MANAGEMENT FIGURE
INTRODUCTION
Existence is the result of investigation of present management experts today. Indeed, discussions terlulis in management, a new beginning in 1900. Previously almost be said there is no peeling-paring in writing in the field of management. Therefore, it can be said that the management as science, is a young science. That situation is causing some people are still reluctant to admit it as science. Things like this not only experienced by management science, but also other sciences, suffered a similar fate, or process, before he was entitled to use the title of science.
By way of solving the problem, then by Beishline, management was classified into three classes:
a. conventional management
b. systematic management, and
c. management based on science.
Conventional management is also called traditional management or management of chance, meaning that managers in dealing with an issue, by basing ourselves to actions that took dizaman past, so it always bases itself on tradition.
Here, the experience of the manager plays a key role. In traditional management, manager experience play an important role. Mamajemen this type in use among a broad, but this type is the least form of management effectiveness and efficiency.
Systematic management can be considered as a middle step between conventional management and management based on science. Here, the manager in solving a problem that it faces, not just relying on experience, but on the experiences of others who face similar problems. What used by others with success, guided and practiced.
Management based on science formulated by Beishline as follows:
Management based on science is not receiving a manner solely by management because that way in the past been used with good results, but carefully define the issues faced, making a benchmark as pengangan to work, gathering the materials to achieve temporary solutions, and check back the way it was split. Thus, mamajemen based science is a way to form a logical examination and analysis, leading to an effective plan.
This is close to what was raised by Lansburgh Spriegel and say as follows.
Steps in the scientific management in decision making are:
a. Get the facts
b. analize the facts
c. consider the objectives in the light of the available facts, and
d. Decide.
Thus, science-based management must define the steps, before taking a decision, ie collecting data, analyzing the data already collected, and then specify what the verdict.
This does not mean that the results of experiences in the past does not need to be considered at all. In urgent circumstances, when collecting and analyzing data is not possible then inevitably a good experience in the past can be applied. This was recognized very well by Spriegel and Lansbrugh, which goes on to say as follows:
Unfortunately, the action frequently has to be taken without the facts. If immediate action has to be taken time Is not available for all the facts collecting. In this case the server as past experience guides available ... .. many of the long-run business decisions Can be supported by the scientific forecasting is still there but Remains a measure of enlightened in sight in terms of past experience.
Management science is a young science. This knowledge arises thanks to the results pernyelidikan experts from earlier today. By karnanya, it's good we now put forward several experts who laid the foundations for the emergence of management science. Previous experts that we refer to as management figures because they were the pioneers laid the foundations of knowledge management. Will briefly put forward the results of their creation, the history of his life, and so forth.
INTRODUCTION
Existence is the result of investigation of present management experts today. Indeed, discussions terlulis in management, a new beginning in 1900. Previously almost be said there is no peeling-paring in writing in the field of management. Therefore, it can be said that the management as science, is a young science. That situation is causing some people are still reluctant to admit it as science. Things like this not only experienced by management science, but also other sciences, suffered a similar fate, or process, before he was entitled to use the title of science.
By way of solving the problem, then by Beishline, management was classified into three classes:
a. conventional management
b. systematic management, and
c. management based on science.
Conventional management is also called traditional management or management of chance, meaning that managers in dealing with an issue, by basing ourselves to actions that took dizaman past, so it always bases itself on tradition.
Here, the experience of the manager plays a key role. In traditional management, manager experience play an important role. Mamajemen this type in use among a broad, but this type is the least form of management effectiveness and efficiency.
Systematic management can be considered as a middle step between conventional management and management based on science. Here, the manager in solving a problem that it faces, not just relying on experience, but on the experiences of others who face similar problems. What used by others with success, guided and practiced.
Management based on science formulated by Beishline as follows:
Management based on science is not receiving a manner solely by management because that way in the past been used with good results, but carefully define the issues faced, making a benchmark as pengangan to work, gathering the materials to achieve temporary solutions, and check back the way it was split. Thus, mamajemen based science is a way to form a logical examination and analysis, leading to an effective plan.
This is close to what was raised by Lansburgh Spriegel and say as follows.
Steps in the scientific management in decision making are:
a. Get the facts
b. analize the facts
c. consider the objectives in the light of the available facts, and
d. Decide.
Thus, science-based management must define the steps, before taking a decision, ie collecting data, analyzing the data already collected, and then specify what the verdict.
This does not mean that the results of experiences in the past does not need to be considered at all. In urgent circumstances, when collecting and analyzing data is not possible then inevitably a good experience in the past can be applied. This was recognized very well by Spriegel and Lansbrugh, which goes on to say as follows:
Unfortunately, the action frequently has to be taken without the facts. If immediate action has to be taken time Is not available for all the facts collecting. In this case the server as past experience guides available ... .. many of the long-run business decisions Can be supported by the scientific forecasting is still there but Remains a measure of enlightened in sight in terms of past experience.
Management science is a young science. This knowledge arises thanks to the results pernyelidikan experts from earlier today. By karnanya, it's good we now put forward several experts who laid the foundations for the emergence of management science. Previous experts that we refer to as management figures because they were the pioneers laid the foundations of knowledge management. Will briefly put forward the results of their creation, the history of his life, and so forth.