Search results

The purpose of this paper is to trace the European and British activities of Wallace Clark and his consulting firm with public sector agencies and private firms implement Henry L. Gantt’s chart concept.

Archival records and secondary sources in English and French.

Developed to meet the shipbuilding and use needs for the Great War (World War I), the Gantt chart was disseminated through the work of Wallace Clark during the 1930s in numerous public sector and private organizations in 12 nations. The Gantt concept was applied in a variety of industries and firms using batch, continuous processing and/or sub-assembly lines in mass production. Traditional scientific management techniques were expanded for general management, such as financial requirement through budgetary control. Clark and his consulting firm were responsible for implementing a managerial tool, the Gantt chart, in an international setting.

Some firms with which Clark consulted could not be identified because the original records of the Wallace Clark Company were disposed of by New York University archival authorities. Industries were identified from the writings of Pearl Clark and Wallace Clark, and some private or public organizations were discerned from archival work and the research of French and British scholars.

This is the first study of the diffusion of a managerial tool, developed in America by Henry L. Gantt, into Europe and Britain through the contributions of Wallace Clark.

The purpose of this paper is to make a specific attempt of historicizing outstanding academic leadership in the field of management history.

By using the biographical method and applying it to the material contained in Hodgetts's video interview of Wren and Bedeian's autobiography, the authors examine how outstanding management laureates, Wren and Bedeian, look back on their own lives and the people who influenced them.

The intellectual and institutional origins of their life stories are traced and the factors in Wren's and Bedeian's lives that might explain their pathways to becoming the US outstanding management historians as the Academy of Management Fellows are assessed.

The paper highlights the most outstanding achievements of the past in a manner that might be valuable when addressing the present day concerns about outstanding teaching and research in the field of management history.

The unique contribution of this study is its focus on showing how the manner in which outstanding management historians narrate the past may explain their present‐day achievements, and thus help readers understand that very past.

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.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: to report the number of articles in the business academic literature that have been written about the pioneers depicted in a 1977 Daniel Wren and Robert Hay study; and to report the findings from a replication and extension of that study.

The paper employed a systematic literature review combined with an empirical replication and extension of the 1977 study.

The literature review revealed that 101 articles referenced only a few of the 1977 identified pioneers. In fact 47 of the articles were about three of the pioneers – keeping them firmly in the academic institutional memory, while others have fallen into insignificance. The results of the new study identified seven new names for the list of top ten, while three remained steadfast. Frederick Taylor was number one on both lists. Interestingly, no woman made the top ten.

The replication and extension is a strength and limitation in which the authors were able to meticulously follow Wren and Hays' methodology, yet prevented the inclusion of possible viable new sources.

This piece calls for the continuation to rediscover history as a backdrop for research.

The paper reminds us of the value of preserving business academic institutional memory.

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 aims to problematize the dominant narrative forms of disciplinary histories of management thought. Specifically, the authors explore the narrative mode of emplotment used in Wren’s (and later Wren and Bedeian’s) 50-year encyclical on the history of management thought, namely, The Evolution of Management Thought (EMT).

The authors propose that management histories operate as powerful narratives that shape our understanding of management thought and, consequently, our disciplinary futures. This paper explores the textual narrative of EMT. Additional data are drawn from other scholars’ observations of this text. This paper is positioned in the debates of management history.

While acknowledging the wealth of historical facts in EMT, the authors argue that the umbrella narrative orders events of the past in such a manner that the historical knowledge follows a form of Darwinian evolutionism. Thus, the narrative leads to problematic representations suffering from progressivism, presentism and universalism.

Disciplinary scholars in management and organization studies need to carefully reflect on how we construct our representations of the past and histories. This will allow us to better craft transparent and reflexive histories.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to propose a remedy, albeit a partial remedy, which we believe is needed to avoid adverse epistemological consequences associated with the use of problematic narratives in management and organizational histories.

The purpose of this paper is to examine what qualities contributed to the durability of The Evolution of Management Thought (EMT) as a classic that provided scholars a grand narrative of management history for half a century. Specifically, this paper aspires to reveal how the EMT has overcome the boundedness of time over the past 50 years by being both timeless (signaling continuity/permanence) and historical (signaling change/contingency).

The authors analyze both the metaphorical (i.e. universal) and the historical (i.e. particular) meanings that the EMT authors have communicated over eight editions of the classic.

The authors found that Wren and Bedeian have managed to balance temporality and referentiality in the EMT by writing it as the “practical past” of management. The authors also found that the authors ensured the ongoing renewal of their classic by innovating it as an everlasting contemporary text.

This paper provides an original analysis of the EMT explaining why it is a “classic” of management history. The analysis presented in this paper reveals why this timeless work has been a singular touchstone that exemplifies the history of management discipline.

Frederick Taylor, the “Father of Scientific Management” is recognized as a pioneer in the field of management. However, many unfair criticisms have been leveled at him starting with the infamous Congressional hearings of 1911. Many scholars of management history believe that such criticisms have resulted in negative portrayals of Frederick Taylor in both practitioner and academic circles, and even in some basic management textbooks. This is unfortunate because many of those criticisms result from either a failure to read and understand Taylor's original works or from misinterpretations of them. The purpose of this paper is to contend that students of management will develop a more accurate impression of Frederick Taylor if they read his words and not interpretations of them.

First, an introduction of Frederick Taylor and scientific management is presented. Then, a categorization of common criticisms of Taylor is offered. The results of a study conducted to measure undergraduate business students' impressions of Taylor from their exposure to him in an introductory management course are then presented. The students then give their impressions of statements taken from Taylor's original work and are tested on the differences between them.

The results of the analyses suggest that students have a negative impression of Taylor from their textbooks, but their reaction to statements taken from the original works of Taylor are rated quite favorably.

Future research could be conducted to determine whether the works of other seminal management theorists should be presented in their complete contexts and direct sources to provide students with a more accurate and complete portrayal of their ideas.

This paper is unique in that it empirically tests whether negative attitudes towards Frederick Taylor and scientific management persist after students are exposed to original source works.