Analysis Of Mary Parker Follett's The Giving Of Orders

Mary Parker Follett’s “The Giving of Orders” in this essay addresses the complexities of given orders and received. She presents that it is apparent through observation and through psychology that you cannot get moderate results with people when orders are given, pressured, influenced or manipulated. She articulates the need for the change in habits and patterns in people and correlates it to administration and organization. She proceeds in her article to further understand through, analysis that consists of three things. The first is the “build up certain attitudes,” the second, “provide for the release of these attitudes,” and the third, “augment the released response as it is being carried out.” If these three things are implemented,

Matthew R. Fairholm states, “Our leadership perspective defines what we mean when we say "leadership" and shapes how we view successful leadership in ourselves and others.” (Pg. )Therefore, change and modifications of desired behaviors must first stem from leadership, in order to achieve success. Follett does consider the challenges for “old-fashioned employers,” they have a difficult time transitioning and comprehending that training and employee is much different from providing orders. Therefore, these types of employers express their frustration with employees who are unable to complete tasks, when in actuality the employee is at a disadvantaged as they are not trained and new habits were not created and reinforced. Follett affirms that lack of training, is a deficiency in education. Therefore, it is crucial for leaders and employers to develop and plan ahead for modeled behaviors to gain the desired responses. Follett asserts psychology has a significant involvement because depending on the delivery of the order and how it is elicited can be the control of how responses are given

She conveys that business administration should avoid troublesome internalization by using an integrative technique. Unfortunately, Follett does not elaborate further on the context of what might this integration method appear to be. She changes the direction of her focus back onto the preparation of giving orders. Now, giving orders is a significant component to management but Follett should have provided additional information revolving the integration of management and the giving of orders. Fairholm suggests, “they misunderstand the evolving nature of authority derived from changing social structures, and because they have missed opportunities to tie in research procedures and focuses from intellectual interests such as psychology, sociology, history, and political science, not just scientific management, Weberian bureaucracy, and the like.” (Fairholm. 2004). Follett provides psychological perspectives, however maybe she misunderstands other perspectives, why further development is needed for her to examine. Follett later admits there is additional psychological, learning about the development of habits and the preventative measures of giving orders greatly surpasses than what she can explain in this article. It would be interesting if, she has examined and considered other theories and philosophies surrounding giving orders and