Search results

The purpose of this paper is to make a specific attempt of historicizing outstanding academic leadership in the field of management history.

By using the biographical method and applying it to the material contained in Hodgetts's video interview of Wren and Bedeian's autobiography, the authors examine how outstanding management laureates, Wren and Bedeian, look back on their own lives and the people who influenced them.

The intellectual and institutional origins of their life stories are traced and the factors in Wren's and Bedeian's lives that might explain their pathways to becoming the US outstanding management historians as the Academy of Management Fellows are assessed.

The paper highlights the most outstanding achievements of the past in a manner that might be valuable when addressing the present day concerns about outstanding teaching and research in the field of management history.

The unique contribution of this study is its focus on showing how the manner in which outstanding management historians narrate the past may explain their present‐day achievements, and thus help readers understand that very past.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: to report the number of articles in the business academic literature that have been written about the pioneers depicted in a 1977 Daniel Wren and Robert Hay study; and to report the findings from a replication and extension of that study.

The paper employed a systematic literature review combined with an empirical replication and extension of the 1977 study.

The literature review revealed that 101 articles referenced only a few of the 1977 identified pioneers. In fact 47 of the articles were about three of the pioneers – keeping them firmly in the academic institutional memory, while others have fallen into insignificance. The results of the new study identified seven new names for the list of top ten, while three remained steadfast. Frederick Taylor was number one on both lists. Interestingly, no woman made the top ten.

The replication and extension is a strength and limitation in which the authors were able to meticulously follow Wren and Hays' methodology, yet prevented the inclusion of possible viable new sources.

This piece calls for the continuation to rediscover history as a backdrop for research.

The paper reminds us of the value of preserving business academic institutional memory.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to trace the European and British activities of Wallace Clark and his consulting firm with public sector agencies and private firms implement Henry L. Gantt’s chart concept.

Archival records and secondary sources in English and French.

Developed to meet the shipbuilding and use needs for the Great War (World War I), the Gantt chart was disseminated through the work of Wallace Clark during the 1930s in numerous public sector and private organizations in 12 nations. The Gantt concept was applied in a variety of industries and firms using batch, continuous processing and/or sub-assembly lines in mass production. Traditional scientific management techniques were expanded for general management, such as financial requirement through budgetary control. Clark and his consulting firm were responsible for implementing a managerial tool, the Gantt chart, in an international setting.

Some firms with which Clark consulted could not be identified because the original records of the Wallace Clark Company were disposed of by New York University archival authorities. Industries were identified from the writings of Pearl Clark and Wallace Clark, and some private or public organizations were discerned from archival work and the research of French and British scholars.

This is the first study of the diffusion of a managerial tool, developed in America by Henry L. Gantt, into Europe and Britain through the contributions of Wallace Clark.

Lenin advocated “Taylorization” (i.e. scientific management), to rebuild post‐revolutionary Russia's economy. The evidence, however, indicates that Lenin's advocacy caused conflict within the communist party, and scientific management was rarely implemented successfully. Noting a rhetoric‐reality gap, the paper explains the difference between Lenin's advocacy and actual practice. Lenin wished to convey the message that his regime was progressive, using the latest management techniques. Rather than following scientific management precepts, pressure was placed on Soviet workers to increase productivity without improving work methods. The paper's conclusion is that Lenin's advocacy of scientific management was a leader's rhetoric, a political expediency, and it would be misleading to connect scientific management with the practice of management in post‐revolutionary Russia.

Examines the debate about the value of the experiences of practising managers in building management theory. Henri Fayol, an advocate of the experimental method, built his administrative theory from his experiences. Examines the development of Fayol′s ideas before the publication of his major work, Administration Industrielle et Générale. A preview of other works reveals new translations and sources of documentation.

Successful corporate turnarounds occur, thus avoiding liquidation, but historical examples are few. In late nineteenth century France Henri Fayol became managing director (CEO) of a vertically integrated iron and steel firm and made various decisions that retrieved the firm from the brink of liquidation. In examining his career, the competitive nature of the industry, and his decisions, it is suggested that he employed a deliberate and comprehensive corporate strategy to guide the firm toward its objectives. While he developed his theory of management from these experiences and claimed that its application was the primary cause of the turnaround, this paper suggests that there were several other factors at work.

Among modern scholars and students there is an increasing distance between the fundamental thoughts of early management writers and contemporary, often secondary, accounts of how these pioneers developed their ideas. This shortcoming can be remedied by seeking original sources from when a pioneer’s ideas were being formulated and from the context within which this occurred. We examine examples of how others have furthered our understanding of management history by the discovery and translation of pioneering writings and present a rare, out‐of‐print translation and a previously untranslated and unpublished presentation from the French pioneer, Henri Fayol. These presentations to his colleagues in the mineral industry reveal Fayol’s early reflections as they would later evolve into his classical book, Administration Industrielle et Générale.

In the closing decades of the twentieth, and at the start of the twenty‐first, centuries, attention has again turned to the critical role of intuition in effective managerial decision making. This paper examines the history of intuition in management thought by tracing its origins to Chester I. Barnard. This paper reveals not only the intellectual roots linking Barnard’s conceptualization of intuition in management thought to, among others, the influential works of the economist and sociologist, Vilfredo Pareto; Lawrence Henderson’s influence on Barnard through Henderson’s leadership and direction of the Harvard Pareto Circle; the works of the early pragmatist John Dewey; Humphrey’s The Nature of Learning; and Koffka’s Principles of Gestalt Psychology. Further, Barnard’s conceptualization of intuition foreshadowed by nearly two decades nearly all of Polanyi’s thinking and elaboration of tacit knowledge. This paper also examines Barnard’s and Simon’s differing views on intuition and provides a brief overview of contemporary research on intuition in managerial decision making.