Towards the latter part of the 20th century and beginning of the 21st century, Peter F. Drucker became known as the guru of management and as ‘the man who invented management’. For several years, his works primarily focused on private sector organizations, their management practices, programs, and performance. Over time, however, Drucker seems to have transformed from a management author and consultant into a social ecologist. Drucker’s works became increasingly permeated with examples of matters surrounding society at large. One of Drucker’s integral concepts is that of a Functioning Society. Central to this visionary concept is the notion that freedom, dignity, and equal opportunity can provide conditions for individuals to find meaning and purpose in their lives, and in turn, individuals will be able to contribute towards the betterment of communities and society.
{"title":"Peter Drucker on Social Ecology, Balancing Change and Continuity, and Building a Functioning Society","authors":"Byron Ramirez","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3740930","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3740930","url":null,"abstract":"Towards the latter part of the 20th century and beginning of the 21st century, Peter F. Drucker became known as the guru of management and as ‘the man who invented management’. For several years, his works primarily focused on private sector organizations, their management practices, programs, and performance. Over time, however, Drucker seems to have transformed from a management author and consultant into a social ecologist. Drucker’s works became increasingly permeated with examples of matters surrounding society at large. One of Drucker’s integral concepts is that of a Functioning Society. Central to this visionary concept is the notion that freedom, dignity, and equal opportunity can provide conditions for individuals to find meaning and purpose in their lives, and in turn, individuals will be able to contribute towards the betterment of communities and society.","PeriodicalId":139028,"journal":{"name":"BHNP: History of Management Theory & Practice (Topic)","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127195830","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The mathematisation of finance - excessive use of mathematical models in finance - has been blamed for the recent financial and economic crisis. We argue that the problem might actually be the financialisation of mathematics, as evidenced by the gradual embedding of branches of mathematics into financial economics. We find that the concept of embeddedness, originally proposed by Polanyi, is relevant to describe the sociological relationship between fields of knowledge. After exploring the relationship between mathematics, finance and economics since antiquity, we show how theoretical developments in the 1950s and 1970s lead directly to this embedding. We argue that it has become necessary to disembed mathematics from finance and economics, and propose a number of partial steps to facilitate this process.
{"title":"Finance And Mathematics: Merger Or Acquisitions?","authors":"Sébastien Lleo, J. Li","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2503130","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2503130","url":null,"abstract":"The mathematisation of finance - excessive use of mathematical models in finance - has been blamed for the recent financial and economic crisis. We argue that the problem might actually be the financialisation of mathematics, as evidenced by the gradual embedding of branches of mathematics into financial economics. We find that the concept of embeddedness, originally proposed by Polanyi, is relevant to describe the sociological relationship between fields of knowledge. After exploring the relationship between mathematics, finance and economics since antiquity, we show how theoretical developments in the 1950s and 1970s lead directly to this embedding. We argue that it has become necessary to disembed mathematics from finance and economics, and propose a number of partial steps to facilitate this process.","PeriodicalId":139028,"journal":{"name":"BHNP: History of Management Theory & Practice (Topic)","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122441532","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper provides a sketch of the most important milestones of behavioral accounting in general and judgment and decision-making (JDM) research in accounting in particular, over the last six decades. In order to understand JDM research in accounting it is important to know how “behavioral” aspects were introduced into the accounting community. Thus, this integrative literature review, combined with a citation analysis of the current research streams, analyses the last six decades of behavioral accounting research. This paper offers a compact description of how theories and methodologies from social sciences, in particular from the field of psychology, were implemented into accounting research. This paper extends previous general reviews (e.g. Bonner, 1999; Dunk, 2001; Trotman, Tan, & Ang, 2011) and more personal reflections (e.g., Hopwood, 2009; M. D. Shields, 2009) , as it also includes a discussion of emerging themes (e.g. ecological rationality) and methods (e.g. neuroaccounting) and how these approaches are (or are not) picked up in behavioral accounting. Overall, this paper provides a starting point for scholars interested in the foundations of behavioral accounting and in the current trends and debates in JDM research in accounting.
{"title":"Behavioral Aspects and Decision-Making Research in Accounting: History, Recent Developments, and Some Future Directions","authors":"J. Basel, Nicola Dalla Via","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2244363","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2244363","url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides a sketch of the most important milestones of behavioral accounting in general and judgment and decision-making (JDM) research in accounting in particular, over the last six decades. In order to understand JDM research in accounting it is important to know how “behavioral” aspects were introduced into the accounting community. Thus, this integrative literature review, combined with a citation analysis of the current research streams, analyses the last six decades of behavioral accounting research. This paper offers a compact description of how theories and methodologies from social sciences, in particular from the field of psychology, were implemented into accounting research. This paper extends previous general reviews (e.g. Bonner, 1999; Dunk, 2001; Trotman, Tan, & Ang, 2011) and more personal reflections (e.g., Hopwood, 2009; M. D. Shields, 2009) , as it also includes a discussion of emerging themes (e.g. ecological rationality) and methods (e.g. neuroaccounting) and how these approaches are (or are not) picked up in behavioral accounting. Overall, this paper provides a starting point for scholars interested in the foundations of behavioral accounting and in the current trends and debates in JDM research in accounting.","PeriodicalId":139028,"journal":{"name":"BHNP: History of Management Theory & Practice (Topic)","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133012692","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over years the business philosophies have changed and so have the ways in which businesses were conducted in the past. This has led to change in the processes, procedures and evolution of cultures across globe. As ever, culture has remained pivotal in facilitating the process of change. Understanding the right ingredients of culture and leveraging on them to foster change process is a sure formula for success, however, not too many organizations have done it successfully in the past. Even as we enter the 21st century and feel the need to adopt new business measures for instituting efficient business practices, we walk into a world that brings along with it the need to change, need to be flexible, open and receptive to the whole process of change. In wake of this, the paper discusses various change models that have evolved over time. These change models have been instrumental in successful implementation of change processes across organizations; however, caution must be exercised with the use of change models, as the line distinguishing one model of change from the other is apparently very thin. The paper endeavors to use Van de Ven & Poole (1995) framework to assess different models and clearly lists out the parameters that can be used for analyzing and comparing various change models. The model has been mentioned in details by "Weick and Quinn" in their book titled "Organizational Change and Development". The paper includes analysis of 15 change models each of it analyzed on different parameters such as organization type that it suits the most, the factors facilitating and necessitating change under various models, the strategy for change for different models and finally the actors involved in the change process for the change models in question.
多年来，商业理念发生了变化，过去经营企业的方式也发生了变化。这导致了全球范围内的过程、程序和文化演变的变化。与以往一样，文化在促进变革过程中仍然发挥着关键作用。理解文化的正确成分并利用它们来促进变革过程是成功的一个确定公式，然而，在过去没有太多的组织成功地做到了这一点。即使我们进入了21世纪，感到有必要采用新的商业措施来建立有效的商业实践，我们也步入了一个需要变革的世界，需要灵活、开放和接受整个变革过程。在此之后，本文讨论了随着时间的推移而演变的各种变化模型。这些变更模型在跨组织成功实施变更过程中发挥了重要作用;然而，必须谨慎使用变更模型，因为区分一个变更模型与另一个变更模型的界线显然是非常薄的。本文尝试使用Van de Ven & Poole(1995)的框架来评估不同的模型，并明确列出了可用于分析和比较各种变化模型的参数。Weick和Quinn在他们的《组织变革与发展》一书中详细提到了这个模型。本文包括对15种变革模型的分析，每一种模型都分析了不同的参数，如最适合的组织类型，各种模型下促进和必要变革的因素，不同模型的变革策略，以及所讨论的变革模型中参与变革过程的参与者。
{"title":"Organizational Change Models: A Comparison","authors":"Hargovind Adhikari","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1016981","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1016981","url":null,"abstract":"Over years the business philosophies have changed and so have the ways in which businesses were conducted in the past. This has led to change in the processes, procedures and evolution of cultures across globe. As ever, culture has remained pivotal in facilitating the process of change. Understanding the right ingredients of culture and leveraging on them to foster change process is a sure formula for success, however, not too many organizations have done it successfully in the past. Even as we enter the 21st century and feel the need to adopt new business measures for instituting efficient business practices, we walk into a world that brings along with it the need to change, need to be flexible, open and receptive to the whole process of change. In wake of this, the paper discusses various change models that have evolved over time. These change models have been instrumental in successful implementation of change processes across organizations; however, caution must be exercised with the use of change models, as the line distinguishing one model of change from the other is apparently very thin. The paper endeavors to use Van de Ven & Poole (1995) framework to assess different models and clearly lists out the parameters that can be used for analyzing and comparing various change models. The model has been mentioned in details by \"Weick and Quinn\" in their book titled \"Organizational Change and Development\". The paper includes analysis of 15 change models each of it analyzed on different parameters such as organization type that it suits the most, the factors facilitating and necessitating change under various models, the strategy for change for different models and finally the actors involved in the change process for the change models in question.","PeriodicalId":139028,"journal":{"name":"BHNP: History of Management Theory & Practice (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128569749","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2006-09-18DOI: 10.1016/S1479-8387(06)03007-4
Joel A. C. Baum, B. McKelvey
{"title":"Analysis of Extremes in Management Studies","authors":"Joel A. C. Baum, B. McKelvey","doi":"10.1016/S1479-8387(06)03007-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-8387(06)03007-4","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":139028,"journal":{"name":"BHNP: History of Management Theory & Practice (Topic)","volume":"294 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130803056","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Among international agencies striving to establish global corporate governance norms, the Anglo-American Shareholder Value Model has become paradigmatic. Ironically, its ascendancy occurred as its principle academic progenitors, financial agency theorists, conceded the shareholder maxim misleading. Now, Financial Agency theorists speak of enlightened stakeholder theory and instruct directors to maximize the firm's long-term value. This theory's persistence owes much to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)'s Principles of Corporate Governance. The Principles uneasily incorporates the two contending corporate models, shareholder value maximization and stakeholder theory. Unfortunately, this shareholder - stakeholder counterpoint has lost its relevance. Accordingly good governance principles must rest on a microeconomic theory in which the firm operates as a voluntary association that, by safeguarding firm specific investments, encourages capital (especially, human capital) investments. The team production theory of the firm, found in behavioral law and economics, provides such a model.
{"title":"A Team Production Proposal to the Shareholder - Stakeholder Quarrel: The OECD Principles of Corporate Governance","authors":"A. Kaufman, Ernie Englander","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1030846","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1030846","url":null,"abstract":"Among international agencies striving to establish global corporate governance norms, the Anglo-American Shareholder Value Model has become paradigmatic. Ironically, its ascendancy occurred as its principle academic progenitors, financial agency theorists, conceded the shareholder maxim misleading. Now, Financial Agency theorists speak of enlightened stakeholder theory and instruct directors to maximize the firm's long-term value. This theory's persistence owes much to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)'s Principles of Corporate Governance. The Principles uneasily incorporates the two contending corporate models, shareholder value maximization and stakeholder theory. Unfortunately, this shareholder - stakeholder counterpoint has lost its relevance. Accordingly good governance principles must rest on a microeconomic theory in which the firm operates as a voluntary association that, by safeguarding firm specific investments, encourages capital (especially, human capital) investments. The team production theory of the firm, found in behavioral law and economics, provides such a model.","PeriodicalId":139028,"journal":{"name":"BHNP: History of Management Theory & Practice (Topic)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114844566","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The notion of flexibility is frequently used throughout the academic and applied management literature. However, specific flexibility constructs are often ill-defined, and the frequent use of such constructs has propagated conceptual confusion rather than leading to clarification of the meaning of the underlying concept. This paper reviews and discusses the use of flexibility in three areas of the management literature (organization theory, strategic management, and operations management) and establishes that the underlying conceptions of flexibility used in these areas are remarkably similar. Based on this review, the paper presents a general definition of the concept of flexibility as an object's capacity for variability of one or more of its characteristics. After concluding that much of the conceptual confusion originates not in the concept itself, but in its use in specific flexibility constructs, it proposes a set of steps aimed at clarifying the nature of flexibility constructs in management theory and research. Finally, the paper discusses directions for future management research on flexibility. The paper distinguishes between the general concept of flexibility and specific flexibility constructs. Thus, the presented argument serves also as an example, a reminder, and a call for definitional discipline and conceptual explicitness in organizational and management research.
{"title":"Flexibility in Management Theory: Towards Clarification of an Elusive Concept","authors":"Martin R. Fellenz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1098111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1098111","url":null,"abstract":"The notion of flexibility is frequently used throughout the academic and applied management literature. However, specific flexibility constructs are often ill-defined, and the frequent use of such constructs has propagated conceptual confusion rather than leading to clarification of the meaning of the underlying concept. This paper reviews and discusses the use of flexibility in three areas of the management literature (organization theory, strategic management, and operations management) and establishes that the underlying conceptions of flexibility used in these areas are remarkably similar. Based on this review, the paper presents a general definition of the concept of flexibility as an object's capacity for variability of one or more of its characteristics. After concluding that much of the conceptual confusion originates not in the concept itself, but in its use in specific flexibility constructs, it proposes a set of steps aimed at clarifying the nature of flexibility constructs in management theory and research. Finally, the paper discusses directions for future management research on flexibility. The paper distinguishes between the general concept of flexibility and specific flexibility constructs. Thus, the presented argument serves also as an example, a reminder, and a call for definitional discipline and conceptual explicitness in organizational and management research.","PeriodicalId":139028,"journal":{"name":"BHNP: History of Management Theory & Practice (Topic)","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134507417","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：