Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present how the past, Fayol's principles of management, is applied to the present, Porter's competitive strategies – cost leadership and differentiation – and in turn how the understanding of this connection between the past and present directs the future development of firms.

This study explores which of Fayol's principles can be matched to Porter's cost‐leadership or differentiation strategy in terms of strategy implementation.

The paper finds that the principles of division of work, authority and responsibility, unity of command, unity of direction and scalar chain are useful in the implementation of a cost leadership strategy but other, more modern alternative principles apply for differentiation strategy. Likewise, the three principles of stability of tenure of personnel, initiative and esprit de corps apply to the implementation of differentiation strategy, but not to cost leadership, where, again, alternative principles apply. The remaining six principles of discipline, subordination of individual interests to the general interest, remuneration, centralization, order and equity are applicable to implementation of both.

By melding the past with the future, it shows that the flexible use of Fayol's principles in an integrated manner lays the foundation for the successful implementation of competitive strategies and the future development of firms.

This study documents the flexible use of Fayol's principles, an issue that has received modest attention in the literature. It also adds to the literature on the potential implication of Fayol's work for successfully implementing competitive strategies.

Accurate and timely foresight of future trends and changes in science and technology (S&T) is a key to national competitiveness. The purpose of this paper is to describe recent technological foresight conducted by the Technology Foresight Center at the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Evaluation and Planning. The authors also address current issues and problems encountered in the process of technology foresight (TF) in Korea.

The authors used TF methodologies which included bibliometrics, expert panels, SWOT analysis, and conferences/seminars.

The authors derived 20 future issues and 40 future needs in S&T from the five areas of global mega trends; then 200 future technologies were suggested with a time horizon of 40 years, from 2010 to 2050, for solving those future issues and needs. Finally, the authors suggested outlooks for technological development in the years 2020 and 2050.

It is time to evaluate Korean TF exercises which were started 15 years ago. The evaluation of TF will help guide TF and inform policy and decision makers.

The findings can help policy makers shape future governmental S&T policy in Korea. The final result of this work was applied to the second S&T Framework Plan in Korea, in which 90 technologies were identified as national key technologies for the next five years, from 2008 to 2012.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, there are no studies suggesting not only future technologies based on solving future issues and needs but also outlooks for technology development in the years 2020 and 2050.