Search results

In the history of business management thought, six idea families have predominated during the last eighty or so years — bureaucracy (Max Weber), scientific management (Frederick Winslow Taylor), classical management (Henri Fayol), human relations (Elton Mayo), neo‐human relations (Abraham Maslow). To these one can add the more recent contributions of different writers under the heading of guru theory. The first five idea families are well known, but the sixth requires explanation. Gury theory achieved prominence during the 1980s. While not yet featuring extensively in management textbooks it has received widespread attention in the financial and business press (Lorenz, 1986; Dixon, 1986; Clutterbuck and Crainer, 1988; Pierce and Newstrom, 1988; Heller, 1990). Guru theory consists of the diverse and unrelated writings of well‐known company chief executives such as Lee lacocca (Chrysler), Harold Geneen (ITT), John Harvey‐Jones (ICI) and John Sculley (Apple Computer); of management consultants like Tom Peters and Philip Crosby; and of business school academics like Michael Porter, Rosabeth Moss Kanter and Henry Mintzberg. Since their contributions are so heterogeneous, and as the writings draw so much of their authority from the individual authors themselves, the adopted label is felt to be appropriate.

Examines the role played by business school academics in promoting management ideas through their teaching. Defines the concept of a popular management idea, and explains how the author identified bureaucracy, classical management, scientific management, human relations, neo‐human relations and guru theory, to be the most popular management idea families of the twentieth century. Reviews the existing literature on factors which may influence academics to select certain management ideas for presentation rather than others. Offers hypotheses based on the author′s own experiences as a business academic. Reports the findings of a small postal survey which explored academics′ reasons for choosing the topics to teach and compares the findings with the hypotheses presented earlier. Concludes by discussing the implications of this and further research, and considers the extent to which business academics now tend to follow management practice, rather than lead it. Finally, makes recommendations for future research in this field and suggests appropriate research methods to be used.

A study has been made of employers′ perceptions of the desired skills and values to be displayed by secondary school leavers in the Bristol area. Five major companies in a single locality provided the information by in‐depth discussions. These perceptions were translated into 20 identifiable skills. In a case‐study approach, the staff in a local comprehensive school were asked to indicate their judgement of the importance of each skill and asked to assess how well each skill was achieved in the school. The extent to which teachers′ ranking of importance and attainment matched those of industry are discussed. Schoolteachers tended to emphasise cognitive skill acquisition at the expense of affective skills. Skills relating to personal development and responsibility of the pupil were attained less well than companies hoped for.

There is something uniquely fascinating about things which are smaller than life. From the model cars and trains of our childhood days, to the intricate scale models which draw visitors in their thousands to such places as London's Science Museum, somewhere along the line these miniature replicas of full‐sized originals have provided all of us with a memorable experience in our lives. While it might take a psychologist to identify the exact reasons why the everyday things in life, seen as it were through the wrong end of a telescope, should hold this fascination over the human brain, it is immediately obvious that the fascination exists, and that models can play an important role in teaching us about the full‐sized items they represent.

This paper sets out to explore the relationship between archives and the management of records, which are increasingly the product of the audit society, informed by a neo‐liberal agenda.

The article is based on the author's views.

It argues that there is no relationship between the two activities, except of the records themselves.

This article will be of interest to those interested in the archiving of records and its management.