IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/96nj8.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the divergence of early and contemporary HRM theories

Author

Listed:
  • Gordon, Anna

Abstract

The quest of human for better production and management methods to generate or to raise income is as ancient as time. Adam Smith (1723 – 1790), David Ricardo (1772 – 1823), and Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) are considered to be the pioneers of modern management theories. The conventional management theories originated in the industrial revolution when technical advances, the expansion of commerce and markets, increasing populations generate mass production opportunities by means of a motorized and systemic method. First, this research reviews three most crucial early works: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” (1776) by Adam Smith (1723 – 1790), “Letter to T. R. Malthus, October 9, 1820” by David Ricardo (1772 – 1823), and “Introduction to the Principles of Morals” (1789) by Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832). Second, we compare those early works with modern theories and practices of HRM. We argued that the early theories were built upon materialistic consideration; while, the modern theories are established on both materialistic and humanitarian grounds. The trends in HRM literature showed that we might witness, in coming decades, a surge of theories built on humanitarian principles.

Suggested Citation

  • Gordon, Anna, 2021. "On the divergence of early and contemporary HRM theories," OSF Preprints 96nj8, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:96nj8
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/96nj8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/60422ea267386c047b61c473/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/96nj8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:96nj8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.