Are the Classical Management Functions useful in describing managerial work
Are the Classical Management Functions Useful in Describing Managerial Work?
Author(s): Stephen J. Carroll and Dennis J. Gillen
Source: The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Jan., 1987), pp. 38-51
Published by: Academy of Management
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/257992 .
Accessed: 08/09/2014 02:29
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp .
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Academy of Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Academy of Management Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 134.148.104.4 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 02:29:07 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
? Academy of Management Review, 1987, Vol. 12, No. 1, 38-51.
Are the Classical Management
Functions Useful in
Describing Managerial Work?
STEPHENJ. CARROLL
University of Maryland
DENNISJ. GILLEN
Syracuse University
This paper attempts to evaluate the usefulness of the classical management functions perspective for describing managerial work and for serving as the basis for management education. It also examines some of the newer conceptualizations of the manager 's job and relates these to each other and to the earlier classical approach.
As Miner (1971, 1982) noted, most management textbooks are organized on the basis of the original classical management functions first introduced by Fayol (1949) and elaborated and extended by others such as Urwick (1952). The Fayol functions are planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling
Author(s): Stephen J. Carroll and Dennis J. Gillen
Source: The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Jan., 1987), pp. 38-51
Published by: Academy of Management
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/257992 .
Accessed: 08/09/2014 02:29
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp .
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Academy of Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Academy of Management Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 134.148.104.4 on Mon, 8 Sep 2014 02:29:07 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
? Academy of Management Review, 1987, Vol. 12, No. 1, 38-51.
Are the Classical Management
Functions Useful in
Describing Managerial Work?
STEPHENJ. CARROLL
University of Maryland
DENNISJ. GILLEN
Syracuse University
This paper attempts to evaluate the usefulness of the classical management functions perspective for describing managerial work and for serving as the basis for management education. It also examines some of the newer conceptualizations of the manager 's job and relates these to each other and to the earlier classical approach.
As Miner (1971, 1982) noted, most management textbooks are organized on the basis of the original classical management functions first introduced by Fayol (1949) and elaborated and extended by others such as Urwick (1952). The Fayol functions are planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling