Next principle we need to discuss is the Principle of
Subordination of Individual Interests to the General Interest.
It is common experience that 'what should be' is very
different from 'what is' for everyone and in every aspect of living. In one
sense, the very living of an individual can be generally described, under
normal circumstances, as a steady movement from what is to the chosen what
should be. For instance, a clerk strives to becocme a manager; a political
volunteer aspires to become an MLA first, then, a Minister if not the Chief
Minister.
Very often, it
appears to be a fact that what should be seems to elude the grasp of every
individual; at the end, even if he reaches his what should be, he realizes that
it is not the same level he aspired for though the end may be the same. What it
generally suggests is that disappointment in some form or other is the common
lot of all. Adjustment with unhappiness is not achievement of happiness. All,
almost all, adjust with their living wherever they find themselves since they
have to go on.
Against this background, we have to look into this
principle of subordination of individual interests to the general interests
which here stand for the interests of the institution to which one belongs.
First thing that an employee must remember is that an
institution also, like himself , has an objective, a goal for which it has been
established. And, under any circumstances, an institution is larger than any
individual, any employee. Fayol says in
unambiguous terms that the interests, the goal of the institution must
come first for any employee since his
very entry into employment indicates his willingness to work for the goal of
the institution.
Subordination of the individual interests to the
interests of the company is never easily achieved since the company, when all
said and done, is certainly external to the employee. Here comes the most
difficult task of the manager. He has to monitor the work of the employee in
such a way that he is able to make the employee, if not convince him, work for
the institution compromising his interests if they conflict with those of the
institution.
It might look that Henri Fayol is against the unions
since he is firm on the principle of subordination of the personal interests to
those of the institution. In fact, he was not against unions; he never opposed
giving benefits to workers. He urged for 'constant supervision' which will
enable the manager to detect at the
earliest any wavering and wasting by any employee. He must be tactful in
helping the employee achieve the
necessary balance between his interests and the interests of the institution.