YÖNETİM BİLİMİ AÇISINDAN KLASİK DÖNEMİ HATIRLAMAYA İLİŞKİN BİR ÇALIŞMA

Year 2008, Issue: 21, - , 20.06.2015

Doğan Nadi Leblebici

Abstract

Turkish literature in management sciences, and management education as a reflection of it, actually start with definition of management. Following parts are related to historical evolution of management sciences. So-called evolution includes classical, neo-classical and modern periods. Classical period in management sciences starts with bureaucratic theory which was a product of 19 century, and continues with the scientific management, and ends with the administrative theory. This study aims at exposing unknown aspects of classical period in Turkish literature, and discussing current reflections of classical period on organizations

Keywords

Management, Organization, Theory, Classical Period

YÖNETİM BİLİMİ AÇISINDAN KLASİK DÖNEMİ HATIRLAMAYA İLİŞKİN BİR ÇALIŞMA

Abstract

Yönetim bilimlerinde Türkçe yazýn ve bunun yansýmasý olarak yönetim bilimleri eðitimi genellikle yönetimin tanýmýný yapmakla baþlar. Bunu takip eden kýsým ise genellikle yönetim biliminin tarihsel evrimine iliþkindir. Yönetim biliminin bir disiplin olarak söz konusu evrimsel geliþimi klasikler, neo-klasikler, modernler olarak bilinmektedir. Klasik dönem 19. Yüzyýlýn son dönemlerinin ürünü olan bürokrasi kuramý ile baþlar, 20. Yüzyýlýn baþlarýnda kendi içinde farklý açýlýmlarý olan bilimsel yönetim kuramý ile devam eder ve yönetsel kuram ile tamamlanýr. Bu çalýþmada yönetim bilimi alanýnda klasik dönem olarak bilinen evrimsel aþamanýn Türkçe yazýnda bilinen yönlerinin yanýnda bilinmeyen yönlerini ortaya koymayý ve bu döneme atfedilen çalýþmalarýn günümüzdeki yansýmalarýna deðinmeyi amaçlanmaktadýr

Keywords

Yönetim, Örgüt, Kuram, Klasik Dönem

References

• Bendix, Reinhard (1960) Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait, Garden City New York: Doubleday.
• Boddewyn, J. (1961) “Frederick Winslow Taylor Revisited,” Journal of the Academy of Management, (4)2: 100-107.
• Carey, Alex (1967) “The Hawthorne Studies: A Radical Criticism,” American Sociological Review, 32(3): 403-416.
• Delany, William (1963) “The Development and decline of Patrimonial and Bureaucratic Administration,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 7(4): 458- 501.
• Dibble, Vernon K. (1965) “The Organization of Traditional Authority: English County Government, 1558 to 1640,” Handbook of Organizations (Edt. James G. March) Chicago: Rand McNally, 879-909.
• DiMaggio, Paul J. ve Walter W. Powell (1983) “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields,” American Sociological Review, 48(2): 147-160. Drucker, Peter F. (1954) The Practice of Management, New York: Harper.
• Edwards, Richard (1979) Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the Twentieth Century, New York: Basic Books.
• Fayol, Henri (1949) General and Industrial Management, London: Pitman Publishing Company.
• Franke, Richard Herbert ve James D. Kaul (1978) “The Hawthorne Experiments: First Statistical Interpretation,” American Sociological Review, 43(5): 623-643.
• Frost, Carl F., John H. Wakely ve Robert A. Ruh (1974) The Scanlon Plan for Organizational Development: Identity, Participation and Equity, East Lansing: Michigan State University.
• Fry, Louis W. (1976) “The Maligned F. W. Taylor: A Reply to His Many Critics,” The Academy of Management Review, 1(3): 124-129.
• Gilbreth, Frank B. ve Lilian Gilbreth (1917) Applied Motion Study, New York: Sturgis and Walton Co.
• Gouldner, Alvin W. (1954) Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy, Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press.
• Gulick, Luther ve L. Urwick (1937) Papers on the Science of Administration, New York: Institute of Public Administration, Columbia University.
• Hall, Richard H. (1963) “The Concept of Bureaucracy: An Empirical Assessment,” American Journal of Sociology, 69(1): 32-40
• Lawler, Edward E. III (1971) Pay and Organizational Effectiveness: A Psychological View, New York: McGraw Hill.
• Locke, Edwin A. (1982) “The Ideas of Frederick W. Taylor: An Evaluation,” The Academy of Management Review, (7(1): 14-24.
• --- (1975) “personnel Attitudes and Motivation,” Annual Review of Psychology, 26: 457-480
• Locke, E.A., D.B. Feren, F.M. McCaleb, K.M. Shaw ve A.T. Denny. (1980) “The Relative Effectiveness of Four Methods of Motivating Employee Performance,” Changes in Working Life (Editörler: K. Duncan, M. Gruneberg ve D. Wallis), Chichester, England: Wiley ss. 363-387.
• Massie, Joseph L. (1965) “Management Theory,” Handbook of Organizations, Ed. James G. March, Chicago: Rand McNally, 387-422.
• Michels, Robert (1949) Political Parties, New York: Free Press
• Mooney, James D. (1937) “The Principles of Organization,” Papers on The Science of Administration (Ed. Luther Gulick ve L. Urwick), New York: Institute of Public Administration, Columbia University
• Mooney, James D. ve Allan C. Reiley (1939) The Principles of Organization, New York: Harper.
• Morgan, Gareth (1997) Images of Organization, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc. nd
• Mouzelis, Nicos (1979), Organization and Bureaucracy (2 Edition) London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
• Pugh, D. S., D. J. Hickson, C. R. Hinings ve C. Turner (1968) “Dimensions of Organization Structure,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 13(1): 65-105.
• Rodrigues, Carl A. (2001) “Fayol's 14 Principles of Management Then and Now: A Framework for Managing Today's Organizations Effectively,” Management Decision 39(10): 880-889.
• Ryan, Thomas A. (1947) Work and Effort: The Psychology of Production, New York: Ronald.
• Scott, W. Richard (1998) Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems (4th Ed.) New Jersey: Prentice Hall (1992-3 Ed). rd nd
• Simon, Herbert A. (1965) Administrative Behavior, (2 Ed.) New York: Free Press.
• Taylor, Frederick W. (1911) The Principles of Scientific Management, New York: Harper.
• --- (1947) Scientific Management, New York: Harper & Brothers.
• Umstot, D. D., C. H. Bell, T.R. Mitchell, T. R. (1976) “Effects of Job Enrichment and Task Goals on Satisfaction and Productivity: Implications for Job Design,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 61: 379-394
• Udy, Stanley H. Jr. (1959) “Bureaucracy and Rationality in Weber's Organization Theory,” American Sociological Review, 24(6): 791-795.
• Vernon, Horace Middleton (1977), Industrial Fatigue and Efficiency, (Ýlk Baský 1921) New York: Arno Press.
• Walton, Richard E. (1977) “Work Innovation at Topeka: After Six Years,” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 13(3): 422-433.
• Ward, John W. (1964) “The Ideal of Individualism and the Reality of Organization,” Business Establishment (Editör: Earl F. Cheit), New York: John Wiley, ss. 37-76.
• Weber, Max (1947) The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, London: Oxford university Press.
• --- (1946) From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, Editörler: H.H.Gerth ve C.W. Mills, New York: Oxford University Press
• Wrege, Charles D. ve Amedeo G. Perroni (1974) “Taylor's Pig Tale: A Historical Analysis of Frederick W. Taylor's Pig-Iron Experiments,” The Academy of Management Journal, 17(1): 6-27.
• Wrege, Charles D. ve Anne Maria Stotka (1978) “Coke Creates A Classic: The Story Behind W. F. Taylor's Principles of Scientific Management,” The Academy of Management Review, 3(4): 736-749. nd
• Wren, Daniel A. (1979) The Evolution of Management Thought (2 Ed), New York: Wiley.