Business philosophies and popular management theories: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
Tom.Reding (talk | contribs) m +{{Redirect category shell}} using AWB |
||
| (36 intermediate revisions by 28 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
#REDIRECT [[Philosophy of business]] |
|||
__NOTOC__ |
|||
'''Business philosophies''' or '''popular management theories''' refers to a range of [[accounting]], [[marketing]], [[public relations]], [[operations]], [[training]], [[organizational development|labor relations]], [[time management|executive time management]], [[investment]], and [[corporate governance]] approaches claimed (by their proponents, and sometimes ''only'' by their proponents and selected clients) to improve business performance in some measurable or otherwise provable way. |
|||
{{Redirect category shell|1= |
|||
These management theories often have their own [[vocabulary]]. They are sometimes built around the business philosophy of a single guru. They rarely have the sophistication or internal consistency to qualify as a school of [[philosophy]] in the conventional sense - some resemble a [[cult]] [[religion]]. What they tend to have in common is high [[management consulting| consulting]] fees to consult with the "[[business guru]]s" who have created the "philosophy". Only rarely is the capacity to teach others transmitted to any trusted students - one of the key requirements of any legitimate school of thought. |
|||
{{R from merge}} |
|||
}} |
|||
Most of these theories tend to be popular for a time (about 5 to 10 years). Then they disappear from the popular consciousness. Occasionally one has lasting value and gets incorporated into textbooks and into academic management thought. For every theory that gets incorporated into strategic management textbooks there are 100 that are forgotten. Many theories tend either to be too narrow in focus to build a complete corporate strategy on, or too general and abstract to be applicable to specific situations. the low sucess rate is fueled by the management talk circuit in which hundreds of selfappointed gurus sell their books and explain their "revolutionary" and "groundbreaking" theories to audiences of business executives for a not-insignificant fee |
|||
==Some examples== |
|||
It is a highly subjective exercise deciding what theories to include in this list. Some of these theories will likely have lasting merit. Only time will tell. |
|||
One would be the [[Experience Economy]] thesis. Others include the [[Peter Principle]] and [[The Dilbert Principle]]. Some would include [[marketing warfare strategies]] and the Strategy of the Dolphin. |
|||
Tom Peter's "Excellence" theories could meet the criteria for being included in the list. |
|||
Proponents of the [[theory of constraints]] (e.g. its originator, [[Eliyahu M. Goldratt]]) claim it is an effective [[organization]] [[performance improvement]] approach, incorporating the practice of scientific [[critical thinking]]. |
|||
[[Reengineering]] might turn out to be a short term popular business philosophy. |
|||
Widely regarded approaches like [[agile software development]] might be included, but they tend to be more focused strictly on [[software engineering]], and do not claim to be applicable to solve broader problems in all types of business. |
|||
[[Natural Capitalism]], as another example, tends to confine its claims to improving [[natural resource]] and [[energy]] use to create a more efficient [[service economy]]. These make very sober and limited claims and do not apply to all businesses. They are to that degree probably also more credible. |
|||
Another example might be [[Arthur Andersen]], a [[management consulting]] and [[accounting]] firm, which touted its [[methodology]] as a cure for most of what corporate or government clients identified as wrong with them. This methodology was taught to thousands of young Andersen recruits over decades, and expanded to fill several thick books. People outside Andersen rarely understood it. Just prior to the [[Year 2000 problem]] the firm split, and its management consulting arm broke away to become [[Accenture]]. In [[2001]] the accounting arm went down in the [[Enron]] [[accounting scandal]]s, giving rise to loud cries for [[accounting reform]]. [[Accounting]], by definition, is supposed to be the most tangible and reliable set of practices in business. |
|||
Accordingly, some doubt the viability or real value of [[Accenture]]'s methods as well. Since the Andersen school of business philosophy was probably the most developed such school, the question of whether there is ''any'' legitimate work in such generally-applicable methodologies has arisen. The term '''mythodology''' came into use briefly to describe such overly-broad methods. |
|||
==See also:== |
|||
*[[Business]] |
|||
*[[Management]] |
|||
*[[Philosophy]] |
|||
*[[Fraud]] |
|||
*[[Management consulting]] |
|||
==Finding related topics== |
|||
*[[List of management topics]] |
|||
*[[List of marketing topics]] |
|||
*[[List of ethics topics]] |
|||
*[[List of human resource management topics]] |
|||
*[[List of economics topics]] |
|||
*[[List of finance topics]] |
|||
*[[List of accounting topics]] |
|||
*[[List of information technology management topics]] |
|||
*[[List of production topics]] |
|||
*[[List of business law topics]] |
|||
*[[List of business ethics, political economy, and philosophy of business topics]] |
|||
*[[List of business theorists]] |
|||
*[[List of economists]] |
|||
*[[List of corporate leaders]] |
|||
*[[List of companies]] |
|||
==Books== |
|||
*Micklethwait, John; Wooldridge, Adrian. <cite>The Witch Doctors: Making Sense of the Management Gurus</cite>. ISBN 0812929888 |
|||
[[Category:Cleanup]] |
|||
Latest revision as of 11:44, 5 June 2017
Redirect to:
This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
|