Search results

Evaluates the classical theoretical framework of planning and its relevancy in an international context. Additionally, it integrates Hofstede’s model of cultural dimensions into the discussion to provide an exploratory analysis of how national culture characteristics may impact cross‐cultural acceptance and application of classical planning principles.

Planning, organising, co‐ordinating, commanding and controlling – these are the elements of management according to Henri Fayol. Less known, but no less important, are Fayol’s principles of management. Fayol was born in 1841 and died in 1925. His Administration Industrielle et Générale was published in French in 1916 but was not translated into English until 1929. Fayol’s work is often quickly rejected either because of its age or because it is believed to have been superseded by observational findings. However, Fayol’s work was based on observation. This paper considers some contemporary models of management (Hales, Kotter, Mintzberg) and argues that Fayol’s elements of management are not refuted but are rather reinforced by more recent findings. The paper concludes that Fayol’s work stands the test of time. The five elements of management and 14 principles of management are briefly presented.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of Fayol's ideas on both British management thought and practice.

The paper presents a schematic which seeks to illustrate the links between the various strands of scientific management theory, especially that of Fayol, in Britain between the 1920s and the 1960s/1970s and, for the same period, the links between the theory and practice of scientific management. The links indicated in the schematic are assessed first through an examination of the development of British management thought, in particular the exemplification of Fayol's ideas by Lyndall Fownes Urwick and the British neoclassical school. Using archival evidence from a small number of engineering companies, the impact on practice of the ideas of Fayol and other aspects of scientific management is then examined.

The paper concludes that, while Fayol's theoretical influence has stood the test of time, his impact on practice was much more limited.

By focusing on the historical impact on practice of management theory, this paper not only provides a basis for future research by business and management historians, but also throws light on the relevance for practice of theory, an issue of relevance for all theoreticians and management practitioners.

This paper examines critically how the manager’s role in public relations has been conceptualised, comparing how the work of managers has been defined from a public relations and management perspective. Here the paper provides a critical review of the relevant public relations and management literatures, pointing to the relative weaknesses in the public relations literature. The paper concludes by examining a particular case study to illustrate some of the weaknesses in current practitioner role models to conceptualise the weaknesses in the public relations manager’s role.

The paper aims to explore the life and contributions of one of the most influential management scholars (Herbert A. Simon), who is known as the founder and contributor to many scientific fields. Simon's interdisciplinary approach in conducting his research in management has made him a significant figure in many disciplines.

The paper is of a qualitative nature, and information is collected from the books and articles that are written by Simon as well as those who have been familiar with his work. This paper concentrates on Simon's contribution to the decision‐making theory and, more specifically, his insights into the process of decision making in real world situations. It explores the tenets of the classical and neoclassical approach to decision making and argues that because of Simon's work, attention was diverted from concentration on studying the organizational structure to the behavior of the decision makers during the process of making decisions. This new orientation brought more attention to the behavioral approach in studying decision making in organizations. Special attention is given to Simon's “bounded rationality” model and its relation to the process of decision making. This paper also deals with Simon's view on the role of intuition in decision making and explores the practicality of using his model in the real world.

Simon opened up a new world of scientific inquiry that its main focus is on the development of the most effective and realistic model for the decision makers to predict future outcomes.

The paper only concentrates on the core contribution of Herbert Simon's work on the decision‐making process. It does not indulge itself in Simon's related work in other disciplines such as computer science and artificial intelligence. In addition, this paper does not deal with the new developments in the theories of decision making. Future research could concentrate on the new discoveries concerning the ability of humans to construct thinking machines in order to improve productivity in organizations.

The paper examines the productive life of Herbert Simon and develops a realistic portrait of his core contributions to humanity (decision making). It involves the reader with the intricacies of the decision making process as it is examined and studied by Simon.

This paper aims to discuss some of the debates that have surrounded knowledge management as a field since its inception in 1990s from the perspective of the dilemmas that they have raised regarding: the notion of knowledge management as a field in relationship to other cognate fields such as information management, and the implications introduced by different approaches and perspectives on managing knowledge.

Problems and dilemmas brought about by the contribution of the following perspectives and strands of literature on knowledge management are discussed: organisational behaviour perspectives; strategic management perspectives; and economic‐ and accountancy‐based perspectives.

The explicit aim attributed to knowledge management by many authors of managing the transfer of tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge raises dilemmas that are re‐enacted and reconstructed in the above key approaches to knowledge management.

Beyond focusing on the classical debate on the nature of knowledge and whether it can be managed, these dilemmas offer avenues for reconsidering both the conceptual apparatus and the practical organisational intervention methods inherent to this field; this implies adopting different views and professional practices over what we understand by management, strategy, measurement and evaluation.

Examines the role played by business school academics in promoting management ideas through their teaching. Defines the concept of a popular management idea, and explains how the author identified bureaucracy, classical management, scientific management, human relations, neo‐human relations and guru theory, to be the most popular management idea families of the twentieth century. Reviews the existing literature on factors which may influence academics to select certain management ideas for presentation rather than others. Offers hypotheses based on the author′s own experiences as a business academic. Reports the findings of a small postal survey which explored academics′ reasons for choosing the topics to teach and compares the findings with the hypotheses presented earlier. Concludes by discussing the implications of this and further research, and considers the extent to which business academics now tend to follow management practice, rather than lead it. Finally, makes recommendations for future research in this field and suggests appropriate research methods to be used.

This paper aims to trace the historical roots of African American management by examining managerial practices and experiences described in the letters of Benjamin Thornton Montgomery, a former slave who eventually became manager and, ultimately, owner of the Hurricane plantation.

The method used is the historical archival method of analysis, primarily the examination of a series of letters written by Montgomery during the 1865‐1870 time periods. These letters, which document the foundation and emergence of African American management during the Emancipation age, are for the first time presented as a source of management history.

Contrary to traditional thoughts of the insignificance of the plantation era to the history of management, the analysis indicates that Montgomery's management practices were quite sophisticated as they incorporated classical management principles of planning, delegation, leadership, and control.

This paper provides insights concerning the historical roots of management practices during the African American Emancipation period which could provide contemporary managers with a more realistic foundation of management practice.

The principal contribution of this investigation is the historical awareness of the documented roots of African American management represented by Montgomery's competence and perseverance to manage effectively while withstanding impeding racial attacks.

Complexity theorists propose that organizations are made up of complex responsive processes in which people create and recreate organizational forms through dynamic micro-level interactions. Social constructionists add that conversations are the means by which these interactions occur. Our analysis illustrates how the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) engaged a wide range of stakeholders in a successful dialogue process to recreate a new system for monitoring nuclear reactors. The success was due, in large part, to the conversational qualities tacitly and explicitly agreed to by those involved in the process which included a spirit of freedom, inclusion, inquiry, spontaneity, and possibility. Using a grounded theory building process, we show how these qualities produced transformative change by increasing levels of interconnectivity, shared identity, and collective capacity among participants. These findings provide the beginnings of a model for understanding continuous and transformative change and demonstrate the value of engaging the “whole system” in sustained dialogue, even in complex, highly regulated environments.

The aim of the paper is to connect the field of health management to other related academic discourses (critical management studies and critical development studies) that can contribute to a more interdisciplinary approach to understanding health organizations and management.

The paper's design is theoretical critique that blends post‐structural, critical management and critical development approaches into a focused discussion of modernity and its relevance to contemporary health management issues.

Modernity proliferates through a variety of rhetorical tropes that go unnoticed or remain invisible. Through a brief analysis of historical definitions of management and development, the findings suggest that health management could also be critiqued as a cultural and social construction, enriching anthropological studies as well as informing practical critiques of health projects in the development sector.

The conceptualisation of health‐management as a cultural construct of modernity opens up the prospect for some rich empirical studies into what management practices support the scientific‐rational claims on which it rests.

The critique informs a re‐appraisal of health management practices that are often taken for granted and ritualistic parts of organizational life. Such a re‐evaluation could lead to the implementation of more nuanced and appropriate health practices.

Connecting management and development discourses in this way has not been done before and its relevance to health management remains under‐researched. This paper highlights the way these discourses can enrich the study of health organizations and create a truly interdisciplinary understanding of health.