Conceptualising the nature of work: revisiting Luther Gulick's theories of organisation

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The aim of this paper is to evaluate the coherence of Gulick's ideas on the nature of work roles and the implications for organisational theory. Design/methodology/approach -An analysis is undertaken of Gulick's writings in the "Papers on the Science of Administration", on different ways of organising (for which the author has used the term "systems of organisation") and similar work by his contemporaries, including Chester Barnard. The subsequent critique of Gulick's ideas by Herbert Simon is evaluated. Gulick's ideas are then compared with a theoretical framework developed by the author, which covers similar ground to the systems of organisation.Findings -The paper argues that Gulick's ideas on the nature of work roles in his systems of organisation were an important, but flawed contribution to organisational theory. Shortcomings in Gulick's theories on systems of organisation are identified, which, when rectified, improve the coherence of the theories and address legitimate criticisms made by Herbert Simon.Research limitations/implications -The article has important implications for contemporary interpretations of the intellectual clash between Gulick and Simon, and the relevance of Gulick's ideas for contemporary management research. Practical implications -The article has implications for the theoretical perspectives which are brought to bear on how organisations conceptualise their work tasks and organise themselves accordingly. Originality/value -The paper subjects one of the central elements of Gulick's principles of administration to in-depth critique at a conceptual level in order to re-evaluate its worth and contemporary relevance.

An exploration of government administrative processes in supporting agro-smallholders’ access to municipal markets in eThekwini Municipality, KwaZulu-Natal Province

“…The administrative theory is still found to be relevant today. In support of this, Breese (2013) commented that the administrative theory is still relevant as most of its principles, such as planning, organising, staffing, coordination, division of work and delegation, are still present and utilised in numerous organisations. The author stipulated that any organisation could not operate without considering some administration principles.…”

The impact of department structure on policy-making: How portfolio combinations affect interdepartmental coordination

“…According to Hammond (1990), this line of argumentation has not been developed much further due to a focus on individual, social, and psychological factors for explaining decision-making in public administrations. Only in the last decade have several scholars revived the original ideas of Gulick (Breese, 2013;Meier, 2010).…”

A review of management history from 2010-2014 utilizing a thematic analysis approach

“…They include: Hugo Musterberg, the great pioneer in industrial psychology; Igor Ansoff's work on strategic management (Moussetis, 2011); Henry B. Plant, an entrepreneurial pioneer (Ford and Petersen, 2011); Fritz Machlup's contribution to exchange rate mechanisms (Connell, 2011); Mary Barnett Gilson, an economist and a specialist in industrial relations (Phipps, 2011); Frank George Woollard, a pioneer in the establishment of flow production and an early application of current-day lean principles and practices (Emiliani and Seymour, 2011); Alfred P. Sloan, Jr (Houghton, 2010); Adam Smith (Crowley and Sobel, 2010), Kathryn Harrigan (Moore, 2014), Luther Gulick (Breese, 2013), Hugo Munsterberg (Prieto and Phipps, 2014), Jane Dutton (Moore, 2014), George Caspar Homans (Muldoon et al, 2013), Dale Carnegie (Hayek et al, 2014), Joseph Schumpeter (Harvey et al, 2010), Lyndall Urwick (Parker and Ritson, 2011) and Alfred D. Chandler, Jr (Smothers et al, 2010).…”