从管理理论丛林的混乱中走出来——管理学四原则发展的历史分析

IF 0.9 Q4 MANAGEMENT
R. Lloyd, D. Mertens, P. Palka, S. Pérez
{"title":"从管理理论丛林的混乱中走出来——管理学四原则发展的历史分析","authors":"R. Lloyd, D. Mertens, P. Palka, S. Pérez","doi":"10.1108/jmh-01-2023-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to map the antecedents and precursory contexts regarding the four principles of management. Moreover, a description of its codification and coalescence as a unified teaching framework is provided, critically reviewing key theoretical underpinnings of management principles in academic research and management textbooks.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA historiographic approach reviewed seminal works for theory origins of the four principles of management, by analyzing 260 management textbooks from 1935 to 2013 to document their adoption in management education. This study used critical hermeneutics (Prasad, 2002) to explore the framework’s progression by providing the context of cultural, political and economic influences.\n\n\nFindings\nThis research study tracked and mapped the creation of the four principles of management, as it became the commonly accepted teaching framework in management education. Today, every predominant management principles textbook uses the four principles of management – plan, lead, organize and control – as the basis for teaching students.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThere is limited research on the application of the four principles of management in contemporary management, despite its ubiquity in management education. The study’s historical account of its formation provides insights into its adoption and utilization in modern education context. The study’s primary limitation stems from the generalization of the representative sample of textbooks used in the study (1917–2013). However, data saturation was achieved for the scale of textbooks and writings which was reviewed.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThrough a critical analysis into the formation of the four principles of management, this research not only provides a historical account of its construction but, as importantly, the influencing factors that led to its development. This research fills a gap in critical literature, as a post mortem exegesis has never been conducted on the four principles of management in the afteryears of its amalgamation.\n","PeriodicalId":45819,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management History","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emerging from the chaos of Management Theory Jungle: a historical analysis of the development of the four principles of management\",\"authors\":\"R. Lloyd, D. Mertens, P. Palka, S. Pérez\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jmh-01-2023-0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis paper aims to map the antecedents and precursory contexts regarding the four principles of management. Moreover, a description of its codification and coalescence as a unified teaching framework is provided, critically reviewing key theoretical underpinnings of management principles in academic research and management textbooks.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nA historiographic approach reviewed seminal works for theory origins of the four principles of management, by analyzing 260 management textbooks from 1935 to 2013 to document their adoption in management education. This study used critical hermeneutics (Prasad, 2002) to explore the framework’s progression by providing the context of cultural, political and economic influences.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThis research study tracked and mapped the creation of the four principles of management, as it became the commonly accepted teaching framework in management education. Today, every predominant management principles textbook uses the four principles of management – plan, lead, organize and control – as the basis for teaching students.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThere is limited research on the application of the four principles of management in contemporary management, despite its ubiquity in management education. The study’s historical account of its formation provides insights into its adoption and utilization in modern education context. The study’s primary limitation stems from the generalization of the representative sample of textbooks used in the study (1917–2013). However, data saturation was achieved for the scale of textbooks and writings which was reviewed.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThrough a critical analysis into the formation of the four principles of management, this research not only provides a historical account of its construction but, as importantly, the influencing factors that led to its development. This research fills a gap in critical literature, as a post mortem exegesis has never been conducted on the four principles of management in the afteryears of its amalgamation.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":45819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Management History\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Management History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jmh-01-2023-0001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jmh-01-2023-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本文旨在绘制关于管理四原则的前因和前兆背景。此外,还描述了它作为一个统一的教学框架的编纂和合并,批判性地回顾了学术研究和管理教科书中管理原则的关键理论基础。设计/方法论/方法史学方法通过分析1935年至2013年的260本管理学教科书,回顾了关于管理四原则理论起源的开创性著作,以记录它们在管理教育中的应用。本研究使用批判性解释学(Prasad,2002),通过提供文化、政治和经济影响的背景来探索框架的进展。本研究追踪并绘制了管理学四大原则的创建过程,使其成为管理教育中普遍接受的教学框架。如今,每一本占主导地位的管理原理教科书都将管理的四大原则——计划、领导、组织和控制——作为教学的基础。研究局限性/含义尽管管理四原则在管理教育中无处不在,但对其在当代管理中的应用研究有限。该研究对其形成的历史描述为其在现代教育背景下的采用和利用提供了见解。该研究的主要局限性源于对研究中使用的具有代表性的教科书样本(1917–2013)的概括。然而,对于所审查的教科书和著作的规模,数据已经饱和。独创性/价值通过对管理四原则形成的批判性分析,本研究不仅提供了管理四原则构建的历史记录,而且重要的是,提供了导致管理四原则发展的影响因素。这项研究填补了批评文献的空白,因为在其融合多年后,从未对管理的四项原则进行过事后注释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Emerging from the chaos of Management Theory Jungle: a historical analysis of the development of the four principles of management
Purpose This paper aims to map the antecedents and precursory contexts regarding the four principles of management. Moreover, a description of its codification and coalescence as a unified teaching framework is provided, critically reviewing key theoretical underpinnings of management principles in academic research and management textbooks. Design/methodology/approach A historiographic approach reviewed seminal works for theory origins of the four principles of management, by analyzing 260 management textbooks from 1935 to 2013 to document their adoption in management education. This study used critical hermeneutics (Prasad, 2002) to explore the framework’s progression by providing the context of cultural, political and economic influences. Findings This research study tracked and mapped the creation of the four principles of management, as it became the commonly accepted teaching framework in management education. Today, every predominant management principles textbook uses the four principles of management – plan, lead, organize and control – as the basis for teaching students. Research limitations/implications There is limited research on the application of the four principles of management in contemporary management, despite its ubiquity in management education. The study’s historical account of its formation provides insights into its adoption and utilization in modern education context. The study’s primary limitation stems from the generalization of the representative sample of textbooks used in the study (1917–2013). However, data saturation was achieved for the scale of textbooks and writings which was reviewed. Originality/value Through a critical analysis into the formation of the four principles of management, this research not only provides a historical account of its construction but, as importantly, the influencing factors that led to its development. This research fills a gap in critical literature, as a post mortem exegesis has never been conducted on the four principles of management in the afteryears of its amalgamation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
50.00%
发文量
28
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信