearly states his desire to publish anddevelop a theory of administration (he called it the doctrine administrative)which would form the basis of a body of knowledge for teaching, studying anddeveloping a science of administration that would ultimately revolutionizeindustrial management and the management of the public service. (His ownknowledge of, and contributions to, specific areas of knowledge within the fieldof mining engineering were clearly a very strong formative influence here.) Healso wanted to attract public attention to, discussion of, and ensuingdevelopment of the ideas which he had originally published in AIG. Thefollowing extended extract from the preface provides insight into his interests,concerns and motivations at the time of the publication (i.e. 1916-1917)[40].

I have defined “administration” as “planning, organization, command, coordination andcontrol”, and this definition has been approved unanimously. The role that therefore passes toAdministration when so defined, in the management of public or private enterprises, is offundamental importance. Also, the essay on administrative theory which I published a yearago, under the title “General and Industrial Administration”, has lively attracted attention;offers are arriving from all directions to help me propagate those ideas which seemindispensible in the conduct of all enterprises.

…In these studies, the word “administration” is almost exclusively used in the sense of“anticipation, organization, command, coordination and control”[38, p. 1;41].

After a somewhat tedious commentary on one Claude Bernard’s discourse onthe scientific method, Fayol continues:

…While I was closely studying the mining and metallurgical industry, my attention alsoturned to enterprises of all kinds, from that of the family to that of the State. Little by little, Irecognised that certain administrative principles are applicable to all enterprises, whatevertheir nature, their goals and their size. The doctrine set out in the first volume of thesestudies[42] comprises these principles, rules and processes.

Public discussion will determine what must be retained from this doctrine. I note withpleasure that it is attracting the attention of promoters and industrialists and has already beenapplied in numerous situations.

To facilitate these applications, a sound body of knowledge[43] must be established. Iintended to start this documentation by exposing my personal observations andexperiences[46]. Several considerations made me decide to change this plan.

After spending half a century preparing for and then writing [AIG] I told myself that if,after another 50 years, some of my suggested administrative ideas will have taken their placein current business practice, I would not have wasted my time. The results already achievedallow me to hope that this goal might be achieved sooner and more completely. Because of thewar, the government finds itself swept up in an exposure of its activities; its heavy handweighs on every business, family and individual. The public, disturbed in its habits, itsinterests and its affections, constantly in contact with government officials, observes, reflectsand sees, or believes it sees, numerous administrative errors committed. It seeksunderstanding, it eagerly reads all of the books that address the operation of public services.AIG has had the benefit of this curiosity. Despite its title and its unattractive appearance, fourthousand copies of this small volume are already in the hands of the public. Another printingis needed. The Grandes Ecoles are getting ready to introduce administration into theircurricula: conferences on the subject are being held by our learned societies and inCommercial and Industrial Clubs and in the Military.

…It is to better satisfy the awakening interest in administration that I am publishing[L’Eveil] before my “personal observations and experiences”. Comprising studies,conferences, commentaries and critiques arising from a variety of sources, it seemed to me


43

natural to provide a general and complete idea of what “administration” is, in the sense ofplanning, organisation, command, coordination and control[38, pp. 5-6].

So here we can understand why Fayol became diverted from his original intentto publish the “personal observations” and “lessons from the war” that hepromised in AIG.

According to Urwick and Brech[47], the CAS was founded by Fayol in 1919.However, it has been discovered that Fayol made at least two earlier referencesto it. On 24 November 1917, at the end of his speech at a public meetingsponsored by the Société d ’Encouragement pour l’Industrie Nationale, he said:

And if you who have honored me with your attention this evening are willing to participate inthe development and dissemination of these ideas, I ask that you to contact the Centre forManagement Studies at 100, rue Vaugirard [in Paris] where a volunteer colleague, an engineerwho specializes in these matters, will take care of any verbal or written communications on thesubject of management. This colleague is available each Monday from 1.30 pm until 3 pm andI myself will willingly devote all of the spare time that my business activities will allow. It isto that address that I ask you to bring or send the observations that you cannot have failed tomake, the thoughts that your daily contact with public and private enterprises must haveprovoked, and your suggestions for remedies. Plus, above all, the remarks and criticisms thatyou feel are deserved by the doctrine laid out in my book as I have just had the honour ofoutlining to you[27, p. 57].

As footnote to another paper published in February 1918[48], Fayol wrote, “Ihave established at 100 rue Vaugirard, Paris a Centre for Management Studiesfor the breakdown, collection and analysis of observations sent to me. It is to thataddress that I invite my readers to write to me or to visit on Mondaysfrom 1.30 pm to 3.00 pm”. Furthermore, Vanuxem indicates in a paper alsopublished in 1917[49] that the CAS was already in existence at the time, althoughhe calls it the Centre for Industrial and General Administrative Studies.

There is no mention of the Centre in Fayol’s earlier address, 30 March1917[50], on the subject of technical education, and although the lack of such areference is not strong information by itself, it is reasonable to conclude that theCentre was actually established some time during 1917 and certainly earlierthan November of that year.

It is also worth noting that Henri le Chatelier had been actively promotingTaylor’s ideas of scientific management in France since 1909 and founded, in1920, an organization for the promotion of improvements in industry, theComité de l’Organisation Française (COF)[47, p. 95]. However, Fayol’s CAS pre-dates the COF by more than two years.

The mission of the CASIn his intriguing monograph, “Theoretical and practical introduction to thestudy of experimental administration”, Vanuxem wrote:

To prepare for the the development of the theory [of administration] and to accelerate itsdiffusion, M. Henri Fayol has established a public enterprise: the Centre for Industrial andGeneral Administrative Studies[51]. The name signifies a curriculum: it is a reminder that ifmanagement theory is to be of general application it was nevertheless born in the world ofprivate business where the most worthy types of administrative systems that can be initiated

JMH1,3

44

or transposed are used. The Centre is thus presented as the forerunner of an instrument for asystematic industrialisation.

The aims of the CAS are threefold.

(1) The application of the experimental method in the field of industrial and commercialadministration (management) has started. The CAS must develop its application andextend it into every sphere where the management function is found, from the family tothe state, to international organisations,to churches and so on. To achieve rapid progress,the CAS will organise a public effort for expounding the theory.

(2) The CAS must continue and intensify its propaganda, already started, for introducing theteaching of management studies in our school programme. This teaching is naturallynurtured by the theoretical foundation.

(3) Finally the CAS will prepare the rapid popularization of established administrativeprinciples and the procedures which have proved them.

In summary, the CAS must lead from the front in a dual effort: on the one hand, internalactivity to elaborate the theory and, on the other hand, external activity of lobbying andpopularisation[49, pp. 42-3].

Administration Industrielle et Générale: L’Eveil de l’Esprit PublicSince the CAS’s records have not been preserved[19, p. 139], the best, if not theonly means of finding out what it accomplished is to examine its earlypublications and references to its activities in other contemporary materials.The first of the CAS’s own publications was a collection of articles, transcriptsof speeches and other records under the collective (and cumbersome)title Administration Industrielle et Générale: l’Eveil de l’Esprit Public[38,pp. 145-433], General and Industrial Administration: The Kindling of PublicInterest (see Appendix 2 for notes on translation). The contents of this collectionprovide an idea of some of the work that Fayol was promoting through theCentre and identify some of the people who were becoming active in themovement that was referred to as “Fayolisme”.

L’Eveil contains 15 major pieces of work and several minor items. Four of themain items and the preface to the entire collection were authored by Fayol[52]himself while another 11 are the work of others. Some of these authors wereassociated personally or professionally with Fayol himself and with the CAS tosome degree, while others were public figures commenting on the relevance andcontent of AIG which was, at the time, Fayol’s first and only publication in thefield of administration. As with AIG, the first appearance of L’Eveil was acomplete edition of a technical journal[38], followed by reprint in book form. Ata first look, the collection appears quite disorganized because the variouschapters and sections are out of sequence, and some of the reprinted articles didnot actually appear in their own journals and publications until 1918 or even1919. To assist in unscrambling the arrangement, a detailed list of contents hasbeen provided in Appendix 1 at the end of this article where also are detailed thecomplications of the table of contents and pagination in the original publicationand its subsequent reprints[4].

The structure of L’Eveil, which is presented in detail in Appendix 1, fallsnaturally along the lines of its four main chapters (although readers of the


45

original will find that the pagination does not follow the sequence of its table ofcontents!). Following a preface, which was written by Fayol himself, the firstchapter presents the transcripts of three lectures he delivered betweenNovember 1917 and March 1918 (a fourth item by Fayol, which may also havebeen a lecture, is reprinted in the fourth chapter). The second chapter,contributed by Paul Vanuxem, comprises three sections. In the first section heoutlines the principles of “experimental administration”. In the second, hedescribes the CAS’s system for analysing documentation systematically toextract the relevant contributions to the developing “doctrine administrative”.The third section is a tabulated decimal classification system for the individualsubjects within the anticipated corpus of works in the developing field ofadministration.

The third chapter in L’Eveil is devoted to two contributions which discuss theapplication of administrative theory to the management of the military effort inthe front lines of the battlefield, and might be seen as Fayol’s missingcontribution to AIG Part 4, “Lessons from the war”. The fourth chapter is acollection of generally short articles by various authors plus one item by Fayolwhich might have been included in the first chapter but for some unknownreason was not.

In the preface to L’Eveil, Fayol states clearly his desire to publish and developa theory of administration (he called it the doctrine administrative) that wouldform the basis of a body of knowledge for teaching, studying and developing ascience of administration that would ultimately revolutionize industrialmanagement and the management of the public service. (His own knowledge of,and contributions to, specific areas of knowledge within the field of miningengineering was clearly a very strong formative influence here.) He also wantedto attract public attention to, discussion of, and ensuing development of theideas that he had originally published in AIG. In the preface, Fayol promotes hisidea of a single, unified doctrine for both industrial and public enterprises.

There is not one doctrine of administration for industry and another for state enterprises;there is only one doctrine. The general principles and rules that are valuable in industry areequally valuable in the state and vice versa.…Sometimes one talks about “industrialising” the state; this expression signifies only oneidea, that of introducing into the state’s activities those industrial practices that aresummarized as “planning, organisation, command, coordination and control”.

To justify the absence of industry’s administrative procedures from public service, it isalleged that unlike industry, the state has no profit and loss statement that periodicallymeasures results at set dates. This is regrettably true. But the majority of departments withina private enterprise also have no separate profit and loss account, but this does not preventthem from being subject to good administrative practices.

Understood in the sense of “planning, organisation, command, coordination and control”,administration is an extremely broad and important new science…All of the problems thatare brought up within administration have their place; and as few of these problems have sofar been given complete and satisfactory solutions, and because, on the other hand, thenumber of people filling administrative positions and, as a result, able to contribute to problemsolving is unlimited, it seems permissible to hope that the science of administration, wellestablished on a sound foundation of written documentation, will quickly and successfullycross its first hurdles.

JMH1,3

46

In this it will be helped by numerous publications which, for many years, point out andcriticize the state’s administrative weaknesses which come down to a lack of planning,defective organisation, poor command, lack of coordination and inadequate controls.

Under the influence of these publications, the public interest is kindled, it looks for thecauses of faults and demands corrections, which it finds are slow to come. It would be evenmore impatient if it know that the operation of the public service could be improved byimmediately adopting some of the procedures used in some industrial enterprises. But fewpeople know this and the directors of the state generally ignore it.

To improve the administration of our businesses and of the state, two things must be doneas soon as possible:

(1) introduce the teaching of administration into all of our schools;

(2) universal application to the public service, just as in private business of theadministrative procedures consecrated by experience.

In particular, I call your attention to the following procedures:

● Business plan;

● Organization chart;

● Staff meetings;

● Underpass[53];

● Time study.

These are the tools that can be used in a multitude of situations and which everymanager must know how to apply[39, pp. 6-8].

Fayol’s contributions to L’EveilL’Eveil includes three lectures and a paper by Fayol. Together, they present fourdistinct aspects of his manifesto. The first lecture is a summary of AIG and theessence of his administrative principles. The second lecture calls for changes inthe public education curriculum to include courses in administration. The thirdlecture calls for application of his principles to the operation of the publicservice. The article provides Fayol’s personal view of how his principles playeda major role in helping him turn around the fortunes of his company.

De l’importance de la fonction administrative dans le gouvernement desaffaires. On 24 November 1917, Fayol presented an invited paper at a meeting ofthe Societe d’Encouragement pour l’Industrie Nationale. “On the importance ofthe administrative function in business management”[38, pp. 81-123,54] is arelatively brief (39-page) summary of the essence of AIG, shorn of much of itsphilosophizing and reminiscence, in which Fayol traces from his 1900 addressto the International Congress through his 1908 speech at the fiftiethAnniversary Congress the essence of the doctrine presented in AIG. Heemphasizes the importance of administrative theory, and he also outlines thefunctions of management and the 14 general principles[55], the fivefundamental rules[56] and the five administrative procedures[57]. Taylorismand motion study are also discussed.

L’enseignement de l’administration dans les écoles techniques supérieures.The Society of French Civil Engineers was involved in a public enquiry into


47

certain aspects of the education system, particularly its technical content andits relevance to the training of engineers and managers. Under the heading“Teaching administration in the post-secondary schools”, Fayol addressed ameeting of the Society on 30 March[38, pp. 131-51], arguing for includingadministration as a subject in the curriculum of the civil engineering schools.He presented his assessment of the relative importance of various skills andabilities required at various levels of responsibility, and quoted at length fromthe comments he made at the 1900 Congress and from those made by theCongress’s President on the excessive emphasis placed on mathematics.

At the end of his presentation, he recommended:

(1) reduction of the teaching of mathematics to the amount strictly necessary for students tobe able to successfully complete the technical courses;

(2) limiting the diploma program in the post-secondary technical colleges[58] to four yearsfor competent students with secondary school education;

(3) establishing a course in administration;

(4) offering a course in the fundamentals of commerce, finance, safety and accounting;

(5) attention to physical health and general cultural issues;

(6) …twenty or so half days of manual work in the workshops, forges, foundries and fittingshops[38, p. 150].

This section of L’Eveil also includes comments and speeches made at othermeetings of the Society during the period 3 November 1916 to 6 July 1917,including the recommendations made by the committee charged with evaluatingsecondary education and preparation for the professional schools (the GrandesEcoles) on curriculum changes. The committee’s recommendations include thereduction of emphasis on mathematics, but as the Committee’s mandateextended much further than the engineering schools, it does not explicitlycontain Fayol’s other recommendations. The last item in this section is the letterof acceptance from the Minister for Commerce and Industry (who was alsoresponsible for the PTT).

La reforme administrative des services publics. On 10 January 1918, Fayolgave a “business lunch” address to the Cercle Commercial et Industriel deFrance. In a speech entitled “Administrative Reform in the Public Service”[38,pp. 162-74] he argued for the application of his ideas to government operations.In contrast with some of his other public speeches, the transcript of this one isscarcely eight pages long, perhaps attesting to his understanding of the likelypost-luncheon attention span of his audience. In the transcript of the ensuingaudience discussion, there are some interesting comments.

M. Villemin:…it seems to me that meetings like this…should not just end with the applause.We should commit ourselves to set up a group where all men of action, all business men whoknow where lies the truth that will save our country will lend a hand such that the war mightteach us something, such that we might save France from the confusion into which she hasfallen. Let us set up an organization that will let us do a good job, promote the cause andspread the good word…

JMH1,3

48

M. Fayol: I am keen to embrace M. Villemin’s suggestion: I told you earlier[59] that wefounded with a few friends a Centre d’Etudes Administratives that is working well and hasproduced a lot, but not yet published. But we have enough material for several volumes andwe are creating a documentation system that will facilitate our studies. My first volume[60] isa kind of general theory; it needs to be accompanied by a large number of factual examples.…If M. Lepain[61] would like to pick up on M. Villemin’s proposal and take the initiative for acollaboration between your Circle and [the CAS], valuable results will surely follow[38, pp. 174-5].

At the conclusion of this discussion, a M. Berran asked if all CCIF memberscould be given a questionnaire to enable them to record and submit theirpersonal experiences. Fayol replied that the CAS was working on such adocument and he would have M. Vanuxem work with M. Lepain to make itavailable[38, p. 176].

L’administration positive dans l’industrie. The seventh item in Chapter 4 isFayol’s article “Positive administration in industry”[38, pp. 267-75; 62]. It is notclear why this article was not included in Chapter 1 along with Fayol’s otherpapers and speeches, unless it is that this particular item has no attribution toa public address and may have been written solely for publication. Thissuccinct (eight-page) summary of his definition of administration and itsimportance in the running of a business is illustrated by a chart showing theannual dividend paid by Commentry-Fourchambault et Decazeville to itsshareholders over the period from 1854 to 1917; the chart shows an irregularpayment from 1854 until 1888, a period characterized variously by Fayol as“empirical administration”. From 1888, when Fayol assumed the position ofmanaging director, the dividend payment was initially restored to an averagelevel and then, from 1898, increased more or less steadily until it jumped duringthe war to an unprecedented level.

Fayol draws on many examples of situations in his own experience toillustrate the importance of administrative abilities in the performance ofmanagers. Portions of this article were translated by Ernest Dale and includedin a book of readings on management. The following extract shows how Fayolwas promoting his theories at the time:

Under the influence of different causes,…the firm…was…on the road to bankruptcy, when achange occurred, in 1888, in the way in which the administrative function was carried out:and, without the modification of anything else, without improvement of any of the adversefactors, the business began to prosper and had not stopped growing since[6, pp. 148-9].

Experimental administrationChapter 2 of L’Eveil (according to its table of contents, although the elements ofthis chapter are scattered around in the actual publication) comprises PaulVanuxem’s “Theoretical and practical introduction to experimentaladministration”[49] and includes his tabulated decimal classification systemwhich was to be used for organizing the Centre’s documentation which wouldsupport the doctrine administrative. This section is a major part of L’Eveil andis, perhaps, its single major and new contribution by an author other than Fayolhimself.


49

Paul Vanuxem, a captain in the Artillery reserve and an engineer in thegovernment department responsible for the PTT, was one of Fayol’s earlycollaborators in the newly-formed CAS. He authored the largest singlecontribution to L’Eveil, which is in three parts. He first discusses experimentaladministration, what it means and what it hopes to achieve. The second partdescribes the system of documentation analysis installed in the CAS, and thethird is a separate presentation of a decimal classification system[63] for thetopics which comprise the new study of administration.

In the first part, Vanuxem presents the concept of administration as a processamenable to systematic study and analysis, applied to definite hypotheseswhich can be tested. The method of investigation is to be primarily by scientificobservation of facts, events and the environment in which they occur. Fourhypotheses are offered at this early stage of development of the doctrineadministrative:

#1 – that the human organisation is not a machine driven by externally applied energy. Inorder for the enterprise to move towards its goals, every worker must consent to apply hisservices with a personal energy controlled by himself and the collective effort occurs by virtueof the combination of individual efforts which are, and remain to a large degree, independentand voluntary.

#2 – Without harmony, there can be no collective action.

#3 – [An important part of the administrative function is]…grasping and maintaining closecontact with things and people, contact with every point of the enterprise, with its externalevidence of activity as well as its internal life.

#4 – [The fourth hypothesis is that] Administration requires…firm rules, is assisted byprecise tools applied delicately, even clinically, and ... that this is a precondition for theproductivity of the collective effort and is a sign of good administration[47, pp. 35-9].

In the second part of his paper Vanuxem explains how the documents andreports received by the CAS will be analysed and catalogued to extract theessential facts and observations which will be used to test and develop thedoctrine administrative. The bulk of useful data would come from privatesources. The Centre would depend mostly on these observations since theywould have been made directly and, since confidentiality would be respected,they would be reliable. Trained readers would highlight significant points andrelate them to the broader framework of the doctrine. A special classificationsystem would be developed that would cater specifically to this analyticaleffort [19, pp. 34-5].

The larger portions of the second and third parts are devoted to the details ofthe special classification system planned for the CAS, and show how it woulddiffer from the universal system established by the International BibliographicInstitute by the introduction of special topics and structures tailored to meet theCEA’s special needs for tracking the subjects and contents of individualdocuments. It is clear that the CAS was preparing to develop a professional“body of knowledge” along very systematic lines, based on Fayol’s five majorelements of administration: planning, organizing, command, co-ordination andcontrol, as the first level of segmentation.

JMH1,3

50

Administration in the front linesChapter 3, titled “Administration in the front lines”[64] contains contributionsfrom two young engineering officers in the French Army, both of whom had hadaccess to copies of AIG and both of whom, having been seriously wounded,found time to record their thoughts on the application of these new ideas to thethe administration of activities at the front line. They sent their conclusions toFayol, who decided to include them in L’Eveil, and he provided an introductionto their submissions which includes the following comments.

Two young officers, whose conduct in the front lines has been the subject of laudatorycommendations and whose serious wounds subsequently barred them from combat, andhaving had the opportunity to read AIG, thought it possible to immediately and usefullyapply some of the doctrine administrative in the army. They have given their views, onethrough a lecture and the other in a letter which I am happy to publish with their consent.These two young men, who had recently graduated as civil engineers had not even startedtheir industrial careers when the war called them. Not content to serve their country gallantly,they also observed much and gave it much thought, and their deliberations resulted in twostudies that give honour to French youth[38, pp. 179-80].

Pour administrer une section: conférence aux aspirants [38, pp. 181-204; 65]. Theauthor, Lieutenant Robert Desaubliaux, was mentioned in despatches fourtimes in an eight-month period, and was then wounded and eventuallyrepatriated to a position of conducting courses in machine-gun operation forofficer cadets. His contribution to L’Eveil is “Managing a section: a lecture toofficer-cadets”. He wrote: “Instead of the usual banal speech at the end of thecourse, I really wanted to give them a talk about handling a section [of soldiers].As M. Fayol had affirmed in his book that a doctrine administrative could betaught, I was content to follow the topics in his book one by one and, with hisgreat authority in administrative matters behind me, I only needed to add myown examples from front line experience”[38, pp. 181-2]. His examples areusually cynical, frequently entertaining and always relevant. Here are just a few.

In the Military Tradition, several aphorisms are handed down from generation to generation.Beneath a pleasant exterior they reveal a sharp criticism of a deplorable state of affairs. Forexample ... “never do today what another can do tomorrow”. Don’t laugh; this is the principleof inertia. Such easy advice! Such a practical application! Illustration: You are in charge of asection. You are trying to improve the situation for the men, who have no shelter,... wet,miserable. Invariably they will say “Lieutenant, it’s not worth the trouble; we’ll be relieved in afew days; our replacements can do it”.

“Never follow an order without waiting for the countermand”. Order, counter-order, this thefatal result of a lack of unity of direction and unity of command…

“S’en fout et en rendre compte!” [A respectable translation of this might be “What’s the point,but make sure your rear end is protected!”][38, pp. 185-7].

Robert Desaubliaux later wrote “The biological origins of the administrativefunction”[66] which was published under the auspices of the CAS, and hemarried Fayol’s grand-daughter Anne-Marie.

Lettre de M. De Mijolla. Pierre-Louis-Marie De Mijolla, also a mining andcivil engineer (a graduate of the same school as Fayol, as it happens) wasdecorated with the Légion d’Honneur during his army service. He wrote a


51

letter[38, pp. 205-12] to Fayol in which he commented on a number ofadministrative topics such as the value of administrative abilities in the army,the problems of dual command, the training of young engineers and the role ofadministration in the family and in the state, all topics of interest and concernto Fayol.

Reviews and applause for AIGChapter 4 of L’Eveil contains eight items, including Fayol’s major article“L’administration positive dans l’industrie” which could have been put inChapter 1 with Fayol’s other contributions. Of the other seven items, three aremore or less substantial (the articles by LaChapelle, Dautheuil and Renucci)while the remaining four are six pages or less in length. These articles aregenerally written for journals and publications which probably lie outside thenormal areas of interest of the engineers and managers that Fayol reachedthrough his publications in the Bulletin of his own technical society. Theyillustrate a level of interest that was rapidly outstripping the boundaries ofFayol’s technical audience, and provide extremely superficial introductions andsummaries of the ideas presented in AIG. It may be interesting to speculate asto whether the authors had actually read AIG and were trying to show it, orwhether they truly wanted to share the knowledge with the readers of theirjournals. However, the overall impression from reading these articles is thatFayol’s ideas were indeed being noted and discussed in many areas of publicand industrial life, just as he had hoped.

The first item in Chapter 4 is an accolade, delivered on 20 May 1917 to ageneral meeting of the Société de l’Industrie Minérale by M. Chipart, theSociety’s secretary-general. He recounts the major contributions to the Society’sBulletin, including Levêque’s History of the Forges de Decazeville[67] and Fayol’sfirst publication of AIG. Chipart also thanks Fayol for his support in sustainingthe continuing publication of the Bulletin during the war[38, pp. 213-16].

Georges LaChapelle’s article, titled “M. Henri Fayol’s ideas’’[68], summarizesa number of points from AIG including the distinction between“administration” and “management”, the five elements of administration andthe 16 principles of organization. He also repeats some of Fayol’s criticisms ofstate enterprises and bureaucracies.

In “Industrial science: general and industrial administration”[69], JeanDautheuil, a civil engineer, similarly summarizes Fayol’s ideas for the readers ofthe “civil engineering” journal and includes some of Fayol’s thoughts onincluding the teaching of administration in the engineering curriculum.

A. Renucci’s article on “Administrative reform”[38, pp. 249-66;70], printedunder the broader heading “Administrative questions”, contains his criticismof many of the state’s administrative practices and proposes several of the ideasin AIG as appropriate remedies.

Under the broader heading “Transformations in public life”, Maxime Leroypublished an article on “Administrative technique in industry”[38, pp. 277-82;71].

JMH1,3

52

After briefly tracing the evolution of French society from a despotic monarchyto a post-revolutionary democracy, he wrote:

Together with a democratic regime which diluted power was born a socialism more and morehostile to the former dictatorial tendencies and to the brutal and fanciful “blanquisme”; andcorresponding to this beneficial evolution, the internal organization of industry clearlyhighlights a movement towards administrative structures that agree with current scientifichabits and the democratic ideas of collective discussion.

Henri Fayol…has just published a book which shines an extremely vivid light onto thisindustrial transformation. [AIG] is its simple and expressive title. Few books give more foodfor thought in these difficult times when France is trying to invent new administrativearrangements that will assure her intellectual and economic resurrection[38, p. 278].

The article continues much in this vein, extolling the merits of AIG (but withoutactually quoting from it at any length) as a stimulant to reform in the publicservice. One suspects that this article was included in the collection at leastpartly because of its author’s prestige, rather than for its positive contributionto the development of the doctrine itself.

The sixth contribution is anonymous; L’Eveil’s table of contents refers only to“Mr X”. The unknown author presents an article entitled “Industrialadministration”[38, pp. 283-4;72] and writes:

M. Fayol’s complete book [AIG] should find its way into the hands and libraries of ourdepartment…

His principles, laid out with remarkable precision, clarity and sharpness, will persuade eventhe most sceptical…

The type of manager is drawn by a master’s hand and one feels on every page that the authorhas placed the fruits of a talent that is as equally practiced as it is theoretically sound…

A manager who achieves this ideal will certainly be loved, admired and followed with zeal,courage and devotion…

Under his orders, nothing is useless, nothing excessive; everyone in his place with maximumscope for initiative in a perfectly mapped plan with a minimum of red tape[38, pp. 283-4].

The last item in Chapter 4 and, indeed, the last item in the entire collection, is atwo-page article by Henri Mazel called “Social science”[38, pp. 285-6;73]. Theauthor writes:

In my own plan for administrative reform, I advocate establishing a School for administrationthat would graduate all of the department heads for the public service. Anyone who isastonished that one could learn and teach administration should read M. Henri Fayol’s book[AIG]. In it they will find a demonstration firstly of the possibility and necessity ofadministrative teaching and thereafter a discerning assessment of the relative importance ofthe various capacities of people in a business organisation[38, p. 285].

Following a brief summary of ideas from AIG, the author concludes “…if thegentlemen I spoke of were to bring me the keys to our constitutional reform ona velvet cushion, and if I can build the indispensable School of administration, Iwon’t fail to endow the Henri Fayol Chair whose namesake will inspire theprinciples I just noted: planning, organisation, command, coordination andcontrol”[38, p. 286].


53

Other work by the CASAmong the other works known to have been conducted or sponsored by theCAS are various publications by a number of authors associated with the centreand a study of the function and the performance of the board of directors. Oneindication of the range of publications available as a result of the CAS’s work ison the back cover of the 1921 Dunod publication of L’Incapacité Industrielle deL ’Etat: les PTT. There appears a list of contemporary publications by the CASitself, including[74]:

Essai sur la Conduite des Affaires et la Direction des Hommes by Wilbois & Vanuxem (Payot,no date)

Administration et Organisation Commerciale[75,76] by J. Carlioz (Dunod, 1918)

Le Gouvernement des Entreprises Commerciales et industrielles by J. Carlioz[77,78] (Dunod, nodate)

Les Origines Biologiques de la Fonction Administrative by Desaubliaux (Dunod, no date)

La Fonction Administrative dans la Domaine Militaire by General de Pouydraguin (Dunod, nodate)

A comparison of this list of titles with the equivalent list on the back of theoriginal 1918 Dunod publication of L’Eveil in book form is interesting. Thiswas, as we now know, published after the founding of the CAS. The 11 titles onthe back of L’Eveil include AIG (of course!), translations of two works byTaylor[79], a translation of a book by Hartness[80], two works in French onscientific management[81,82], three works on industrial economics, one book onthe subject of factory construction and one on the retraining of the war-wounded. In other words, there was, at that date, nothing of the emerging CAS,and one may therefore further conclude that L’Eveil was almost certainly itsfirst publication.

In his 1925 encomium on Fayol’s life, Verney[17, pp. 43-4] commented that

M. Fayol’s doctrine lost no time in crystallizing around the “Centre d’études administratives”which he himself created under pressure from of numerous entreaties to do so. For severalyears, the Centre has regularly met every week; at its conferences and even more so at itsseminars, presided over by M. Fayol with good humour and authority, eminent men fromnumerous walks of life have participated; writers, thinkers, men of action, engineers andsoldiers, bureaucrats and business managers. Important publications have already come fromthis active collaboration.

Verney provided a list of some 13 publications by authors other than Fayolhimself, and offers a more complete bibliography[17, p. 116] of 36 publicationsby, and related to, Fayol and Fayolism spanning the period 1900-1924. Eleven ofthese are by Fayol and 25 by other authors, including some of the above-mentioned 13. Most, if not all, of these would have been associated with, or thedirect output of, the CAS. Much remains to be done to locate these publications,review them and assess their contribution to management thought and thedevelopment of the doctrine administrative of the time.

JMH1,3

54

In 1929, Fayol’s son wrote …some of [Fayol’s disciples] came together under him to form the Centre d’Etudesadministratives. Their publications were numerous. In particular, I would mention “L’Eveil del’Esprit Public”, a collection of seminars by Fayol and his early followers; “AdministrationCommerciale” by M. Carlioz, which develops the application of the Doctrine to a company’scommercial function; “L ’Incapacite Industrielle de l’Etat”, by Fayol, in which he presents theresults of his investigation into the PTT; “Les Origines de la Fonction Administrative” by M.Desaubliaux; “Le Gouvernement des Entreprises” by M. Carlioz; “Essai sur la Conduite desAffaires et la Direction des Hommes” by M. Wilbois and M. Vanuxem; “L’EntrepriseGouvernementale” by M. Albert Schatz[83].

To identify at least some of these “disciples”, we can look at the names ofthose who attended him at his Table of Honour at the testimonial Banquet on7 June[17, pp. 54-5]: they included Sainte-Claire Deville; De Freminville; HenriFayol (his son); Amede Fayol (his brother); R. Desaubliaux; Mazerat, author of“Experimental administration, Fayolism”; Carlioz, professor of administrationat the Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales; Wilbois and Vanuxem, authors of“Essai sur la conduite des affaires et la direction des hommes”; R.-P. Doncoeur,author of “Une Ecole des chefs, Le Fayolisme”; A. and L. Franchet, authors of“Pour former les hommes qu’il faut à la France d’apres-guerre”; and manyothers.

It appears that the CAS was also interested in the role and function of theboard of directors, a subject that was surprisingly absent from Fayol’spresentation in AIG. At a meeting of the Société de l’Industrie Minérale on30 January 1919, Fayol commented on a discussion paper by L. Guillet with thewords “I heartily thank M. Leon Guillet for the effort he just contributed to themissionary work of the Centre d’Etudes Administratives. The measuresadopted by the Ministry of Commerce, the excellent results already obtained area forceful encouragement to the improvement of existing methods.” Thesession chairman then said:

In his fine work on industrial administration, M. Fayol showed the qualities needed at eachlevel, from director to worker. In corporations there is a very important element that M. Fayolscarcely mentioned, the Board of Directors. Perhaps he would volunteer a few words?

Fayol responded:It was neither by intention, nor by neglect, that I did not speak more about Boards of Directorsin my first volume on industrial and general administration. This organ of large industrial andgovernment enterprises has a large role to play and deserves its own study. We have not lostsight of this at our study center and one of our collaborators has started an important piece ofwork on this very subject.

In drawing a parallel, during my previous speech[84], between the private, limited companyand the parliamentary government, between the Board of Directors and the Parliament itself,I made some interesting connections. We often speak ill of the Parliament, with good reason,unfortunately, and Boards of Directors are not above criticism. There are good ones, there arepassable ones, and there are bad ones. What is it that makes some very valuable and othersuseless? What are the consequences of different ways of recruiting employees? What is theeffect of knowledge or ignorance of administration? These are questions of equal interest toprivate enterprises and to public authorities, and for which the Centre d’étudesadministratives is actively seeking qualified help”[85, pp. 55-6].


55

Although it appears from these comments that the CAS was working on thesubject, no specific publication by the CAS on this subject has yet been found.

The merger of the CAS with CNOFDespite the broad range of activities and the participation of so many interestedparties, the demise of the CAS occurred in 1925 or 1926. Urwick observed that:

In the early stages of the popularization of his work attempts were made to represent Fayol’sdoctrine as in some way in competition or contrast with Taylor’s studies. But at the opening ofthe Second International Congress held at Brussels in 1925, he himself announced that hewanted to make clear how false he found this antithesis. This speech led to the unification ofthe organisation founded by Henri Le Chatelier, the “Conference de l’Organisation Française”,and Fayol’s Center of Administrative Studies, into a single national body “Le Comité Nationalde L’Organisation Française” (CNOF)[13, p. ix].

According to Devinat[86], this occurred earlier than 26 November 1926 andUrwick and Brech state that “by an unlucky fate, Fayol did not live to see morethan a few months of the life of the partnership”[47, p. 96]. The actual date ofFayol’s remarks was 10 October 1925 and he died on 19 November 1925, so it is notexactly clear from this information when the merger actually occurred. Fayol’sson, Henri Fayol fils, subsequently became director of the CNOF and held thisposition at the time he wrote the comments, included earlier, about his father’swork.

The CAS operated from 1917-1925, a period of some eight years which saw thestart of France’s recovery from the terrible effects of the Great War on itsindustrial resources and manpower, saw the continued development of Taylor’sprinciples of scientific management in Europe and saw the birth of the concept ofadministration as a discipline worthy of devoted study, teaching anddevelopment. Perhaps the CAS finally lost its early drive and enthusiasm as itsfounder and leader ultimately lost his own energy and did not leave a successor?Perhaps also the CAS was dogged by the political insensitivities of its leaderalluded to earlier.

Beyond Fayol’s work, little if any of the publications and other contributions ofthe CAS itself have survived or endured into the second half of this century.Brodie has commented[87] that he spent many months in Paris researching Fayoland the activities of the CAS and concluded “Regrettably the records of theactivities of the Centre were not kept”. It appears that the records of the CAS havelong since vanished[19, p. 39].

Yet, it would be unfair to dismiss the CAS as irrelevant. The Centre was clearlya focus for the development of Fayol’s doctrine and was an attraction for youngermen who were ready, willing and able to assist their country in the daunting taskof recovering from the war. Without this energy and the work of men such asDesaubliaux, Carlioz, Vanuxem and other Fayol disciples, it is much more likelythat Fayol’s own work would have petered out after his retirement, that his workwould not have come to the attention of such men as Urwick and R.C. Davis, andthat Fayol’s contribution to management thought and practice might never haveoccurred.

JMH1,3

56

Notes and references1. The biographical information in this article is adapted from[2]. Additional sources of

bibliographical information can be found in [3,4].2. Breeze, J., “Henri Fayol’s Résumé de la doctrine Administrative; translation, commentary

and analysis of its historical development”, an unpublished paper submitted to SaintMary’s University, Halifax, NS, 1980.

3. Breeze, J., “Harvest from the archives; the search for Fayol and Carlioz”, Journal ofManagement, Vol. 11 No. 1, Spring 1985.

4. Breeze, J. and Bedeian, A.G., The Administrative Writings of Henri Fayol: A BibliographicInvestigation, 2nd ed., Vance Bibliographies, Monticello, IL, 1988.

5. The company went through several changes of name and affiliations during Fayol’s career.Commentry-Fourchambault et Decazeville is the name most often used in connection withhis career. For details on some of the history of the company, see some of the other articlesin this special edition of the Journal of Management History.

6. Dale, E., Readings in Management, Landmarks and New Frontiers, McGraw-Hill, NewYork, NY, 1970, 2nd. ed.

7. Urwick, L.F., The Golden Book of Management, Newman Neame, London, 1956.8. Wren, D., The Evolution of Management Thought, 3rd ed., John Wiley & Sons, Chichester,

1987.9. Chambers, P., “Europe’s greatest management pioneer”, International Management, June

1974, pp. 48-51.10. Fayol, H., Administration Industrielle et Générale, Bulletin de la Société de l’Industrie

Minérale, 5th series, Vol. X No. 3, 1916, pp. 5-162.11. Fayol, H., Administration Industrielle et Générale, Dunod and Pinat, Paris, 1917.12. Coubrough, J.A., Industrial and General Administration, Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, London,

1930.13. Storrs, C., General and Industrial Management, Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, London, 1949.14. Gray, I., General and Industrial Management, IEEE Press, New York, NY, 1984.15. Urwick, L., The Elements of Administration, Harper & Row, New York, NY, 1943, p. 14.16. A list of Fayol’s technical publications can be found in[17].17. Verney, H., Le Fondateur de la Doctrine Administrative Henri Fayol; Etude de M. Henri

Verney, Dunod and Pinat, Paris, 1925, p. 6.18. Bulletin de la Société de I ’Industrie Minérale, various volumes covering the 1886 -1893

period.19. Brodie, M., Fayol on Administration, Lyon, Grant and Green, London, 1967, p. 3.20. “Discours prononcés par M. Henri Fayol…à la seance solonelle de clôture”, Bulletin de la

Société de l’Industrie Minérale, 3rd series, XV, 1901, pp. 759-66.21. “Le Cinquantenaire de la Société de Commentry-Fourchambault et Decazeville: résumé”,

Société de l’Industrie Minérale: Comptes Rendus Mensuels, July 1908, pp. 240-2.22. Blancpain, F., “Les cahiers inedits d’Henri Fayol”, Bulletin de l’Institute International

d’Administration Publique, Nos 28/29, 48pp.23. Also reproduced as a supplement to Revue Management France, No. 6, June 1974.24. Cuthbert, N., “Fayol and the principles of organization”, in Tillett, A., Kempner, T. and

Wills, G., (Eds), Management Thinkers, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1970, p. 109.25. Reid, D., “Genése du Fayolisme”, Sociologie du Travail, No. 1-86.26. Additional information in the Fayol Archives in the French National Archives.


57

27. Fayol, H., "De l’importance de la fonction administrative dans le gouvernement des affaires”, Bulletin de la Société d’Encouragement pour l’Industrie Nationale, January-February 1918.

28. Fayol, H., “L’incapacite industrielle de l’état: les PTT”, Revue Politique et Parlementaire,CVI, 10 March 1921, pp. 365-440.

29. Fayol, H., "La reforme administrative des PIT”, Rapports et Travaux de la Semaine desPostes,Télégraphs et Téléphones, Association Nationale d’Expansion Economique, May1923, pp. 313-21.

30. Fayol, H., Rapport Concernant l’Organisation et le Fonctionnement des Monopoles desTabacs et des Alumettes, Annex C, submitted to the Ministère des Finances, DirectionGénérale des Manufactures de l’Etat, 1925.

31. Peters, T.J. and Waterman, R.H. Jr, In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best-Run Companies, Harper & Row, New York, NY, 1982.

32. A complete bibliography of Fayol’s writings, published speeches and interviews in the areaof management and administration appears in[4].

33. Winter, J.M., The Experience of World War I, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 1990,p. 170.

34. Both battles were in northern France: Verdun lies some 150 miles to the East of Paris whilethe site of the battle of the Somme was approximately 90 miles to the North.

35. Breeze, J., “Henri Fayol’s basic tools of administration”, Proceedings of the Academy ofManagement, August 1981, p. 103.

36. Unless otherwise indicated, translations from the original French in this article are by theauthor.

37. Nothing is known of his plans for Part 4, but it could be that the third chapter of L’Eveilcalled “Administration au front” filled this obligation as far as he was concerned.

38. Fayol, H., Administration Industrielle et Générale: L’Eveil de l’Esprit Public, Bulletin de laSociété de l’Industrie Minérale, 5th series, Vol. XII, No. 4, 1917.

39. L’Eveil was also published as a book by Dunod and Pinat, Paris, 1918.40. The footnotes in this and other translated extracts from L’Eveil are by this author and do

not appear in the original, unless explicitly stated herein.41. Note that pagination for references to L’Eveil are based on the Dunod and Pinat 1918

edition. See Appendix 1 for a cross-reference between this edition and that published in theBulletin[35].

42. Fayol is referring to AIG here.43. Fort documentation, see Appendix 2 notes on translation.44. Breeze, J.D. and Miner, F.C., “Henri Fayol: a new definition of adminstration”, Proceedings

of the Academy of Management 40th Annual Meeting, 9-13 August, 1980.45. Brodie, M.B., “Henri Fayol: Adminstration Industrielle et Générale – a reinterpretation”,

Public Administration Journal of the Royal Institute of Public Administration, Vol. 40,Autumn, 1962.

46. Promised in AIG as the forthcoming parts 3 and 4.47. Urwick, L. and Brech, E.F.L., The Making of Scientific Management: Volume 1 Thirteen

Pioneers, Pitman, London, 1948, p. 95.48. Fayol, H., “Administration industrielle et générale: l’administration positive dans

l’industrie”, Technique Moderne, February 1918.49. Vanuxem, P., “Introduction théorique et pratique à l’étude de l’administration

experimentale”, Part 2 in Fayol, H., Administration Industrielle et Générale: L’Eveil del’Esprit Public, Bulletin de la Société de l’Industrie Minérale, 5th series, Vol. XII No. 4, 1917,p. 42.

JMH1,3

58

50. The reference to this item in the Vance Bibliography[4] carries the title “L ’enseignement del’administration dans les écoles techniques supérieures” with a date of 3 November 1916.Closer inspection of the material reprinted in L’Eveil indicates that Fayol’s address wasactually delivered on 30 March 1917 and has no specific title.

51. This is the only known reference to the Centre by this name.52. Portions of the comments on Fayol’s contributions to L’Eveil are adapted from from[3].53. Passerelle, see Appendix 2.54. Also published in the Bulletin de la Société d’Encouragement pour l’Industrie Nationale,

November-December 1917.55. Division of labour; authority; discipline; unity of direction; unity of command;

subordination of individual interests to the general interest; remuneration; centralization;hierarchy; order; equity; stability of tenure; initiative; unity of effort.

56. Planning, organization, command, co-ordination and control.57. The business plan; the underpass; time study; the organization chart; the meeting of

department heads.58. “Les écoles industrielles supérieures”.59. Fayol is referring to his comment on the founding of the CAS and its address and operating

hours.60. It is not completely clear whether Fayol is referring here to AIG or L’Eveil.61. M. Jules Lepain, the Director of the Cercle.62. Reprinted from Technique Moderne, February 1918.63. “Essai d’une classification systématique décimale des points de vue envisagés dans la

doctrine administrative”.64. “L’administration au front”.65. Later published by Dunod as a complete monograph Pour Administer une Section.66. Desaubliaux, R., “Les origines biologiques de la fonction administrative”, first published

in the Comptes Rendus Mensuels des Réunions de la Société de l’Industrie Minérale”,District Parisien, 1919, later as a monograph by Dunod, date unknown.

67. Levêque, L., Historique des Forges de Decazeville, Bulletin de la Société de l’IndustrieMinérale, 5th series, Vol. IX, 1916, pp. 5-236.

68. “Les idées de M. Fayol”.69. The actual title of this item is “Science industrielle: administration industrielle et générale”,

not “Exposée des principes généraux de la doctrine administrative” as stated in the tableof contents, and it is actually on pp. 233-48, not 223-48 as stated in the table of contents. Itwas published in Génie Civil, November 1917.

70. Reprinted from France Nouvelle, Revue de l’Union Française, March 1918.71. Reprinted from Journal d’Information, 1 November 1917.72. Reprinted from France Postale, 12 January 1918.73. Reprinted from Mercure de France, 16 March 1918, Vol. CXXVI, p. 304. (The material

reprinted in L’Eveil may be an abridged extract, rather than the complete article.)74. The Fayol publications also listed are[11,28,38].75. This book is noted as having been awarded the Société de l’Industrie Minérale’s Gold

Medal. See [76] for more information.76. Breeze, J., “J. Carlioz’s administration and organization of the commercial function”,

Proceedings of the Academy of Management’s 42nd Annual Meeting, 1982.77. Noted as “Lessons taught at l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales”. See[78] for more

information on the Carlioz publications.78. Breeze, J., “Harvest from the archives: the search for Fayol and Carloz”, Proceedings of the

Academy of Mangement’s 43rd Annual Meeting, 1983.


59

79. Taylor, F.W., The Principles of Scientific Management and Shop Management, translatorsnot indicated, 1903 (published, 1911).

80. Hartness, J., The Human Factor in Works Management, translated by Henri Perrot andCharles de Fréminville.

81. Organisation Scientifique. Principes et Applications du Système Fr.-W Taylor, (ScientificManagement, Principles and Application of the Taylor System), no author.

82. Amar, J., Le Moteur Humain et les Bases du Travail Professionel, (The Human Motor andthe Scientific Basis of Professional Work), preface by Henri le Chatelier.

83. Fayol, H., Fils, “L’oeuvre de Henri Fayol, la doctrine administrative”, Communication auComité du Commerce, de la Banque et de l’Utilité Publique à la Société du Nord, 18 March1929.

84. Fayol is referring here to “L’industrialisation de l’état”, which had been presented to theSociété at its meeting on 24 October 1918. This was supposed to have been published in theSociété’s Bulletin but actually appeared first in Revue Politique et Parlementaire, CVI, 10March 1921, pp. 365-440 and also as an appendix to [25].

85. Comptes Rendus Mensuels des Reunions de la Société de L’Industrie Minérale, 1919,pp. 55-6.

86. Devinat, P., Scientific Management in Europe, Geneva, International Labour Office, 1927,pp. 218 (information provided by Wren, D.).

87. Personal discussion with Morris Brodie in January 1995.

Appendix 1. Complete contents of Administration Industrielle et Générale:l’Eveil de l’Esprit PublicThe complete title of the publication is Administration Industrielle et Générale Prévoyance –Organisation – Commandement – Coordination – Contrôle Etudes Publiés sous la Direction de M.Henri Fayol: l’Eveil de l’Esprit Publique: Extrait du Bulletin de la Société de l’Industrie Minérale(4e livraison de 1917).

Figure A1 dissects and compares the paginations of the book form of l’Eveil as published by H. Duno et E. Pinat Paris 1918 and as previously published in the Bulletin de la Société del’Industrie Minérale[38, pp. 145-430]. Figure A1 also compares the pagination of the originalpublication (“Pagination in the Bulletin”) with the pagination in the Dunod and Pinat 1918 edition(“Pagination in D&P”). In the column headed “Vance Item no.”, Figure A1 identifies the items byFayol as documented in [4].

Figure A1.Contents of

AdministrationIndustrielle et Générale.l’Eveil de l’Esprit Public

Vance Pagination PaginationItem in the in

Item Author no. Bulletin D&P

Front cover “L’Eveil” No page nos No page nos

Title page “AdministrationIndustrielle et GénéraleL’Eveil de l’Esprit public” No page nos No page nos

Inside front cover;duplicate of front cover No page nos No page nos

Title page “Essai d’uneclassification systématiquedécimale des points de vueenvisagés dans la DoctrineAdministrative” No page nos No page nos

Tableau de classificationsystématique décimale dela Doctrine Administrative Paul Vanuxem No page nos 13 (note 1)

(Continued)

JMH1,3

60

Préface H. Fayol 4A 145-152 1-8

Avant=propos (Introductionthéorique et pratique àl’étude de l’administrationexpérimentale) Paul Vanuxem 153-156 9-12

CHAPITRE 1 Conferencesde M. Fayol

1o De l’importance de lafonction administrative dansle gouvernement de affaires H. Fayol 5 225-267 81-123

2o L’enseignement del’administration dans les H. Fayolécoles techniques supérieures and others 6 269-295 125-160

3o La réforme administrativedes services publics H. Fayol 7 305-317 161-177

CHAPITRE II Industrialiser

Introduction théorique etpratique à l’Etude del’Administration expérimentale Paul Vanuxem 153 9

PREMIERE PARTIE:Administration expérimentale

1o La valeur administrative,facteur fondamental durendement collectif Paul Vanuxem 157 13-19

2o L’autonomie et la richessedu point de vue administratif Paul Vanuxem 164 20-25

3o Les moyens d’investigation Paul Vanuxem 170 26-32

4o L’induction; quelqueshypothèses Paul Vanuxem 177 33-40

5o Conclusion Paul Vanuxem 185 41 (note 2)

DEUXIEME PARTIE: Ladocumentation au Centred’Etudes

1o La documentation, basede la doctrine, point d’appuide l’action Paul Vanuxem 186 42-44

2o La division du travail:exécution et préparation Paul Vanuxem 189-190 45-46

3o Les taches d’exécution Paul Vanuxem 191-195 47-51Les documents et leur annotationLa rédaction des notesLe classement

4o La tache de préparation Paul Vanuxem 196 52-78Table of Contents for “Essai” 223 79

(Continued)



Figure A1.


61

CHAPITRE III L’administration au front

Avant-propos Henri Fayol 8 323-324 179-180

1o POUR ADMINISTRERUNE SECTION Conférenceaux aspirants par le LieutenantR. Desaubliaux R. Desaubliaux 325-348 181-204

2o LETTRE DE M. DE MIJOLLA Louis de Mijolla 349-356 205-212

CHAPITRE IV Etudes et articles divers

1o Compte rendu de l’AssembléGénérale de la Société del’Industrie Minérale 357-360 213-216

2o LES IDEES DE M. FAYOL(Extrait de la <<Revue Georges Politique et Parlementaire>>) Lachapelle 361-376 217-232

3o EXPOSEE DES PRINCIPESGENERAUX DE LA DOCTRINEADMINISTRATIVE 233-248 (Extrait du <<Génie Civil>>) Jean Dautheuil 377-420 (Note 3)

4O LA TECHNIQUEADMINISTRATIVE DANSL’INDUSTRIE(Extrait de <<L’Information>>) Maxime Leroy 421-426 277-282

5o LA REFORME DENOTRE ADMINISTRATION(Extrait de <<La France Nouvelle>>) A. Renucci 393-410 249-266

6o ADMINISTRATIONINDUSTRIELLE(Extrait de <<La FrancePostale>>) Mr. X 427-428 283-284

7o L’ADMINISTRATIONPOSITIVE DANS L’INDUSTRIE(Extrait de la <<TechniqueModerne>>) Henri Fayol 9 411-420 267-275

8o SCIENCE SOCIALE(Extrait du <<Mercure deFrance>> tome CXXVI,mars 1918) Henri Mazel 429-430 285-286

Table of Contents for L’Eveilas published by D & P 287-289

Table of Contents forthe Bulletin 431-433

Printer’s name page No page no. No page no.

List of other publications byH. Dunod et E. Pinat No page no. No page no.

Notes:The Table of Contents identifies this table as page 13 but it is actually bound into the publication withoutpage numbers.The conclusion is not included in the printed Table of Contents of L’Essai in either version.Page 233 is erroneously noted as “223” in the printed Table of Contents of L’Eveil.



Figure A1.

JMH1,3

62

Appendix 2. Notes on translationAdministration = “administration” as Fayol clearly intended at this time of his presentation ofhis ideas (although he seems to have later extended it to more completely include the concept ofwhat we today consider to be “management”). See Breeze and Miner[44] and comments byBrodie[45] and by Urwick[13, preface]

Centre d’Etudes Administrative = “Centre for administrative studies” (CAS).

Doctrine administrative =“‘doctrine’ of administration” (as in “a theory based on carefullyworked-out principles and taught or advocated by its adherents” (Websters New WorldDictionary). A doctrine is more than just a theory, and Fayol was not “…writing as a theoretician,but as one who hoped through an amalgam of experience and analysis, to make a contribution toa substantive body of knowledge”[45, p. 312].

Industrialiser; industrialisation = “To introduce into State enterprises the procedures that favoursuccess in industrial enterprises”[28].

Administration Industrielle et Générale: l’Eveil de l’Esprit Public = General and IndustrialAdministration: The Kindling of Public Interest. (The author had a lot of difficulty devising asuitable term for “l’eveil de l’esprit public. “L’eveil” also means “the dawn ” in both realistic andpoetic sense, and l’esprit is literally “the spirit”, but “the dawning of the public spirit” clearlyleaves something to be desired! If the resulting choice fails to convey Fayol’s true meaning, thefault lies solely with the author.)

Fort documentation = “sound body of knowledge”. Another tough one. Literally, “sturdy (orstrong) documentation” but as is so often the case with French, a literal translation into Englishis inadequate. Urwick’s phrase[13, preface] is appropriate.

Passerelle = “Underpass”. The passerelle is Fayol’s choice of a word that expresses his concept oflateral communications. In AIG[11, p. 38] he illustrated the point with a diagram which resemblesa stepladder seen from the side, often reproduced by commentators, showing how lateralcommunications between employees at the same level in the hierarchy can reduce, if noteliminate, the delays caused when communications pass up and down the two sides of the chainof command to and from the common superior. The passerelle has at least two meanings, “anarrow pedestrian passageway” or a “gangplank” and also has a metaphorical connotation offorming a link between two concepts (notes from Larousse, Dictionaire du FrançaisContemporain). A familiar example of a passerelle is the underground tunnel that connectsdifferent parts of a Paris Metro station and which is also often used as a means of crossing underthe wide boulevards to get to the other side in one piece. Storrs[13, p. 35] used the word“gangplank” in her translation while Coubrough[12, p. 28] used “bridge”. To those who have anidea of the use of “gangplanks” by pirates and privateers, this word carries an unfortunateconnotation of a one-way trip into shark-infested waters. But Fayol’s concept of bypassing thetraditional chain of command has an innate sense of passage beneath something, rather thanpassage over something, and therefore “gangplank” fails to convey his real intent. The words“culvert” or “underpass” seem more appropriate to this intent, but since a culvert is more oftena tunnel which carries rainwater of effluent under a road or track, the work “underpass” ispreferred.

Documents

Henri_Fayol’s centre for administrative studies.pdf