Theory and History of the Humanistic Management Culture in the Era of Industrialism

Abstract

Introduction. Insufficient consideration of the human factor and the inability to fully realize its potential has led to criticism of mechanistic management as a basic in the industrialism formation. Subsequently, against this background, humanistic management was introduced, which in some way compensated for the shortcomings of the mechanistic approach. However, the cultural and historical aspects of humanistic management have remained out of science's attention so far, which has necessitated this research. Purpose and methods. The purpose of the article is a theoretical and historical analysis of the humanistic management culture, identification of its features and key factors of development in the conditions of industrialism. The methodological basis of the research is the dialectical principle of cognition, systemic and cultural approaches to the study of social phenomena and processes, the fundamental provisions of the theory and history of management culture. Results. It is established that the culture of humanistic management, in contrast to the mechanistic concept of "economic man", which responds only to material incentives, uses the "social man" concept, which assumes that, in addition to material gain, the worker seeks to meet moral needs. In this case, the formal organization with officially established rules is complemented by an informal organization based on behaviorism, based on the theory of Y, moral aspects of interaction, B-leadership and the motivators' predominance that guide human activity to self-realization. Conclusions. The scientific novelty of the obtained results is to identify the objective preconditions that led to the emergence of a culture of humanistic management, as well as to generalize the features of the main directions of this culture of management. The practical significance is seen in the expansion of ideas 40 Yelena Kovalenko about the theory and history of world culture, including in them previously virtually unexplored in the cultural and historical context of the ideas of humanistic management of the industrialism era.

Бізнес-Етика В Гармонізації Життєдіяльності Суспільства

“…They develop a socio-ethical approach, according to which the owners and managers of the organization are responsible for the balanced observance of the common interests of the organization, the interests of stakeholders, and global public interests. This approach is also been developed by Ukrainian scientists (Abolina, 2012;Hrishnova, 2010;Kolot et al, 2010;Kovalenko, 2020aKovalenko, , 2020bKovalenko, , 2021Kovalenko et al, 2019;Martynyshyn & Khlystun, 2018, 2019Martynyshyn & Kovalenko, 2016, 2017, 2018a, 2018bMartynyshyn et al, 2020aMartynyshyn et al, , 2020bPalekha, 2009;Radchenko, 2014;Savchenko & Radchenko 2008), who argue that organizations should make voluntary commitments to society and direct part of their funds to improve it.…”

Менеджмент-Культура: Філософсько-Культурологічне Осмислення

“…Today, scientists are further developing these areas of management, adjusting and supplementing them with cultural components, in accordance with new organizational realities (Drucker, 2008;Florida, 2019;Hamel, 2007;Kovalenko, 2018Kovalenko, , 2020aKovalenko, , 2020bKovalenko, , 2021aKovalenko, , 2021bMartynyshyn & Khlystun, 2018, 2019Martynyshyn & Kovalenko, 2016, 2017a, 2017b, 2018a, 2018b, 2018cMartynyshyn et al, 2020aMartynyshyn et al, , 2020bMintzberg, 2011;Pink, 2015;Senge et al, 2010).…”

Management Culture Metaphysics: Chaos, Order, Harmony

“…It is important to note that several scientists, including Immanuel Kant (1786Kant ( , 1797, Henri Bergson (1914), Martin Heidegger (1996, Piama Gaidenko (1997Gaidenko ( , 2003, Theodor Oizerman (2009), Vladislav Lektorskii (2018), explore metaphysics as a separate independent problem. This problem in the context of management is also partially affected by such modern scientists as Yaroslav Martynyshyn, Olena Khlystun, Ruta Adamoniene, Martina Blašková, Yelena Kovalenko (Martynyshyn et al, 2020a(Martynyshyn et al, , 2020bMartynyshyn & Khlystun, 2018, 2019Martynyshyn & Kovalenko, 2017, 2018a, 2018bKovalenko, , 2018Kovalenko, , 2020aKovalenko, , 2020bKovalenko, , 2021 and others.…”