Search results

This paper discusses the lives and contributions of five key members of the Management History Division: Arthur G. Bedeian; Alfred A. Bolton; James C. Worthy (now deceased); Charles D. Wrege; and Daniel A. Wren. Each has proved himself a teacher and intellectual leader in matters of fundamental concern to management history.

Management history contains many unsolved mysteries. In this paper four categories of mysteries are discussed, along with methodologies that have proved useful in solving such mysteries. Examples of the successful use of the outlined methodologies are also presented with illustrations of the results achieved.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the development of electric lamp renewal systems, an early, successful program to encourage the adoption of new technology, electric lighting.

Much material for the research comes from a variety of archival sources and publications of the early part of the twentieth century.

The free lamp renewal system was brilliant and effective: its high level of customer service and human contact dispelled fear raised by the new energy source, increasing the acceptance and use of electric lighting and thereby electricity. Lighting, in the absence of electrical appliances, was one of the few users of electricity. Thus, the electric companies created a marketing strategy that encouraged adoption of the new technology.

We examined the electric lighting industry at the turn of the twentieth century. Other examples of technology adoption could generalize our findings.

Our research suggests that supportive programs, which are high in customer contact and customized service, can aid in the adoption of new technology and unfamiliar products. By encouraging the use of such free or cheap products, customers are induced to higher usage of related products that increase the revenue stream to the provider.

The lamp renewal system is forgotten today, yet was a crucial factor in winning consumer acceptance of electric lighting and an early example of how companies can encourage adoption of new technology. Although the concept of uniformed men in trucks coming to customer homes once a month to clean and replace light bulbs is quaint – it worked!

The purpose of this paper is to introduce Frederick W. Taylor's lecture on his “task” system of management, given at his home in “Boxley” in 1907.

The paper summarizes the lecture's contents, and details its background.

The paper emphasizes the critical importance of primary sources to the work of management scholars, not just management history.

The paper provides further evidence of the import that needs to be attached to sound historical method as a basis for scholarship in management in general, and management history, in particular.

Outlines a new method of discovering original documents related to management history. Uses seemingly insignificant statements in books, articles or original documents to locate documents not listed on any computer database or public archive records, but which are undiscovered in attics or basements. The method involves the use of sources not commonly used by management scholars: obituaries, wills, cemetery records, deeds, land‐ownership maps, city directories and court records. Provides two examples to illustrate the discovery of actual documents: (1) the discovery of ten years of correspondence between F.W. Taylor and S. Thompson on the time required to do work, and (2) new evidence on F.W. Taylor’s interest in high‐heat treatment of tool steel leading to high‐speed steel and in shovels and shovelling. Finally presents new evidence on Taylor’s secret agreement with Bethlehem Steel to give favourable testimony in a patent case in exchange for a free licence for the high‐speed steel process Taylor had sold to Bethlehem for more than $50,000 in 1901.

Introduces Frederick W. Taylor′s lecture on his “task” system of management, given at his home, “Boxly”, in 1907 and recorded by his friend Morris Cooke as the basis for part of his book. Summarizes the lecture′s contents, and details its background, including correspondence between Cooke and Taylor regarding its development.

This paper aims to acquaint readers with Louis J. DeLamarter and the innovative strategies he used to extend the profitability of the street railway in the USA.

Initially the researchers were interested in street railways (trolleys) and why they had flourished in Grand Rapid, Michigan when they were failing in other parts of the USA. Extensive research in local and national newspapers, business journals and trade publications of the time led to the story of Louis J. DeLamarter. His innovative approach to running the street railway in Grand Rapids MI emerged as the cause of the Grand Rapids Railway Company's unique, though temporary, success.

DeLamarter conceived and implemented a number of innovative marketing practices which were rooted in a differentiation strategy: he focused on the customer whereas other transportation companies did not. His strategy made the company successful after others became bankrupt. His ideas were lauded in the industry, adopted, and are still used in public transportation today. Only external factors such as the depression, the advent of the automobile and burdensome regulations undermined his success.

Despite extensive searches, no original papers by DeLamarter could be located.

Public service companies worldwide can learn about the importance of customer focus from DeLamarter's work. Additionally, managers can learn that even the most successful innovative strategy will only yield a short‐term competitive advantage if the industry faces unfavorable external factors.

The story of Louis J. DeLamarter and his innovations in public transportation are presented for the first time.

The purpose of this paper is to review the recent book A New History of Management (NHM) and to discuss the strengths and limitations of the book versus traditional management history as practiced by Wren and Bedeian.

I analyze NHM by looking at the evidence presented in the book versus the historical record.

Although there are some strengths to NHM, the scholars often fail to address the larger historical evidence, which reduces the value of their work.

The value is to start a discussion of the nature of management history by discussing traditional versus postmodern history. Hopefully, the authors can commence with a dialogue to further historical research.