The liaison between science and management, which has made terms such as linear programming and statistical decision theory part of the business vocabulary, is now being extended in this country and abroad to open new horizons for business and the scientist. Here is a quick roundup of developments to date and a look into the future.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DadayanV.ChernyakU.“Mathematical Methods in Economics,”Economic Science (Ekonomicheski Nauki)No. 3, 1960, pp. 140–151. Translation by KircherP.GinsburgsG., to appear soon in Management Science.
2.
Quoted, but with considerable liberties taken, from ThompsonG. L., “Computers and the Undergraduate Mathematical Training of Engineers,”Conference on Electrical Engineering Education, Syracuse University, 1960. See also CharnesA.CooperW. W., “Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming,”Management Science4, No. 1, Oct., 1957.
3.
See, e.g., TruebloodR. M.CyertR. M., Sampling Techniques in Accounting (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1957).
4.
See FisherR. A., “Statistical Methods and Scientific Induction,”Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological), 17, No. 1, 1955, pp. 69–77. See also TukeyJ. W.“Conclusions vs. Decisions,”Technometrics2, No. 4, Nov., 1960, pp. 423–433.
5.
For examples, see e.g., SchlaiferR., Probability and Statistics for Business Decisions—An Introduction to Managerial Economics under Uncertainty (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1959).
6.
From WallisW. A.RobertsH. V.: Statistics: A New Approach (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1956).
7.
See ChurchillN.TeitelbaumL. “The Effects of an Audit,” Office of Naval Research—Carnegie Institute of Technology Research Report. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Institute of Technology, Graduate School of Industrial Administration, May, 1960, and ChurchillN.CooperW. W.“An Experiment for Measuring the Effects of an Audit,”Office of Naval Research—Carnegie Institute of Technology Research Report. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Institute of Technology, Graduate School of Industrial Administration, Dec., 1960.
8.
New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1960.
9.
Op. cit., p. 17.
10.
See CharnesA.CooperW. W., “Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming,”Management Science4, No. 1, Oct., 1957.
11.
New York: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1957.
12.
Loc. cit., p. 57.
13.
See, e.g., his Appendix, “How to Cheat on Personality Testing.”
14.
This term is used by Mr. Whyte to characterize “… the contemporary body of thought which makes morally legitimate the pressures of society against the individual. Its major propositions are three: A belief in the group as the source of creativity; a belief in ‘belongingness’ as the ultimate need of the individual; and a belief in the application of science to achieve the belongingess.” (Loc. cit., p. 7.) Mr. Whyte, it should be noted, proceeds to qualify such terms as “individual” and “societal”—but neither so adequately nor so succinctly as Aristotle's ancient, “He who is unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a god.” (Cf. The Basic Works of Aristotle, McKeonR. P., ed.; New York: Random House, Inc., 1941, p. 1130.)
15.
I do not mean to suggest that the “facts” of inter-organization assignment are new or are even now confined only to scientists. I choose this example partly because Mr. Whyte has himself noted the exceptional status accorded to certain scientists and creative workers in some companies (cf. loc. cit., pp. 446 ff.) and partly because some of the organization strains resulting from the need to effect these accommodations are of a relatively novel or revealing sort—as when, say, under the promptings of some of their scientists, company managements have been willing to permit these persons to remain on the payroll while servicing, or being serviced by, other organizations (e.g., universities) which sometimes do not even reimburse either these scientists or their parent companies.
16.
See Appendix V in Automation (London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1956) for references to research on management structures under automation that is being conducted in England and the USSR. See also CooperW. W., “Management Science and Management” (Pittsburgh: Carnegie Institute of Technology, Graduate School of Industrial Administration, ditto report, 1956).
17.
Loc. cit. pp. 88 ff.
18.
Cf. loc. cit. pp. 93 ff.
19.
The Aims of Education (The Macmillan Co., 1929) republished as a Mentor Book in July, 1949.
20.
GordonR. A.HowellJ. E., Higher Education for Business (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959).
21.
F. C. Pierson, and others, The Education of American Businessmen (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1959).
22.
See also SilkL. S., The Education of Businessmen, Supplementary Paper No. 11 of the Committee for Economic Development, Dec., 1960; FinbergB. D., A Summary of the Education of Businessmen, Carnegie Corporation of New York, 1960.
23.
Loc. cit., p. 99.
24.
I am dealing here with only their technical education, in Whitehead's sense, and hence ought to warn the readers of this paper that there are issues of wisdom, self satisfaction and culture that also need attention. Cf. Whitehead, loc. cit., passim on the subjects of liberal and technical education.
25.
Loc. cit., pp. 53 ff.
26.
New York: Chas. Scribner's Sons, Inc. Translated by Talcott Parsons with a foreword by TawneyR. H., See also TawneyR. H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism (New York: Penguin Books, Inc., 1947).
