在纪律和惩罚中，福柯评论说：“一个愚蠢的暴君可能用铁链束缚他的奴隶；但是一个真正的政客用他们自己的思想枷锁更强烈地约束他们。”。这个评论在当代组织工作讨论有关如何？
法国哲学家福柯的分析和思想在公司和组织的当代管理中同样被使用。在这篇文章中，我将分析他关于西方变化的思想如何应用于当代管理机构和其他管理职位。在本文的研究将主要集中在如何对待他们的奴隶的独裁者们通过他们的铁链。束缚的铁，在这种情况下，意味着目前的领导者和管理者受到他们的晚辈的职责和实施的政策和策略，没有约定的员工不考虑他们的贡献对制定的职责，因此，作为领导者和管理者强加的。同样，本文也将探讨如何真正的政治家，主管和经理，结合他们的思想链上初中，他们的思想的枷锁会被指政策、策略和条款和条件，通过对所有利益相关者的观点或将由初级员工对公司提出的协议。
米歇尔·福柯在他的纪律和惩罚书中使用“霸王”一词，指的是一个人如果不考虑到他或她所做的贡献，就决定如何去做事情。一个暴君，在这种情况下，不仅仅是一个独裁者，而是一个不尊重别人意见的人。在这个背景下，福柯提出他的想法与他的机械和社会变化，在提出主要基于访问历史的法语文件西方学科体系的变化分析。他的分析主要以医院、学校，通过怎样的折磨、处罚进行深入评价集中营和监狱，监禁和纪律。在他的评价中，酷刑的概念以两种方式受到嫌疑犯；酷刑的主要事件之一是在调查嫌疑犯过程中。在调查过程中，犯罪嫌疑人受到了严刑拷打。刑讯嫌疑人强迫他或她提供证据。如果酷刑不能迫使犯罪嫌疑人出示有罪的证据，无罪宣告成立。第二个实施酷刑的事件是在对犯罪罪犯的惩罚中，目的是纠正他或她。
In Discipline and Punish (1977) Foucault comments that "a stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chains of their own ideas". How is this comment relevant for a discussion of work in contemporary organisations?
French philosopher, Foucault's analysis and ideas are equally used in the contemporary management of companies and organisations. In this essay, I will analyse how his ideas in relation to the changes in the western can be used in the contemporary management of institutions and other managerial positions. Throughout the essay, the research will majorly focus on how autocrats treat their slaves by subjecting them to iron chains. Enchaining by the iron would, in this case, mean how the current leaders and managers subject their juniors to duties and implementation of policies and strategies that were not agreed upon by the employees without considering their contributions towards the formulation od the duties, therefore, considered as imposed by the leaders and managers. Equally, this essay will also evaluate how true politicians, competent and good managers, binds their junior in the chains of their ideas., The chains of their ideas would be taken to refer to either the policies, strategies and terms and conditions that are passed upon the agreement of all the stakeholders or the ideas that would be proposed to the firm by the junior employees.
Michel Foucault in his Discipline and Punish book used the term despot to refer to a person who dictates how things would be done without taking into account the contributions of his or her subjects. A despot, in this case, is more than just a dictator, rather, a person who does not respect the opinions of others. In his context, Foucault posited his ideas in relation to his analysis of mechanical and social changes that were behind the changes that were posed to the Western disciplinary system majorly based on the historical French documents that were accessed (Foucault, 1977). His analysis was majorly based in the hospital, school, camps and prisons through an in-depth evaluation of how torture, punishment, imprisonment and discipline. In his evaluation, the concept of torture is subjected to the suspects in two ways; one of the major incidents where torture was applied was during the process of investigating the suspect. During the investigation, the suspect was subjected to torture. Inflicting torture to the suspects compelled him or her to provide evidence. In case, torture failed to compel the suspect to produce evidence ascertaining his or her guilty; innocence was pronounced. The second incident where torture was applied was during the punishment of a crime offender with the aim of correcting him or her (Foucault, 1977).
To begin with, in the contemporary organisational management, despotic leadership is bound to reduce the organisation's productivity. In the operation of an organisation, an autocratic manager may not have strategic ideas and insights on how to manage the organisation (Howard, 2007). The employees under him or her may have these strategic ideas on how to operate the organisation in a manner that would increase the productivity and therefore, growth in the long run. To the disadvantage of the firm's growth a
