Search

It was the diversity of methodological models employed by writers in the area of management history over the past forty years -- a small selection will be discussed herein which prompted the title of this paper. The four terms which appear most frequently in the literature that require definition are: (1) general history, (2) economic history, (3) business history, and (4) management history. Needless to say, these terms are not mutually exclusive; however, general history considered from the broad view may be said to be the examination of past social, political, economic, cultural, and religious relationships in their connection with each other. Economic history, it has been suggested, is the study of a particular class of historical events. These are events which arise out of economic choice, where men find themselves faced with the need to make their resources match the ends which they set for themselves. Management history is thus certainly not just a subset of business history. It extends beyond the boundaries of business. However, them is a good deal of conceptual overlap since the objectives of management are clearly discernable in the business organization, which are in turn closely related to economic objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Consulting activities play a significant part in a professional's role. One of his problems is the income generated from his services. This study, a part of a larger survey conducted in 1972, evaluates consulting/royalty incomes and institutional restrictions on consulting activity of the Academy membership. Selected institutional and demographic data are compared with income data. The results indicate that consulting plays a relevant role for selected Academy member groups. Nearly one half of those reporting 50 percent or more of their income from consulting and royalties were at the full professor level. On the other hand, 30 percent of all respondents reported zero income from outside consulting activities; and nearly one half of all the respondents reported that less than 10 percent of their total income comes from consulting/royalty incomes. The average consulting/royalty income for full professors was $5,832, whereas instructors reported an average of $1,395. When eliminating royalties by holding books constant, only 3 respondents had incomes in excess of $49,000; including royalties and consulting resulted in 34 in this income range. Reported restrictions on outside consulting activities were far less than indicated in other studies. Fifty-six percent of the respondents had either no institutional restriction or a vague policy. Several patterns on restrictions developed: (1) state and private colleges are more lax than both state and private universities, (2) institutions 10,000 and above tend to be more restrictive than smaller ones, (3) no single graduate institution seems to produce a "super consultant." Despite an average consulting/royalty income of $4,490 for all respondents, the average income of $21,165 does not appear to be excessive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]