Search results

Presents the thoughts on decision processes of Chester I. Barnard, one of the century’s greatest management theorists. Includes his classic article, “Mind in everyday affairs”; his unpublished book, “The Significance of Decisive Behaviour in Social Action”; his correspondence with Herbert Simon, and significant comments found in his personal papers.

An example is given of how monolithic organisations can cause things to grind to a halt by religious adherence to bureaucratic protocol, and how, on the other hand, a little nous and influence, by bending the rules, can get things done quickly.

Presents anecdotes in the development of aspects of the field of management, relating to Lawrence J. Henderson, Chester I. Barnard, Peter Drucker, Kurt Lewin and J.B. Rhine. These suggest that history needs to be viewed in a hermeneutical philosophy where it is seen as presenting the Zeitgeist of its period rather than describing facts or causal relations.

A parable related to ethics among organizations, particularly with regard to relationships between managers and their workforce.

The introduction of new systems into companies is illustrated by real experiences. To get people within the companies to accept and implement new practices and methods, they must be made to feel part of the change, identify with it, and feel responsible for its implementation. The consultants and educators should always be aware of the final decisions being made by the people who have to carry out the changes.

A short case illustrating significant aspects of organizational diagnosis.

This paper asks whether or not Chester Barnard was a member of an intellectual or managerial “élite”. While it is clear that Barnard provides great insight regarding leadership and social responsibility, it is also apparent that his views regarding, for example, race relations were, at least by our contemporary standards, unenlightened and may have conformed more with the “élite” of that time. With the stronger democratic sensibilities of our time, represented by affirmative action, etc., Barnard has to be read historically and understood in the light of his own time in order to get out of him what is still useful today. The paper does not propose to resolve the issue of whether or not he was an e´litist. The conclusion is reached, however, that the continuation of the debate regarding Barnard’s membership of an intellectual or managerial e´lite may have implications for the ongoing reading of Barnard’s work by the management students of today.

The purpose of this article is to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Evolution of Management Thought (EMT), a critically acclaimed text in management and organizational studies for its value in historicizing the practice of management.

The authors asked Daniel Wren and Arthur Bedeian in their own words to their contribution. In addition, the authors offer commentary and critique of 16 leading management historians who share their reflections on the intellectual significance of Wren and Bedeian, and the punctuation of EMT as a canonical text in the field of management history.

The legacy of Wren and Bedeian can be felt across the academy of historical research on business and organizations. Their work has separately made significant contributions to management studies but together they have forged a fruitful partnership that has given rise to multiple generations of scholars and scholarship that continue to shape the field to this day.

The contribution of the authors in this article is to mark the significant milestone of EMT’s five-decade success by hearing from the authors themselves about their longstanding success as well as giving space to critique about the past, present and future of our collective historical scholarship shaped by Wren and Bedeian’s legacy.

Anyone who attempts to publish an article should be familiar with the Writer's Market. This standard reference work, which describes the editorial policies of numerous book and journal publishers, is readily available in most libraries and bookstores.