Dear Lee

Try this book https://www.amazon.co.uk/Manage-Slaves-Marcus-Sidonius-Trilogy/dp/1781252521 which is actually a collection of excerpts on the topic from Roman texts written in the style of a modern CEO airport book. I recently used it to teach a Masters module in Rome!!

Thanks!  That is an excellent idea!!

The Roman army is not parallel in many ways to business organizations from the 1900s or 2000s.  You have to realize the Roman army was not run in the same way at all points in time.  When Hannibal took his army over the Alps and invaded Italy, the Republic rotated two men as the leader of the Roman army.  This was done to limit how much power these leaders would have.  This clearly violated the principle of having one and only one leader.  The strategy of the Roman forces would shift as the leaders took turns.  This did not work out very well for Rome. While Rome eventually defeated Carthage, few would say the loses to Hannibal were examples of good Roman military leadership. Rome also had rival generals who fought against each other subsequently, When an Emperor was established, this did provide unity in the chain of command.  However, several emperors proved to be insane, and some abused their position. Several were assassinated.  These situations are not parallel to business organizations in the 1900s.  At some points, decimation was used by Roman military leaders as a method of discipline.  Ruling by fear does not parallel the espirit de corps Fayol contemplated.  Some introductory management texts today mention Fayol, but only give examples of a few of his principles.  The rest are no longer apparently of much interest.  Are you planning to talk about an optimal span of control? Many current theorists think more in terms of situational or contingency leadership theories.  I am not clear on where you are heading.  Are you going to argue people long ago knew all of Fayol's principles, and he really only summarized them into a list?  Alternatively, you might be arguing the lack of appreciation of Fayol's principles today is unwarranted. Based on historical examples, are you hoping to show Fayol's principles are relevant across the ages?  If you want to move in one of these directions, or some other direction, it seems to me you have to be more specific about what period in Roman history you are talking about, and exactly which principles do and do not apply.  I have long had an interest in world history and management history, so best of luck with your efforts, Bruce