MANAGEMENT HISTORY: IS THERE MADNESS IN ITS METHOD?

It was the diversity of methodological models employed by writers in the area of management history over the past forty years -- a small selection will be discussed herein which prompted the title of this paper. The four terms which appear most frequently in the literature that require definition are: (1) general history, (2) economic history, (3) business history, and (4) management history. Needless to say, these terms are not mutually exclusive; however, general history considered from the broad view may be said to be the examination of past social, political, economic, cultural, and religious relationships in their connection with each other. Economic history, it has been suggested, is the study of a particular class of historical events. These are events which arise out of economic choice, where men find themselves faced with the need to make their resources match the ends which they set for themselves. Management history is thus certainly not just a subset of business history. It extends beyond the boundaries of business. However, them is a good deal of conceptual overlap since the objectives of management are clearly discernable in the business organization, which are in turn closely related to economic objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]