Subject: Public Administration

Course: Public Administration: An Introduction

Title of the Module: Unity of Command

Introduction:

The module is in the form of introduction of the paper on Unity of Command in

Public Administration. Module is divided in to five parts. First part refers to organisational
behavior as studied and explored by administrative thinkers in the development of the
organisation. It is based on a net-work of personal relationships and group ties developed by
workers. It explains how the employees actually behave in an organisation, the second part
argues, that meaning and concept of the Unity of Command. Third part of the module
presents Significance and difference between Unity of Command and Chain of Command.
The fourth part emphasizes on the unity of command structure offers a unique speed
advantage for decision-making. Last and fifth part is related to Limitation and it may lead us
to conclude that the principle of unity of command has broken down as far as public
administration is concerned.

Key Words:
Command, Common Purpose, Coordinated and Cooperative, Division of Work, Leadership,
Planning, Direction, Supervision and Control, Multiplicity of Command, Authority,
Hierarchy, Gangplank, Chain of Command, Scaler Chain, Inefficiency and Irresponsibility,
Command Structure.

Introduction:

Public administration as an organised activity provides various services to the people

and regulates the behavior of individuals and groups in society. Consequently, Public
administration requires the basic tool of organisation for keeping the administrative process
operating. As Prof. George E. Berkely says, ―All administration requires an organisation of
some shape, size, or kind and all organisations carry on some measure of administrative
activity‖. Since much of contemporary life involves organisations, it is necessary here to
understand briefly what an organisation is. An organisation is essentially a group of people
engaged in a coordinated and cooperative effort, working toward a common goal. To James
D. Mooney, ―Organisation is the form of every human association for the attainment of a
common purpose‖. It refers to the pattern of interrelationships which is established between
the workers engaged in the pursuit of common objectives.
 2
It is based on a net-work of personal relationships and group ties developed by
workers. It concerns how the employees actually behave in an organisation. Gulick notes that
any manager will have a finite amount of time and energy, and discusses span of control
under coordination.
Also under coordination, as well as organization, Gulick emphasizes the theory of
unity of command, that each worker should only have one direct superior so as to avoid
confusion and inefficiency. Still another theory borrowed from military organizational theory,
particularly Sir Ian Hamilton and Lyndall Urwick and brought to prominence in non-military
management and public administration by Gulick and Urwick is the distinction between
operational components of an organization, the do-ers, and coordinating, the coordinating
components of an organization who do the knowing, thinking, and planning. In the military,
this is divided between "line" and "staff" functions. Gulick gives the private-sector example
of a holding company performing limited coordinating, planning, and finance functions, with
subsidiary companies carrying out their work with extensive autonomy as it saw fit according
to the parent company's overall direction. Gulick states that his statement of the work of a
chief executive is adapted from the functional analysis elaborated by Henri Fayol in his
"Industrial and General Administration". Indeed, Fayol's work includes fourteen principles
and five elements of management that lay the foundations of Gulick's POSDCORB tasks of
an executive.
Fayol's fourteen principles of management are as follows:
 Division of Work  Centralization
 Authority and Responsibility  Scalar Chain (line of authority with
 Discipline peer level communication)
 Unity of Command  Order
 Unity of Direction  Equity
 Subordination of Individual  Stability of Tenure of Personnel
Interest to General Interest  Initiative
 Remuneration of Personnel  Esprit de Corps

Fayol's influence upon Gulick is readily apparent in the five elements of management
discussed in his book,
Planning - examining the future and drawing up planwhich are:s of actions
Organizing - building up the structure (labor and material) of the undertaking
Command - maintaining activity among the personnel
Co-ordination - unifying and harmonizing activities and efforts
 3
Control - seeing that everything occurs in conformity with policies and practices
In his 1987 piece "Deja Vu: French Antecedents of American Public Administration,"
Daniel Martin notes that virtually all of the principles in American Public Administration up
to 1937 and the coining of the POSDCORB acronym, including the POSDCORB principles,
were present in the French literature on the subject by 1859, but that this literature had largely
been forgotten by the theorists of that era, thus the "re-invention" of these principles in the
later French and American literature.
Classical administrative thinkers focused on structural aspect of organisation. They
believed that the setting up of proper organisation requires the observance of certain
administrative principles. Therefore, the classical writers such as Henry Fayol and Luther
Gulick developed and discussed comprehensively the ―so called‖ administrative principles of
division of work, coordination, departmentalization, hierarchy, authority, unity of command,
span of control, delegation, centralization and decentralization, and so on. These writers
thought that these principles can guide administrators not only in the creation of effective
organisation but also to enhance the academic status of Public Administration. In their
opinion, these principles are universal in nature and applicable to diverse organisation in both
public and private sectors.
Organisation is also related to management. Management is concerned with getting
things done through other people in an organizational setting. It is the direction of a group‘s
efforts toward the achievement of specified goals. Management is regarded as the collective
utilization of human and material resources to achieve defined goals of the organisation.
While organisation provides the structure for the conduct of the work of an agency,
management provides leadership, planning, direction, supervision and control. The efficient
execution of government‘s policies and programmes depends upon effective management and
utilization of material and human resources.
Orgnisation is method of dividing work among different people. Aristotle has
suggested two ways of dividing work: First, division of work according to men or class of
men and second, division of work according to the service. In 1968 Halden Committee said,
―Upon what principles are the functions of departments to be determined and allocated?
There appear to be only two alternatives which may briefly be described as
distribution according to process or classes to be dealt with and distribution according to the
services to be performed.‖
The principle of division of work is basic for the proper and efficient functioning of
an organisation. The importance of this principle of division of labour is clearly brought out
by Kautilya in his Arthashastra when he says that the king alone cannot carry on the entire
 4
administration without assistance. According to Henri Fayol, division of work belongs to the
natural order. Fayol compares organisation to huge animals. Animals evolved by
specializing their biological structure and the brain grew bigger. In the same way
organisation develops by developing sound principles and methods. Fayol believes that
organisation develop by refining their division of work and the central staff gets bigger.
POSDCORB is an acronym widely used in the field of Management and Public
Administration that reflects the classic view of administrative management. Largely drawn
from the work of French industrialist Henri Fayol , it first appeared in a 1937 staff paper by
Luther Gulick and Lyndall Urwick written for the Brownlow Committee. The acronym
stands for steps in the administrative process: Planning, Organizing, Staffing, Directing,
Coordinating, Reporting and Budgeting. Gulick's "Notes on the Theory of Organization"
further defines the principles of POSDCORB by explaining that if an executive's workload
becomes too overwhelming, some of the elements of POSDCORB can be organized as
subdivisions of the executive, depending on the size and complexity of the enterprise.
Under organizing, Gulick emphasized the division and specialization of labor in a
manner that will increase efficiency. Gulick notes that there are three limitations to division
of labor. The first occurs when labor is divided to the point where any one task in the division
of labor would require less than the full time of a worker, in which case a worker may need to
be employed in other tasks to fill up their time. The second limitation to division of labor
arises from technology and custom, where certain tasks may only be handled by certain
workers either because of a lack of technological means or customs at the time. Gulick gives
the example of a single worksite in which only plumbers do the plumbing work and
electricians do the electrical work, though this may not take up their full work time. Work in
these areas could be re-combined in a manner to increase efficiency, however union
considerations could prevent this. The third limitation to division of labor is that it must not
pass beyond physical division into organic division, or intricately related activities must not
be separated from each other. Gulick gives the example that while it may seem more efficient
to have the front end of a cow grazing in pasture at all times and the back half being milked at
all times, this would not work due to the intricate connection between the halves that is
needed for the whole to function.
Historical Background:
The chain of command principle is ancient, but its application to the management of
organisations was only systematized in the twentieth century. Two individual French
engineer and executive Henri Fayol and the German sociologist Max Weber contributed
much to our understanding of this principle. In his book, General and Industrial
 5
Management, Fayol presented what have come to be known as the fourteen principles of
management. These principles include both the unity of command (his fourth principle) and
the scalar chain (line of authority). Fayol‘s principle of the unity of command holds that a
subordinate should report to one and only one supervisor. Fayol believed that this was
necessary to provide the supervisor with clear position authority, and to prevent a subordinate
from receiving conflicting orders. Fayol‘s scalar chain principle states that authority and
responsibility flow, one level at a time, in a vertical line from the highest level in an
organisation to its lowest level. This line of authority establishes an organization‘s hierarchy.
Fayol believed that it was a management error to abandon the chain of command for no
reason, but he also allowed for circumstances in which the chain of command might be
bypassed for the good of the company. For example, Fayol suggested that communication
delays might sometimes be caused by blind adherence to the chain of command and unity of
command principles, and proposed what he called the ―gangplank,‖ which allows
communications outside the chain of command as long as superiors are made aware.
A problem associated with the chain of command occurs when a subordinate bypasses
a manager in either the giving of information or the requesting of a decision. This act
undermines the authority and position of the manager who is bypassed. If this practice is
allowed to continue in a bureaucratically-organized company, morale of the managers will
decline. The urgency and frequency of these situations may, of course, mitigate the impact
and inappropriateness of such contacts. With the rapidly-changing environment and
increasing uncertainty that organizations face in the twenty-first century, some adopt
structures that emphasize flexibility and quick response to change. Weber also studied the
problems inherent in large organisations, as organisations grew from family structures to
much larger entities during the Industrial Revolution. Weber proposed the bureaucracy as a
model of efficient organisation. Bureaucratic characteristics have clearly defined hierarchies
of authority and responsibility, consistent with the chain of command principle.

Meaning of Unity of command:

Unity of command means that an employee should receive orders from one superior
only. In other words, it means that no employee should be subjected to the orders of more
than one superior. Thus, it stands for single boss for each person or mono-command. Unity
of command is a basic principle of classical Public Administration. It means that ―each
subordinate should have one and only one superior‖, with orders flowing from and
accountability flowing to that single superior. It bases itself on the old proverb that ―no man
 6
can serve two masters‖. This important principle is drawn from the hierarchical organisation
characterized by scalar chain running throughout the organisation. The scalar chain provides
for a unified command, one head directing the activities of the entire organisation. Thus, the
scalar principle contains the concept of unit of command.
In addition to the above meaning of unity of command is also interpreted in two other
ways:
(i) It means that all the units of an organisation should be integrated or brought under
the authority of one head like a President, a Cabinet, a Minister, a Secretary, a
Chairman or some other body or officer.
(ii) It means that the head of the organisation should be a single individual. More
elaborately, it means that there should be only one person and not a body of persons
at the apex of an organisation, and all lines of authority should be concentrated in his
hand.
In the first sense, unity of command is incompatible with the independent or
autonomous units of organisations like the public corporations or constitutional bodies in
India or the independent regulatory commissions in USA and so on.
In the second sense, it is incompatible with Commission type or Board type of
organisations like the Election Commission, the Union Public Service Commission, the
University Grants Commission, the Railway Board, the Flood Control Board and so on.
Hence, the most widely accepted interpretation of unity of command is the one given above.
Unity of command is one of the Henri Fayol‘s 14 principles of Management. This
principle states that there must be only one superior of a subordinate. That is an employee or
a worker must not have many bosses or superiors. If an employee of subordinate has to work
under the influence of many bosses or superiors, then it creates a confusing situation dilemma
and disorder.
This also affects overall efficiency, productivity and profit of the organisation, but
also creates confusion about the accountability of an employee. Thus according to the
principle of unity of command, too many heads (bosses or superiors) must not boss or
supervise the same amount of work being done by a worker or an employee. In other words,
the work of a worker or job of an employee must always be supervised by a single head.

Concept of Unity of Command:

The concept of unity of command is essential to avoid confusion and manipulation in
organisations. Duality or multiplicity of command keeps an employee under confusion and
conflicting situation, for instance, ‗whom‘ to follow and ‗what‘ to follow. Further, a
 7
subordinate can also evade orders by playing-off one superior against another, which
undermines the organisational purpose. Henry Fayol is the most important advocate of the
principle of unity of command. He asserted that, ―should it be violated, authority is
undermined; discipline is in jeopardy, order disturbed and stability threatened‖.

As soon as two superiors wield their authority over the same person or department,
uneasiness makes itself felt and should the cause persist, the disorder increases, the malady
takes on the appearance or an organism troubled by a foreign body, and the following
consequences are to be observed; either the dual command ends in disappearance or
elimination of one of the superiors and organic well-being is restored, or else the organism
continues to wither away. In no case is there adaption of the social organism to dual
command.
Gulick and Urwick have also supported the principle of unity of command. They
believed that, ―a man cannot serve two masters. ―Hence, they concluded that, ―well-managed
administrative units in the government are almost without exception headed by single
administrators.‖ Gullick explains the importance of this principle, ―any rigid adherence to
the principle of unity of command may have its absurdities. But they are unimportant in
comparison to the certainty of confusion, inefficiency and irresponsibility which arise from
the violation of the principle.
The concept of unity of command has been opposed by many writers. Seckler-
Hudson argues, ―The old concept of one single boss for each person is seldom found in fact
in complex governmental situations. Many interrelationships exist outside the straight line of
command which require working with, and reporting to many persons for purpose of orderly
and effective performance, the administrator in government has many bosses and he can
neglect none of them. From one he may receive policy orders‘ from another, personnel; from
a third, budget; from a fourth, supplies and equipments.‖
J.D. Millet advocates the theory of ‗Dual Supervision‘ in place of unity of command.
He argues that the concept of unity of command needs to be reconciled with the recognition
that supervision of any activity may be dual-technical (professional) and administrative.
These two types of supervision may be exercised by different individuals.
The former may be concerned with the professional competence in the performance of
a job, while, the latter may be chiefly interested in the efficient utilization of men and
material resources available for the job. He concludes that ―it should be kept in mind that
under no circumstance and employee is subject to conflicting commands‖.
Moreover, the concept of unity of command has been affected by the following two
factors which are the result of growing size and complexity of modern organisations,
 8
(i) Adoption of plural headed bodies like ‗boards‘ and ‗commissions‘ as the heads of
administrative agencies as against ‗bureaus‘ (headed by a single individual).
(ii) Increasing number and growing influence and power of staff and auxiliary agencies
which are manned by specialists.

A principle refers to a fundamental truth. It establishes cause and effect relationship

between two or more variables under given situation. They serve as a guide to thought &
actions. Therefore, management principles are the statements of fundamental truth based on
logic which provides guidelines for managerial decision making and actions. These principles
are derived: -
(a) On the basis of observation and analysis i.e. practical experience of managers.
(b) By conducting experimental studies.

Principles of Management described by Henri Fayol:

Division of Labor
(a) Henry Fayol has stressed on the specialization of jobs.
(b) He recommended that work of all kinds must be divided & subdivided and allotted to
various persons according to their expertise in a particular area.
(c) Subdivision of work makes it simpler and results in efficiency.
(d) It also helps the individual in acquiring speed, accuracy in his performance.
(e) Specialization leads to efficiency & economy in spheres of business.
Party of Authority & Responsibility
(a) Authority & responsibility are co-existing.
(b) If authority is given to a person, he should also be made responsible.
(c) In a same way, if anyone is made responsible for any job, he should also have
concerned authority.
(d) Authority refers to the right of superiors to get exactness from their sub-ordinates
whereas responsibility means obligation for the performance of the job assigned.
(e) There should be a balance between the two i.e. they must go hand in hand.
(f) Authority without responsibility leads to irresponsible behavior whereas responsibility
without authority makes the person ineffective.
Principle of One Boss
(a) A sub-ordinate should receive orders and be accountable to one and only one boss at a
time.
(b) In other words, a sub-ordinate should not receive instructions from more than one
person because -
 9
- It undermines authority
- Weakens discipline
- Divides loyalty
- Creates confusion
- Delays and chaos
- Escaping responsibilities
- Duplication of work
- Overlapping of efforts
(c) Therefore, dual sub-ordination should be avoided unless and until it is absolutely
essential.
(d) Unity of command provides the enterprise a disciplined, stable & orderly existence.
(e) It creates harmonious relationship between superiors and sub-ordinates.
Unity of Direction
(a) Fayol advocates one head one plan which means that there should be one plan for a
group of activities having similar objectives.
(b) Related activities should be grouped together. There should be one plan of action for
them and they should be under the charge of a particular manager.

(c) According to this principle, efforts of all the members of the organization should be
directed towards common goal.
(d) Without unity of direction, unity of action cannot be achieved.
(e) In fact, unity of command is not possible without unity of direction.

Basis Unity of command Unity of direction

Meaning It implies that a sub-ordinate should It means one head, one plan for a
receive orders & instructions from only group of activities having similar
one boss. objectives.
Nature It is related to the functioning of It is related to the functioning of
personnel‘s. departments, or organization as a
whole.
Necessity It is necessary for fixing responsibility It is necessary for sound
of each subordinate. organization.
Advantage It avoids conflicts, confusion & chaos. It avoids duplication of efforts and
wastage of resources.
Result It leads to better superior sub-ordinate It leads to smooth running of the
 10
relationship. enterprise.
Therefore it is obvious that they are different from each other but they are dependent
on each other i.e. unity of direction is a pre-requisite for unity of command. But it does not
automatically comes from the unity of direction.

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

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

Discipline
(a) According to Fayol, ―Discipline means sincerity, obedience, respect of authority &
observance of rules and regulations of the enterprise‖.
(b) This principle applies that subordinate should respect their superiors and obey their
order.
(c) It is an important requisite for smooth running of the enterprise.
(d) Discipline is not only required on path of subordinates but also on the part of
 11
management.
(e) Discipline can be enforced if -
- There are good superiors at all levels.
- There are clear & fair agreements with workers.
- Sanctions (punishments) are judiciously applied.
Initiative
(a) Workers should be encouraged to take initiative in the work assigned to them.
(b) It means eagerness to initiate actions without being asked to do so.
(c) Fayol advised that management should provide opportunity to its employees to suggest
ideas, experiences& new method of work.
(d) It helps in developing an atmosphere of trust and understanding.
(e) People then enjoy working in the organization because it adds to their zeal and energy.
(f) To suggest improvement in formulation & implementation of place.
(g) They can be encouraged with the help of monetary & non-monetary incentives.

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

Stability of Tenure
(a) Fayol emphasized that employees should not be moved frequently from one job
position to another i.e. the period of service in a job should be fixed.
(b) Therefore employees should be appointed after keeping in view principles of
recruitment & selection but once they are appointed their services should be served.
(c) According to Fayol. ―Time is required for an employee to get used to a new work &
succeed to doing it well but if he is removed before that he will not be able to render
worthwhile services‖.
 12
(d) As a result, the time, effort and money spent on training the worker will go waste.
(e) Stability of job creates team spirit and a sense of belongingness among workers which
ultimately increase the quality as well as quantity of work.
(f) Fayol defines scalar chain as ‘The chain of superiors ranging from the ultimate
authority to the lowest‖.
(g) Every orders, instructions, messages, requests, explanation etc. has to pass through
Scalar chain.
(h) But, for the sake of convenience & urgency, this path can be cut shirt and this short cut
is known as Gang Plank.

Sub-Ordination of Individual Interest to General Interest

(a) An organization is much bigger than the individual it constitutes therefore interest of
the undertaking should prevail in all circumstances.
(b) As far as possible, reconciliation should be achieved between individual and group
interests.
(c) But in case of conflict, individual must sacrifice for bigger interests.
(d) In order to achieve this attitude, it is essential that -
- Employees should be honest & sincere.

- Proper & regular supervision of work.

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

E-spirit De’ Corps (can be achieved through unity of command)

(a) It refers to team spirit i.e. harmony in the work groups and mutual understanding
among the members.
(b) Spirit De‘ Corps inspires workers to work harder.
(c) Fayol cautioned the managers against dividing the employees into competing groups
because it might damage the moral of the workers and interest of the undertaking in the
long run.
(d) To inculcate Espirit De‘ Corps following steps should be undertaken -
- There should be proper co-ordination of work at all levels
- Subordinates should be encouraged to develop informal relations among
themselves.
- Efforts should be made to create enthusiasm and keenness among subordinates so
that they can work to the maximum ability.
- Efficient employees should be rewarded and those who are not up to the mark
 13
should be given a chance to improve their performance.
- Subordinates should be made conscious of that whatever they are doing is of great
importance to the business & society.
(e) He also cautioned against the more use of Britain communication to the subordinates
i.e. face to face communication should be developed. The managers should infuse team
spirit & belongingness. There should be no place for misunderstanding. People then
enjoy working in the organization & offer their best towards the organization.

Centralization & De-Centralization

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

Difference between Unity of Command and Chain of Command:

Unity of Command and Chain of Command are often used to refer to military
command structures, but they are also applicable to modern business strategies. Within the
corporate environment these terms refer to the overall business structure, containing either a
rigid hierarchy of bosses or a single manager who oversees all the business functions of a
company. These command structures are different, but each provides its own unique
advantages.

Unity of Command:
Unity of command is a managerial technique that is built around a single individual in
command, with any number of subordinates under his/her command. This is often the
command structure used in small businesses; herein one owner/manager has full control over
every managerial responsibility. Unity of command provides a singular vision with a clear
command structure, such as that of the single owner who determines the vision for the
 14
company. Unity of command requires consistent micromanagement by the head of the
command structure; because the head of the organization has no one under her command to
whom she delegates leadership responsibilities. There has been a recent quickening of the
tempo of the long-standing debate on control and missions of Air Force units employed in
support of ground forces. Army officers, many of whom have never been fully satisfied with
the theory or practice of existing air support doctrine, are raising the issue once more. And so,
largely in Army periodicals we find unofficial statements of the Army‘s requirements for
adequate air support, with the clear implication that if the Air Force can‘t or won‘t do the job,
the Army itself will have to provide its own air support—just as the Marine Corps does.
The principle Army commander is now unable to exercise any control over the air
elements from which he should receive air support. Many soldiers consider that this is an
intolerable situation, that it jeopardizes the successful prosecution of the land battle, and—
above all—that it violates the principle of unity of command. It may be heresy, but as an
Army man I find it impossible to reconcile this argument with established Army doctrine, or
with Army concepts of the principles of war. I believer that there is an inherent inconsistency
in reasoning with demands that local ground commanders should have command control of
supporting air units on the basis of the ―established and proven principle of unity of
command.‖
Chain of Command:
The chain of command, sometimes called the scaler chain, is the formal line of
authority, communication, and responsibility within an organization. The chain of command
is usually depicted on an organizational chart, which identifies the superior and subordinate
relationships in the organizational structure.
According to classical organization theory the organizational chart allows one to
visualize the lines of authority and communication within an organizational structure and
ensures clear assignment of duties and responsibilities. By utilizing the chain of command,
and its visible authority relationships, the principle of unity of command is maintained. Unity
of command means that each subordinate reports to one and only one superior.
The chain of command, sometimes called the scaler chain, is the formal line of
authority, communication, and responsibility within an organisation. The chain of command
is usually depicted on an organizational chart, which identifies the superior and subordinate
relationships in the organizational structure. According to classical organization theory the
organizational chart allows one to visualize the lines of authority of communication within an
organizational structure and ensures clear assignment of duties and responsibilities. By
utilizing the chain of command, and its visible authority relationships, the principle of unity
 15
of command is maintained. Unity of command means that each subordinate reports to one
and only one superior.
In many organizations, the chin of command principle is still very much alive. The
manager‘s status is that of the deliverer of orders, and the employee enacts them under the
monitoring of the manager. Both parties share responsibility for achievements. But, as
Longnecker suggests in his book Principles of Management and Organizational Behaviour,
communication provides the underpinnings of this relationship. The discussions and
meetings contact managers and their subordinates have many improve or harm the
effectiveness of the direct report relationships in the chain of command.
In many organizations, the chain of command principle is still very much alive. The
manager's status is that of the deliverer of orders, and the employee enacts them under the
monitoring of the manager. Both parties share responsibility for achievements. But, as
Longnecker suggests in his book Principles of Management and Organizational Behavior,
communication provides the underpinnings of this relationship. These types of organizations
attempt to place decision-making authority in the organizational structure with those who can
most effectively and efficiently respond to environmental imperatives. Thus, these
organizations may have flatter hierarchies and communication and decision-making patterns
that do not fully adhere to the chain of command or unity of command principles. In the case
of matrix organizations, employees frequently have two managers or supervisors, violating
the unity of command and chain of command principles. To be effective, individuals working
in these organizations learn to share power, use open confrontation to resolve issues and to
utilize all directions in the organization to disseminate information.
These more organic structures are not rigidly bound to the chain of command
principle, although it is still an important organizing principle in most organizations.

Unity of Command and Decision- Making Speed:

The unity of command structure offers a unique speed advantage for decision-making.
The head of the organisation has the unilateral ability to make decisions, without consultation
or discussion with others, thus speeding up the decision-making process. For instance, within
a single owner/manager business environment, the single owner is not responsible to
communicate or discuss changes of policy to or with anyone else, providing flexibility of
management and an increased ability to adjust and conform to market demands, whether by
changing prices as needed or staging sales to complete with another business nearby.

Merits of Unity of Command:

 16
The following merits of unity of command are below:
(i) It develops efficiency in administration.
(ii) It is in conformity with the Scalar system.
(iii) As it avoids confusion among the employees of an organisation, the work is
not delayed.
(iv) In it every employee recognizes his immediate boss, from whom he has to
receive command.
(v) Better Relationship: Unity of command helps to develop a clear and better
relationship among superior and subordinates.
(vi) Unity of command results in a clear and well-organized Authority,
Responsibility and Accountability between various levels of workforce of the
organisation.
(vii) Reduces Duplication of work: It helps to reduce and/or avoid duplication of
work between the various levels of workforce of the organisation.
(viii) Prompt or Quick Decisions: The unity of command helps managers to take
prompt or quick decisions properly.
(ix) Effective and Efficient Discipline: The unity of command ensures an
effective and efficient discipline within an organisation.
(x) Better co-ordination and team work: The unity of command ensures better
co-ordination, and team work in the organisation.
(xi) Boosts Morale and Positive Attitude: It boosts morale and generates positive
attitude among workers in the organisation.

(xii) Higher Productivity: The unity of command leads to higher productivity of

goods and services. This creates a better image or goodwill of the
organisation in the market.
Supporting unity of command, Henry Fayol observes, ―Should it be violated,
authority is undermined, discipline is in jeopardy, order disturbed and stability threatened.‖

Demerits of Unity of Command:

(i) Not universal

The principle that ‗one man should obey one superior‘ cannot be applied universally.
There are some exceptions to this rule. For example, the technical experts do not come under
this category. They receive and issue commands to various other officials. Millett has
rightly observed. ―The concept of unity of command therefore needs to be reconciled with
recognition that supervision of any activity may be dual – technical and also administrative.
 17
The two types of supervision may be exercised by different individuals. The two types of
supervision may be exercised by different individuals. The one type may he concerned with
professional competence in the performance of a job while the other is chiefly interested in
the efficient utilization of the resources – men and materials – available for the job.‖

(ii) Functional Foremanship

Criticizing the unity of command Prof. Tailor has recommended functional

foremanship. In functional foremanship a subordinate may accept the instructions of two
different foremen, one for the speed or the other for its proper maintenance.

(iii) Impractical

The traditional approach to the principle of unity of command that each individual
receives orders from one and only one superior is not practicable. In modern time, due to the
impact of science and technology, the numbers of specialists have increased considerably in
administration. In such a situation, it is unpracticed to receive the command of one superior
only. However, there should be mechanism to ensure that the command of different officials
do not conflict or contradict each other. In case of conflict of commands, the subordinate
should be expected to obey the command of one man only. The notice of conflicting
command should be given to the authorities. But if there is no conflict in commands, duality
or multiplicity of command is not harmful. Unity of command should not be rigidly adhered
to.
To sum up while the principle of unity of command is a useful guide to large-scale
organisation it is not like a mathematical formula to be applied in every case in every
situation. The principle is, however, essential to ensure unity of direction, stability and
continuity of command and control. It achieves unity of purpose in diversity or different
units and activities.

Conclusion:
It may lead us to conclude that the principle of unity of command has broken down as
far as public administration is concerned. But this is certainly not so if we look a little deep
into the issue and analyse the situation thoroughly. Unity of command is not violated if an
employee receives order from two supervisors in respect of different matters or aspects of
matters under his charge. It is broken only if he gets orders from two different sources
regarding one and the same matter. Even in the technical departments, the last work lies with
the administrative chief, who has the power and authority to overrule the technical experts.
We can conclude by saying that unity of command is essential for good
administration. However, there must be flexibility in application of principle of unit of
 18
command to keep pace with changing administrative needs and situation without violating the
authority of superior.