Is science producing a revolution in the functions of the business executive? No, but evolutionary changes are taking place at a rapid rate to keep pace with automated technology—changes which are bound to upgrade marketing and research and development at the probable expense of those traditional masters of the organization chart, production and finance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
U. S. National Science Foundation, Reviews of Data on R & D, No. 30 (September, 1961), NSF 61–51, Washington, D.C.
2.
This concept of management is most clearly developed in KoontzHaroldO'DonnellCyril, Principles of Management (New York: McGraw-Hill, Second Edition, 1959).
3.
SimonHerbert A., The New Science of Management Decision (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1960), pp. 40 ff.
4.
On this point see the perceptive article by BurlingameJohn F., “Information Technology and Decentralization” in Harvard Business Review, Vol. 39, No. 6 (Nov.-Dec., 1961), pp. 121–6.
5.
HoosIda Russakoff, “When the Computer Takes Over the Office,”Harvard Business Review, Vol. 38, No. 4 (July-August, 1960), pp. 102–112.
6.
The National Science Foundation estimates employment of scientists in U. S. industry at 528,200 in 1970 versus 313,400 in 1959.
7.
See, for example, AnthonyRobert N.DayJ. S., Management Controls in Industrial Research Organizations (Boston: Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration, 1952), and WeschlerIrving R.BrownPaula, eds., Evaluating Research and Development (Los Angeles: Human Relations Research Group, University of California, 1953). Among more recent literature is: ChamberlainClinton J., “Coming Era in Engineering Management,”Harvard Business Review, Vol. 39, No. 5 (Sept.–Oct., 1961), pp. 87–94; Symposium, “How Should Scientific Research be Administered,”Business Horizons, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Summer, 1958), p. 52; SwagerWilliam L., “Improving the Management of Research,”Business Horizons, Vol. 2, No. 4 (Winter, 1959), p. 44. ShepardHerbert A., “Patterns of Organization for Applied Research and Development,”Journal of Business, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Jan., 1956), pp. 52–58.
8.
For descriptions of corporate planning organization and technique, see SteinerGeorge A.RootEugene L., “Linear Organization Charts,”California Management Review, Vol. I, No. 2 (Winter, 1959), pp. 11–19; SteinerGeorge A., “What Do We Know About Using Long-Range Plans,”California Management Review, Vol. II, No. 1 (Fall, 1959), pp. 92–103; and SummerCharles E.Jr., “The Future Role of the Corporate Planner,”California Management Review, Vol. III, No. 2 (Winter, 1961), pp. 17–31; QuinnJames B., “Long-Range Planning of Industrial Research,”Harvard Business Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (July-August, 1961), pp. 88–102.
9.
CordinerRalph J., New Frontiers for Professional Managers (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1956), p. 84.
10.
SteinHerbertDenisonEdward F. estimate that narrowing the gap between the average level of (business) techniques and the best known would add 0.1 percent to the annual growth rate of U. S. GNP over the next 10 years. Goals for Americans, Report of the President's Commission on National Goals (New York: Prentice Hall, 1960), p. 189.
