Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the significant contributions of Lillian M. Gilbreth through the lens of critical biography to put her work in the context of her life events, her key roles, the turning points in her life and the societal context within which her contributions to management thought were made.

Critical biography examines the interaction of a person’s life events with the social, economic and political contexts surrounding his or her life and draws inferences as to why the person made specific decisions and contributions.

Key contributions to management thought made by Lillian M. Gilbreth are linked to her biographical events, including the multiple roles she played as daughter, student, wife, mother, author, engineer, psychologist, breadwinner, domestic scientist and teacher. Various turning points in her life are identified, including being allowed to go to college, taking her first psychology course, marrying Frank Gilbreth, publishing Fatigue Studies and Frank’s death. Key societal factors that influenced Gilbreth’s contributions were the growing interest in scientific management, the status of women and the increased interest in domestic science.

The qualitative technique of critical biography is demonstrated as a useful methodology for examining individual contributions to management history. The authors acknowledge the limitation of subjective interpretation.

The reasons behind Lillian Gilbreth’s contributions, which were considered a precursor to the human relations era, are extrapolated from this research.

The influence of social context is examined, as it pertains to the life and work of Lillian Gilbreth.

This paper provides a critical biography of Lillian M. Gilbreth and her work within the context of her life and times.

The purpose of this study is to examine the life and work of Frank Gilbreth using a critical biographical approach to draw connections between his life experiences and the major contributions he made to management history.

The research design is critical biography. First, a biography is provided that reveals critical incidents from his childhood, his early career before marriage, his life after his marriage and his key personality traits. Gilbreth’s major contributions to management thought are then considered in context of his biography.

Although Frank Gilbreth is recalled for his contributions to management history through his work in advancing efficiency through motion studies, he should likewise be credited for his foresight of management theories related to the human element in organizations. The major influences on Gilbreth’s career include Lillian Gilbreth and Frederick Taylor.

A limitation of critical biography is that researchers cannot address causality but, rather, are focused on drawing connections between life experiences and significant accomplishments.

Critical biography can illuminate theory and practice by providing greater clarity by examining concepts in depth and in context. The authors situate Frank Gilbreth’s work in the context of his lived experiences.

The purpose of this study is to narratively explore the influence of leader narcissism on leader/follower social exchange. Moreover, while researchers acknowledge that narcissistic personality is a dimensional construct, the preponderance of extant literature approaches the concept of narcissistic leadership categorically by focusing on the reactive or constructive narcissistic extremes. This bimodal emphasis ignores self-deceptive forms of narcissistic leadership, where vision orientation and communication could differ from leaders with more reactive or constructive narcissistic personalities.

The authors argue that they encountered a compelling example of a communal, self-deceiving narcissist during archival research of Robert Owen’s collective experiment at New Harmony, Indiana. To explore Owen’s narcissistic leadership, they utilize an analytically structured history approach to interpret his leadership, as he conveyed his vision of social reform in America.

Approaching data from a ‘history to theory’ perspective and via a communicative lens, the authors use insights from their abductive analysis to advance a cross-paradigm, communication-centered process model of narcissistic leadership that accounts for the full dimensional nature of leader narcissism and the relational aspects of narcissistic leadership.

Scholars maintaining a positivist stance might consider this method a limitation, as historical case-based research places greater emphasis on reflexivity than replication. However, from a constructionist perspective, a focus on generalization might be considered inappropriate or premature, potentially hampering the revelation of insights.

Through a multi-paradigmatic analysis of the historical case of Robert Owen and his visionary communal experiment at New Harmony, the authors contribute to the extant literature by elaborating a comprehensive, dimensional and relational process framework of narcissistic leadership. In doing so, the authors have heeded calls to better delineate leader narcissism, embrace process and relational aspects of leadership and consider leader communication as constitutive of leadership.

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.

This paper reports the results of a Management History Division survey within the Academy of Management which investigated the current status and future direction of management history teaching in the management curriculum and the role and direction of the Management History Division in general. Comparisons were made to a similar 1989 survey. While management history as a separate course remains elusive, management history continues to be taught in other mainstream management courses. The role of the Management History Division is seen as critical in encouraging others to teach management history. Significant accomplishments have been made in this area since the earlier survey including an expanded Executive Committee, a revised newsletter, new awards for service in the field, and the initiation of the Journal of Management History as an outlet for publication in the field.

The purpose of this paper is to take a look at significant contributions of Follett through the lens of critical biography to put her work in the context of her life events, her mentors, and the other major influences on her work.

Critical biography is a qualitative method with which social historians research the individual scholar's or practitioner's critical incidents in life in order to explore and explain the subject's scholarly development and intellectual contributions, situated in the social and historical background of the subject.

Key theoretical contributions of Mary Parker Follett, which seemed ahead of her time and inexplicable given that she did not work in the private sector, are revealed to be linked to her educational, professional and personal experiences.

Qualitative research in general and critical biography in particular are demonstrated to be the useful methods for providing context for management history. The limitation of author interpretation is recognized.

The current usefulness of Follett's ideas are demonstrated and a case is made for increasing management history coverage in today's business schools.

The paper offers a critical biography of Mary Parker Follett and provides a historical, social and political context for the evolution of her work.

This study aims to examine the extent to which the demographic and work‐related variables of educational level, gender, age, salary level, organizational tenure, and union membership are useful predictors of satisfaction with pay level, benefits, raises, and the structure/administration of a compensation system. These variables have previously been utilized in the prediction of satisfaction with pay levels, but have not been tested as useful predictors of the other three dimensions of compensation satisfaction.

This study used multiple regression analyses and samples of 423 employees in the USA with a 63 percent response rate and 519 employees in the Baltics with a 73 percent response rate.

It was found that not all of the variables are equally useful predictors of each of the four dimensions of compensation satisfaction and that differential prediction is occurring among the four dimensions and across the two world regions. Surprisingly, it was found that in seven of the eight analyses the strongest predictor of satisfaction with the four dimensions of compensation satisfaction is job tenure, while actual compensation level, which was expected to be the strongest predictor, was found to be quite weak.

A major weakness is that all of the data were self‐reported. Ideally the demographic and work‐related variables would have been collected directly from the organization in addition to being collected from employees. A second limitation is that the characteristics of the present sample may limit the generalizability of the results. An inordinate number of the subjects were unionized, female, and married. The major implication is that the paper supports the differential prediction for various dimensions of compensation satisfaction and for the need to explore for additional variables that can account for significant proportions of the variance in these dimensions.

The paper is the first of its kind to examine in a single or cross‐cultural setting the relationship between common demographic and work‐related factors and compensation satisfaction while controlling for organizational level. The literature review traverses the research in the area stretching from the 1940s to 2005 and makes specific suggestions for future research that could advance the field.