Guest editorial

Citation

Cowan, R.A. (2009), "Guest editorial", Journal of Management History, Vol. 15 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmh.2009.15815daa.002

Guest editorial

Article Type: Guest editorial From: Journal of Management History, Volume 15, Issue 4

Peter Drucker would have celebrated his centenary on November 19, 2009 had he not died November 11 2005. Born into the educated élite of Vienna, his schooling was typically German. He then studied law in Hamburg and Frankfurt and then moved to London where he worked in international banking. As the Second World War progressed he migrated to the USA, settling on the east coast. After 30 years he moved to the west coast and to Claremont Graduate School, California. This was to be his academic home for the remainder of his life.

Drucker reached the age of 88 before the first scholarly symposium on his publications was held (Gazell, 2000). By this stage of his life he was famous as “a management guru”. He had published widely in academic and business journals and in substantial popular periodicals. He had written numerous books, which had been translated and retranslated into many languages (Cowan, 2005).

One of the many management educators I approached to write for this issue was at the 2002 Special Libraries Association Conference session portrayed in Hlava (2002). He described how Drucker held the audience for what seemed like a moment in time, even though he actually spoke for longer than the required time for the session. Schwartz and Kelly (1996) interviewed “a crotchety old man” but, rereading the interview, one is reminded of how prophetic Drucker was. Who was this “guru” who disliked the term guru (Fernandez, 2009)?

A guru, a teacher, a guide, but most of all a thinker, it appears to me that Drucker gave himself permission to think and not be bound by the apparent boundaries that modern professionals place on themselves. By this I mean we can fence our minds in by our descriptions of ourselves as career professionals in business administration, information systems management or taxonomic phycology. Drucker may well have been of an era and an education system that relied heavily on the teachings of the great philosophers (see Marciariello and Linkletter, 2009; Kurzynski, 2009), but if so, why does not the world have many more Druckers? Marciariello (2004, pp. xiii-xiv) succinctly described how Drucker tackled a problem. In Linkletter and Marciariello (2009) we are provided with an account of who and what influenced Drucker as a “social ecologist”. We are left in no doubt that Drucker did not view humans or their constructs through rose-coloured glasses:

The absence of a basic social purpose for industrial society constitutes the core of our problem … We have to develop a free and functioning society on the basis of a new concept of man’s nature … It lies in the philosophical or metaphysical field (Drucker, 2004, p. 53).

Kurzynski (2009) and Malcolm and Hartley (2009) explore the parallels between Drucker and Aristotle. Through a comparison of Drucker’s writings with those of Aristotle, Kurzynski (2009) shows a deeper understanding of how a change in ethos may be promoted within big business. Malcolm and Hartley (2009) revisit ethics in business and analyse Drucker’s views in conjunction with the writings of Aristotle and Confucius. I find it fascinating that in this first decade of the global/information/climate-change century the Journal of Management History has published three excellent papers recalling the Hellenic philosophers (Anninoa, 2007; Kurzynski, 2009; Malcolm and Hartley, 2009).

When I was compiling the bibliography (Cowan, 2005) it became very clear very quickly that, although it was fashionable to quote Drucker and to always have his name in the introduction to a management work, very few actually read and understood what Drucker wrote. Management textbooks were published throughout the time Drucker was publishing. Were Drucker’s ideas conveyed in the textbook market accurately? Genoe McLaren et al. (2009), using a methodology that Albert Mills has employed to analyse many management scenarios, show that “while Drucker’s work was found to be the most-referenced of any management writer in the textbooks studied, his theories …were rarely discussed”. The authors then contextualise the production of textbooks and American society to provide a clarification of why Drucker was not given prominence in the textbooks.

One of my correspondents during the time I have been guest editor for this issue was invited to the Druckers’ New Jersey home to discuss management in British industry, and was told that the Gilbreths, who Mousa and Lemak (2009) have argued “preached for working smarter not harder”, had lived close by. What was the influence of Lillian Gilbreth on Drucker? Good research always leads to new questions. Fernandez (2009) reflects on Drucker as the lifelong learner. Drucker was “one to ask questions” (Fernandez, 2009). “Don’t tell me you enjoyed this [a talk], tell me what you will do differently on Monday morning.” (Marciariello, 2004, p. xiii). To me these quotes exemplify the basic Drucker – he wanted to learn, he was always learning.

American society of the 1960s was a turbulent space (Oyler and Pryor, 2009), and out of this turbulence came the workplace changes of the late twentieth century. The changes, although exemplified by the US workplace in this article, have occurred in all western countries. Oyler and Pryor (2009) map Drucker’s growing understanding of the value to an organisation of diversity within the workforce and his advocacy on behalf of workers during the latter period of his academic life:

Knowledge is now the main cost, the main investment, and the main product of an advanced economy and the livelihood of the largest group in the population (Drucker, 1969, p. 264).

Once again, reading these words I am aware of how prophetic they are. Can Kranzberg (1970) be argued against now that we have lived through forty years of information technology? Yani-de-Soriano and Slater (2009) discuss the interplay between the consumer as a knowlege player and the businesses who have failed to recognise the power of this player. These authors also invoke the “social responsibilty” themes of Drucker but in this case they argue for social responsibility of the consumer.

During the many months it has taken to bring together the articles that make up this issue of the Journal of Management History I have had the pleasure of corresponding with persons who knew Peter Drucker. To those people I thank you for the stories, which I treasure. I think it can be said that most people have been affected by Peter Drucker, in one way or another, but to have known him is special.

In summary, the goal of the editorial team, in this special issue, was to honour Peter F. Drucker, to understand the value of his many contributions better. I hope that as you read the seven contributions that resulted from the extremely rigorous refereeing and editorial process, you consider we have succeeded.

Roberta Ann CowanGuest Editor