Administrative Principles: Analysis and Shortcomings

Administrative Principles and Their Shortcomings

Herbert Simon critiques the following principles of scientific management:

1. Specialization of labor within the group
2. Arrangement of group members in a hierarchy of authority
3. Limiting the scope of control at any point in the hierarchy to a small number
4. Grouping of workers for control purposes by:
   • (a) Purpose
   • (b) Process
   • (c) Customers
   • (d) Place

These guiding principles, intended to "increase administrative efficiency" according to scientific management, are described by Simon as ambiguous and difficult to prove empirically.

Here, we review each principle and present the reasons Simon provides to support his claim.

Specialization

The principle suggests that any advance in specialization would improve administrative efficiency. Simon views specialization as an inherent feature of any working group, rather than an efficiency criterion. He argues that two workers cannot do the same thing; they will inevitably do different things, and this constitutes specialization. Whether this inherent feature is linked to efficiency or inefficiency remains to be seen. To salvage the principle, it would have to be rewritten as: "Administrative efficiency will be increased by specialization in the direction that increases administrative efficiency." Thus, the principle becomes a truism, and its ambiguity is more apparent.

Unity of Command

It is assumed that unity of command increases administrative efficiency through a hierarchy of authority. Simon highlights the contradiction between this principle and the principle of specialization. The division of labor through specialization is horizontal, while the hierarchy of authority proposes a vertical division of labor. One alternative is the proposition that a subordinate should obey only one superior. This leads to problems when a subordinate must use various skills in their work, which should be coordinated by different superiors. In this case, Simon notes that one authority could be prioritized over others in case of conflict. However, this would limit specialization in the decision-making process, as only formalized cases could resolve conflicts.

Scope of Control

This principle states that administrative efficiency is enhanced if the number of subordinates directly controlled by an administrator is kept small, typically around 6 or 8. This principle is contradicted by others advocated by scientific management, which expect a small number of subordinates, and vice versa. To avoid this conflict, it is assumed that an optimal point exists, which could be defined. Simon mentions that many studies propose 6, 8, or 10 as the "magic number." However, he argues that there are no solid arguments to support any of these claims.

Organization by Purpose, Process, Client, Location

Simon considers this principle inherently inconsistent and proposes that the criteria for administrative organization compete with each other. Following one criterion will necessarily be at the expense of the others.

Another difficulty posed by Simon is the ambiguity in defining the concepts of purpose, process, customer, and location.

The Dilemma of Management Theory

Simon believes that the problem of administrative theory is to establish criteria that can be used to describe and diagnose administrative situations and principles. The problem of management theory has been exposed, as it generally studies a single isolated aspect and makes recommendations without considering that different and incompatible standards may lead to the same suggestions. Simon argues that all relevant criteria should be considered simultaneously, and ways to weigh them when they are inconsistent should be explored.