Management as a Liberal Art Research Institute

Business Analysis Based on Drucker and Mintzberg

William A. Cohen Ph.D.

PUBLISHED:

January 6, 2024

Even today,  practically every manager seeks maximum profits calculated by quantitative analysis and academic courses based on “quantitative analysis for business decisions” are taught at every graduate school. In the 1960s Peter Drucker and Henry Mintzberg concluded that liberal arts methods of analysis were needed because analysts in concluding that management was a science, excluded  liberal arts in analysis but argued academics as to which mathematical methods were more appropriate depending on the situation. Yet only a few years earlier, Einstein won the Nobel Prize for theoretical physics by publishing four major papers in a single year, relying on the liberal arts with no computer and few mathematical equations.

 

Through economic analysis, an optimal numerical decision was easily calculated for maximum profit and quantitative models made business decisions easier. You just plugged the numbers into an equation. This followed science! However, economic analysis seeking maximum value alone provided a solution which actually resulted in a less than optimal solution.  Drucker calculated that if maximum profitability was always the goal, success frequently attracted unwanted competition and led to  undesirable results. He used the example of the transistor radio invented by American companies in the U.S. These companies eventually lost the entire market to Japanese firms through overpricing. Drucker concluded that while profitability was essential for business, maximum profitability was not. Laws were introduced limiting high pricing of critical medicines. Maximum profits could lead to failure of the product for firms and undesirable results for society.

 

Struggles with COVID-19 provide a recent example of the problems in attempts to “follow the science” and attempt to solve problems by quantitative analysis alone and omitting the liberal arts.

 

Lessons from the Pandemic

As COVID-19 became an important issue, analysts were pressured to “follow the science.” However, it went unnoticed that this was situational. There were always other factors and conflicting goals and benefits. This became more challenging as time went on and unexpected problems were revealed along with strains of the virus mutating. Several effective vaccines were produced under “Operation Warp Speed” despite doubts by many that a “Warp Speed Vaccine” was possible. Other issues surfaced. How many vaccinations were needed, and who should receive them and at what age? Experts looked at numbers and arrived at different conclusions. Some argued that certain individuals should be given priority when distributing the limited supply of vaccines, yet others maintained the vaccine should be required for everyone regardless of any other factor. Ultimately, many recipients rejected vaccination.

 

An optimal decision requires a different and more complex analysis than the outcome of a single goal analysis or quantitative conclusion. The COVID-19 experience forced us to recognize that there are almost always multiple and conflicting goal solutions and success experiences and that reaching one goal might result in failure or higher risk in others.  Finding  solutions which considered economic recovery, the need to educate schoolchildren, the worldwide nature of the pandemic, vulnerability, and effect on different age groups and those with other underlying illnesses and more required consideration of a much broader range of situational factors. Even the personalities and abilities of those involved in implementation as well as the culture, customs, and belief systems of the groups requiring help, available resources and other complicated issues must be considered. Politics might affect interpretation of data and decisions far removed from the injunction to simply “follow the science.” Experts appeared on all sides of important issues, and they frequently differed on interpretations of “fake news,” political issues, scientific dangers, or opinions on what certain data meant and what actions should be taken or avoided.

 

Multiple Factors Complicate Management Decisions

Einstein had grappled with similar problems using liberal arts long before COVID.  In 1905, he had employed the liberal arts and not quantitative analysis, to explore highly technical questions in theoretical physics. Einstein developed the theory of relativity and the equation E=MC² for conservation of energy without a computer, or even the use of chalkboards with only the liberal arts and his own imagination. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for theoretical physics for publishing four major papers in a single year using the liberal arts without complicated mathematics or computers (which he confirmed years later in an article in the London Times).

 

Two Experts who rethought Management

Almost simultaneously, two leading management scientists, Peter Drucker and Henry Mintzberg, concluded that economic analysis alone was insufficient. Both independently concluded that because management itself is an art, effective management decisions require the complete liberal arts spectrum including economics and the physical sciences because certain liberal arts must also be employed which might be of equal or more importance at different times and situations.

 

Drucker and Mintzberg

The these two geniuses especially noted the prime importance of the liberal arts. Drucker wrote that “management is what tradition used to call a liberal art: ‘liberal’ because it deals with the fundamentals of knowledge, self-knowledge, wisdom, and leadership; ‘art’ because it deals with practice and application.” He called knowledge, self-knowledge, wisdom, and leadership “the four essentials” of the process of liberal arts he visualized.

Drucker wrote that leadership is the most important essential and results in 50% of the quality of outcome of any endeavor. Whereas others said that integrity and social responsibility were desirable with leadership, Drucker taught that they were required.

Drucker and his dean, Paul Albrecht, established a Ph.D. program, which, though it offered traditional courses, included other special courses that Drucker himself developed and taught. These courses were outside of the traditional specialty graduate courses offered in a management program. Some called the results “the Drucker difference.”

The approach used behind Drucker’s work was uncovered by Minglo Shao and C. William Pollard, both members of the Drucker Institute Board at Claremont Graduate University where Drucker taught. With another Board Member, Bob Buford, they developed and promoted “management as a liberal art” or MLA and furthered its development. They also commissioned a book, Drucker’s Lost Art of Management by Joseph Maciariello and Karen Linkletter (McGraw-Hill, 2011), which introduced the social responsibility aspect of leadership in MLA as a prime philosophy of management. Professor Maciariello developed and taught a non-degree online course on MLA primarily based solely on this aspect.


Henry Mintzberg’s Innovations

Meanwhile, at McGill University, Henry Mintzberg, an internationally known management scientist, from Canada came to similar conclusions. He wrote that “management, is above all a practice, where art, science and craft meet.”  Going further, he theorized that many of the basic courses in accounting, finance etc. required by managers for an MBA were unnecessary, as the material was already part of programs for attaining specialty graduate business degrees. He suggested that the time spent on these courses was better spent mastering the understanding and practice of general management as specialists already assisted generalist managers with support in their areas of expertise.

 

Along with partners in other countries, Mintzberg developed an accredited graduate management degree that was not an MBA. He convinced senior academic administrators and others at McGill University in Canda to test his concepts in a fully functioning academic and accredited program outside of the school of business. Based on its success, the program grew and he wrote a bestselling book, Managers, not MBAs (Berrett-Koehler, 2004) which explained his views on the shortcomings of the MBA for educating managers. Many of his ideas dovetail with teachings under the MLA banner, including the notion of reflective mindsets, shared competencies, and an emphasis on teamwork and recognition of global management culture.

Mintzberg recognized that reflective mind-sets impact on how a manager looks at any problem. This helps frame how problems are perceived. Therefore, his students practiced one of five mind-sets of emphasis in each of five countries as they traveled worldwide in solving management problems and completing his program. These were: (1.) Reflective mind-set, (2.) Analytic mind-set, (3.) Worldly mind-set, (4.) Collaboration and Cooperation mind-set, (5.) Action mind-set.

 

Mintzberg also recognized that experienced managers look at any problem differently and might develop different, but equally effective solutions. This fitted with another of Drucker’s observations that the largest breakthroughs and innovations frequently occur when employees with backgrounds from different industries or companies changed jobs, which changed the environments of their practices. They brought with them their old ideas, thinking, and procedures that had been used in their previous organizations, unknown to the new organization with which they were now affiliated. Mintzberg also developed the concept of shared competencies by which experienced students shared ideas for more innovative solutions.

 

Drucker’s MLA and Mintzberg’s successful development and application of the liberal arts for management decision making demonstrate the flexibility and almost unlimited potential of the MLA concept for success and additional development and that MLA is adaptable to all organizations for more effective problem solving and decision making.

 


References

A Class with Drucker by William A. Cohen (AMACOM, 2008)

Consulting Drucker by William A. Cohen  (LID, 2019)

Drucker’s Lost Art of Management by Joseph A Maciariello and Karen Linkletter (McGraw-Hill, 2011)

Drucker’s Way to the Top by William A. Cohen (LID, 2019)

Managers, not MBAs by Henry Mintzberg (Berrett-Koehler, 2004)

The New Realities by Peter F. Drucker (HarperCollins, 1989)

Freedom, Responsibility, and Worldview: Understanding Drucker

By Bo Yang Ph.D. • April 2, 2025
One can use Drucker’s ideas to understand the political and social scene in China today. Let’s start with a story. Fyodor Dostoyevsky published his novel The House of the Dead in 1862. Dostoyevsky actually spent time in a Siberian prison camp, and drew on that experience as he depicted prisoners in the novel. These prisoners were seen as hardened criminals, and go through an incredible transformation at Christmastime. They are permitted to put on a play. Suddenly, these hardened criminals are bursting with creativity. They’re writing, directing, designing costumes, an entire production process involved in creating this theatrical play. A completely different side of them comes out. This story illustrates a point that is at the heart of Drucker’s work. This is the idea that no system, no matter how restrictive or oppressive, can completely destroy our humanity. Even within a place as terrible as a prison, there is still room for agency, for choosing how we respond to our circumstances. Even with limitations, they found a way to express themselves. The prisoners find a way to carve out a space for freedom. It makes one think about those times when we are boxed in by expectations, or stuck in a rut. Maybe there is always a way to break out. This ties in perfectly with what Drucker always talked about in terms of individual responsibility. It’s not about waiting for someone to give you permission, or for the perfect situation to magically appear. It’s about realizing that we always have choices, and those choices make us who we are. So these prisoners are finding freedom in this highly unlikely place! But we can see how this links to Drucker’s thoughts on societal order. Think about it: Are we all prisoners in some way? This is where Drucker’s own experiences in 20 th -century Europe become incredibly relevant to our own lived experience today. He saw the rise of totalitarian regimes firsthand. He likened them to “beehives” and “anthills” where individual freedom was crushed by the weight of the state. Like everyone is marching in line; there is no room for being different. Let us think about this: even in societies that aren’t explicitly totalitarian, we can still build those same kinds of structures: prisons of conformity and control, where everyone is expected to be the same. Drucker saw this as the complete opposite of the chaos of disorder. A healthy society has to find that balance. You need a middle ground of diversity, this multi-layered system where individuals can find meaning without being crushed by a large, powerful authority. Walking a tightrope between too much order and too much chaos. Too much order represents the beehive model. Too much chaos creates the jungle, where it is everyone for himself. Finding the middle ground is a challenge. It’s the balance between individual freedom, and a sense of order. In many ways, Chinese society places value on order and control. But Drucker’s ideas about personal responsibility and gives one a choice to exercise individual freedom even within a system of constraints. How do we find those little spaces for freedom within those constraints? You can’t change the system, but you can make choices that allow you to exercise your own agency, and align your actions with your beliefs. That brings us to one of Drucker’s most mind-blowing ideas: it’s what he called the “mechanistic world view.” He thought that seeing the world as a giant machine with humans as cogs in the system disrupts how we see the concepts of freedom and responsibility. Imagine a factory with an assembly line, where each worker has their one specific job. They do this over and over again, with no room for creativity, no sense of ownership. That’s the essence of the mechanistic world view: we all become robots, following a program. Freedom, in this word view, becomes chasing simple pleasures, like comfort. There is no sense of purpose. One just goes through the motions. The focus is on efficiency and output, not the human factors that go into work. Responsibility is reduced to following orders rather than making thoughtful choices. If the mechanistic world view is the problem, what is the alternative? Drucker gives us an alternative: the teleological world view. This is the view that the universe is not a static machine, but rather a dynamic system where everything is connected from atoms to humans. Everything contributes to create a new order. In this world view, freedom isn’t doing what you feel like, or feels good, but developing your potential as a human being and using that to contribute to something bigger than yourself. Responsibility isn’t about following rules, but understanding the impact your choices have. Thinking back to the prisoner story we began with: their decisions had impacts. They tapped into their potential, and found a shared purpose. This resonates with Eastern Philosophical ideas of individual cultivation and harmony with the cosmos. Drucker’s ideas, while grounded in Western traditions, transcend cultural boundaries. How much of our lives, regardless of culture, are actually run by this mechanistic mindset? In work, school – are we really encouraged to think for ourselves? Or to contribute to some bigger purpose? Even in systems that feel very mechanistic, there will always be ways to find pockets to express freedom – places where we can make a choice and do something meaningful. It may not be easy, but it is always there. It starts with recognizing that we have a choice. We can be cogs in the machine. Or we can choose to be creative agents of change. We are reminded of where we began, with Dostoyevsky, who said “man is created for freedom.” Even when things are difficult, we are hardwired for expressing ourselves and deciding our own path. It’s all about finding those stages within the prison walls. The limitations exist in Chinese society; but that doesn’t mean that we can’t have a free existence. Drucker’s ideas, while Western, have resonance in other cultures. Freedom is not just a large, abstract concept. It’s also about the everyday choices we make within our specific cultural contexts. The little ways we express ourselves and choose to build something new instead of accepting the status quo. Making things more beautiful and meaningful, even if it’s just in our own small world. Which brings us back to Drucker’s definition of freedom. For him, freedom involved responsible choice. It is not right as much as responsibility. It is not something given to us. It’s something we must work for and earn. And we choose it every day through our actions.  One final thought: If life is a stage, what role would you play? What kind of performance are you giving to the world? Are you building prisons? Or are you building stages? Are you choosing freedom and responsibility? Or are you just going through the motions? This is not about easy answers. It’s about finding a world where freedom and responsibility can coexist and thrive.

The Children of the American Dream

By Carol Mendenall Ph.D. • March 15, 2025
Stories of travels from a distant land to a new start, a land of opportunity, have always been my favorite. My friends come from exotic countries like Syria, Yemen, Portugal, Mexico, Guam, Kuwait, and India. Countries rich with culture and history, but they came to leave behind poverty, lack of education, war, so much war, to be in America. It is the American Dream, the thread that all of our families whose origin stems from migration at some point in time share. We all come from other lands in search of a new beginning just at different times. My friends came between the ages of 10 and 19, and started as ranch hands, deli shop workers, students working retail, and farmers. Decades later they are a restaurant owner, chief engineer, gas station owner, retired military, and doting grandma. These hard-working individuals are exemplifying the American Dream. First-generation born American descendants of immigrants face a unique challenge. Though the average mantra of a teenager is ‘my parents wouldn’t understand what it is like’ has been heard by many, especially educators, it is believed and demonstrated in the behaviors of first-generation U.S. born children from immigrant families. Research states that ethnic minority males are most likely to become affiliated with gangs (McDaniel, 2012). Different research posits that the likelihood of gang affiliation has to do with the “composition of the neighborhood” (Herbst, 2013). With that being said, I need to point out that ethnic minorities new to the country tend to live in community together, so one does not negate the other. This generation believes their parents only know of the ‘old country’ and are out of touch with American ideology. Therefore, they look for people who are in the know. Many do not fall into this trap of gang life, but more do from the first-born generation than any other. It is disheartening to know friends and acquaintances have come to this country to create a ‘better life’ for themselves and their offspring only to have a child choose the gang life over family. Social Responsibility and Global Corporate Citizenship Why is this a topic of a business journal, you may ask. We who have come before, who have a foundation here, can support newcomers in their individual growth and family support. Social responsibility, specifically Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), ‘global corporate citizenship,’ and ‘stakeholder management practices’, work on the premise that the welfare of all can be supported by the decisions of businesses (Windsor, 2001). There is an economic, environmental, and social responsibility that organizations have to the general public. Businesses need to have societal benefits in mind because governments do not always do so. Corporate Social Responsibility can be demonstrated in many ways which benefit society. Palacios (2004) posits business can be the positive context of changes in employee citizenship and ‘non-territorial forms of national identity’. As individuals increasingly create self-identity through the workplace and other organizations, it is understandable that societal needs and ‘common concerns’ such as “social equity, human rights and environmental preservation” (p.386) be shared through the business platform (Palacios, 2004). Therefore, education on the prevention of youth affiliation with gangs would be fitting in this context. Gang affiliation negatively affects the health of youth and organizations can have a positive impact. The National Gang Center (NGC) shares risk factors and strategies of intervention and prevention. NGC (2025) posits that youth are enticed by the social activities of a gang or show a range of risk factors, typically 7 or more, that push the individual away from home culture and toward a gang. These risk factors include violence in the home, early dating, academic struggles at school, limited belief in self-success at school, negative labeling by in-groups, concern for safety, community conditions, individual characteristics, peer-group influence, and abuse both physical or sexual (NGC, 2025). Individual characteristics include: “antisocial beliefs, early and persistent noncompliant behavior, early onset aggression/violence, few social ties, high alcohol/drug use, impulsivity, lack of guilt, life stressors, low intelligence, low perceived likelihood of being caught, neutralization, medical/physical condition, mental health problems, poor refusal skills, victim and victimization, family poverty, high parental stress/maternal depression, parent proviolent attitudes, poor parental supervision, poor parent-child relations or communication, sibling antisocial behavior, unhappy parents.” These characteristics are not an exhaustive list and do not include the special circumstance of being a first USA-born child of an immigrant family. Nor do all children with some of these characteristics become gang members. Studies show there is no exact or repeating pattern for why some children and teens chose gang membership, but having 7 or more factors does increase the risk of membership by 13% (NGC, 2025). Researchers indicate that most want to join a gang for socialization, which must be alluring to youths of immigrant families that want to belong to the American culture. Gang Prevention Preventions and interventions include reaching students between 5th and 12 th grades and include positive home, school, neighborhood and community interactions such as extra-curricular activities that build self-esteem and the belief of educational and life fulfillment. A key factor is instilling positive feelings between children and their parents. Positive school factors include improving academic performance, positive and safe school climate, and a positive relationship with key personnel on the campus. Prevention includes a moderate level of parental involvement, which involves warmth and control, the ability to react well to conflict, and positive connections with adults outside of the family unit as explained by McDaniel (2012). Immigrants that I have met are active parents who are actively involved in their children’s education and extracurricular activities, but these parents are combatting an additional issue. Their teens assume their parents do not have knowledge relevant to success in America even though they have proved their ability. McDaniel (2012) states that ethnic minority male children make up the largest percentage of gang members. Their children become friends with gang-affiliated minors who seem more knowledgeable of American current events than immigrant parents from a teen’s perspective. Community involvement in social interventions and gang suppression will lead to organizational change according to the National Gang Center (2025). Organizations presenting risk and protective factors to all employees increases the likelihood of gang prevention and, hopefully, can create willing volunteers to be positive role models in children’s lives for those moments when they don’t listen to their parents. Businesses sharing this knowledge with stakeholders provides support for individuals, organizations, and society. As the numbers of at-risk youth diminish, so do the negative impacts of gangs. This can be achieved through organizations willing to see their social and global influence. Dedicated to A.S. who lived a difficult and short life riddled with the strife of trying to get away from the gang life, which proved easier than getting away from the drugs he was introduced to by that ‘gang family’. To his family and two children who remain. References Dima, J. (2008). A Stakeholder Approach to Corporate Social Responsibility: A Fresh Perspective into Theory and Practice. Journal of Business Ethics : JBE; Dordrecht 82(1) 213-231. Herbst, E. (2013). The likelihood of gang membership: Immigrant generational differences among hispanic youth. A thesis for Graduate College of Bowling Green State University. McDaniel DD. (2012). Risk and protective factors associated with gang affiliation among high- risk youth: a public health approach. Inj Prev. 2012 Aug;18(4).253-8. National Gang Center. (2025). Comprehensive Gang Prevention, Intervention, and Suppression Model. US Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://nationalgangcenter.ojp.gov/spt/Programs/53 Palacios L., J.J. (2004). Corporate Citizenship and Social Responsibility in a Globalized World. Citizenship Studies 8(4). 383–402 Windsor, D. (2001), The future of corporate social responsibility, The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(3). 225-256

Foundations of CSR: Truly Sustainable

By Carol Mendenall Ph.D. • March 15, 2025
I had thought that the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) was a fairly recent development based on my experience in business and business education. Though two social reformers did not use the term CSR, their actions showed that all stakeholders are responsible for making a positive impact on society. My familiarity with the work of management and social theorist Peter Drucker, who actively published from 1939 to 2005, led me to the conclusion that organizations have a vital role in society. While Drucker may not have used the term CSR, he certainly advocated much of what encompasses this concept. Drucker’s work includes references to the need for social responsibility in business (Drucker and Maciariello, 2008). While recently sitting in a church service, I listened to a recitation of the work of the English theologian John Wesley, who died in the year 1791. Wesley was a social reformer with striking similarities to Drucker. That experience motivated me to look more into the parallels between Wesley and Drucker, and to see the connections of both men’s thoughts to what we now term Corporate Social Responsibility. It seems that this concept is perhaps far older than I thought, showing the sustainability of this idea. A Definition and Use of Corporate Social Responsibility Corporate Social Responsibility can be defined as follows: Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a business practice that involves integrating social, ethical, and environmental concerns into a company's operations. CSR can also be defined as a company's commitment to respecting the interests of its stakeholders (Google Search, 1-27-25). Examples of CSR include ethical leadership and management techniques, environmental involvement, and being fiscally sound and transparent within reason. It is evident that consumers value CSR activities such as limiting carbon footprint and supporting environmentally friendly fabrication solutions. Lately, some have been selecting products based on that business’ social platform. Society has shown through consumer choice and social media that CSR inspired behaviors are preferred. Many consider CSR as a 21 st century concept, but let’s see how earlier social theorists articulated this concept – one in an era before corporations existed. John Wesley (1703-1791) John Wesley, the ‘Founder and Father of Methodism,’ was a priest for the Church of England who later left this denomination to start his own (GCAH, 2025). In 1727, Wesley was given a fellowship at Lincoln College (Vickers, 2003). Westley became a failed missionary in 1735 and three years later began to speak out against predestination doctrine, arguing that grace and redemption were available to all. He began journaling and sharing his evangelical works through ‘field preaching’ (GCAH, 2025; Vickers, 2003). These actions led to speaking out against corruption in the churches of the day and the need for social reform, including abolition of slavery (Vickers, 2003). According to GCAH (2025), he established Methodist Societies and created their charter in 1784. The Methodists continued based on his writings. Murray Norris (2017) concludes that followers of John Wesley did not separate work life from personal religious development. Wesleyans included charitable donations of volunteerism and finances, high work ethic, and greater outreach as part of their religious outpouring. This early form of social responsibility stemmed from Wesley’s work on economics, politics, and social issues such as workplace safety, prison reform, and education (Nutt & Wilson, 2010; Lunn, 2010). Lunn (2010) states that Wesley was focused on the well-being of the individual worker. Instead of relying on organizations to change society, he supported individuals who were champions of social improvements. Wesley grounded his work in the theology that each person is made in God’s image. Even though the majority of the work was for and with individuals, Stranger’s Friend Societies and some private entities supported Wesley’s efforts to equalize the status of individuals regardless of social class (Murray Norris, 2017; Lunn, 2010). Peter Drucker (1909-2005) Peter Drucker, often called the Father of Management, was primarily interested in society, communities within society, and polity according to A Functioning Society published in 2003. Drucker (2003) posits that management is a knowledge-based social function that influences society and economy (p.11). His first book involving corporations was Concepts of Corporation in 1946 though he did not use the phrase Corporate Social Responsibility (Drucker, 2003). Drucker was raised in Austria and went to Germany for both work and education (2003). He was introduced to the issues of a totalitarian dictatorship when Hitler came to power. Drucker worked for a newspaper in Frankfurt at the time and faced first-hand the censorship of the Nazi party. His experiences brought forth the book The End of Economic Man (1938-1939) and later The Future of Industrial Man (1942). Peter Drucker saw that “social institutions” were “power centers within industrial society” (Drucker, 2003, p.11). Later, Drucker focused on the influence management has on the individual worker as well as on individuals themselves. Unlike Wesley, Drucker supported social change through and with organizations in balance with individuals. Concepts he created teach managers to be people-oriented instead of task-oriented and to consider investment in workers to be a pillar of good business. He found that many organizations had the primary drive of financial stability. Though a business must be stable monetarily to be a functioning organization, it is not the only pillar of ‘good business.’ Rao (2021) reminds us that Drucker posits that “people are our greatest asset” (p.6). Time must be spent on investing in employee development. Another example of how Drucker viewed the balance between society/organizations and the individual is the concept of status and function, a term he learned combing the library in Hamburg, Germany at the age of 18 (Drucker, 2003). Status and function is defined by Drucker in terms of how an individual fits within a social group and what that person’s purpose is independent of any social labels or groupings (Drucker, 1942). This is because status defines where an individual fits within the group as an in-group or out-group member and the role given to that person. Function is how an individual sees themselves with respect to life’s purpose and whether the purpose of society fits within a person’s individual viewpoint. There is a symbiotic relationship between status and function (Drucker, 2003). Status and function can be self-defined or group-generated and is tied to social responsibility and discussed above as CSR. Drucker's emphasis on integrity, social responsibility, and ethical behavior ties leadership decisions and actions in these areas to an organization’s sustainability. Drucker points out the need for sustainability in Managing the Non-Profit Organization and the necessity to balance mission, vision, financial stability, resources and marketing (Drucker 1990). One can conclude that these are of equal importance to a for-profit organization as well. Connections between Wesley and Drucker Related to CSR Wesley focused on “slavery, economics and ethics, his work on aid to the poor, prison reform, and education beyond his scriptural teachings” (Lunn, 2010). Drucker held that individuals and organizations needed to lead the standards of society. These two activists spoke to the issues of the time, and people paid attention. Average people began considering the strategies suggested to alleviate concerns, prevent future negatively impacting events, and create better work environments. These gurus of social responsibility pointed out deficits, gave direction, and inspired others. We stakeholders of today’s society need to continue this work. Uses for CSR Today As we continue to shift from the industrial age to knowledge-based work and work in the service industries, we need to maintain balanced organizations that consider social problems in similar regard as they do business issues. Activities that have been categorized with CSR include organizational ethics, environmental issues, philanthropy, ethical responsibility, charitable global giving, community engagement, economic responsibility, and healthy workplace culture (IBM, 2023). I can see connections between these categories and both Drucker and Wesley. Through similar methods, these social reformers created a sustainable societal norm that created a better environment for individuals in the workplace and society as a whole. We need to maintain these ideals by fostering differences in management and organizational climate and culture. Currently, CSR has been associated with job satisfaction, high performance, and employee trust within organizations that are engaged in social responsibility activities (Brieger, 2019). The benefits of CSR go beyond creating equitable workspace. How do we keep these positive behaviors in the forefront of future organizations and constituents? Sustainability Wesley focused on making safe and ethical workplace conditions a priority. Drucker posits that organizations must measure how well they create and maintain work cultures that support the needs of all stakeholders, status and function, financial stability, innovation, and environmental impact. Organizations that create and maintain a focus on CSR topics such as healthy workplace and environmental issues promote a better society while keeping clientele who share the same interests and concerns. This concept of social responsibility goes far beyond corporations. It lends to sustainable organizations. My question is, who will make sure these concepts are carried into the future? We will. References Brieger, S. A. (2019). Too Much of a Good Thing? On the Relationship Between CSR and Employee Work Addiction. Journal of Business Ethics. Springer Nature B.V. Drucker, P. (2003). A Functioning Society. Transaction Publishers Drucker, P. (1990, 2010). Managing the Non-Profit Organization. Harper-Collins, e-books. Drucker, P. (1942). The future of industrial man. Translation Publishers GCAH, Jan 2025. General Commission on Archives & History: John Westley. https://gcah.org/biographies/john-wesley/ Google Search (Jan, 2025). Definition of Corporate Social Responsibility IBM, Dec 2023. What is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)? Found at https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/corporate-social- responsibility#:~:text=Corporate%20social%20responsibility%20is%20the,impact%20is %20measured%20or%20quantified. Murray Norris, C. (2017). Chapter 9 Education, Welfare, and Missions. Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198796411.003.0010 Nutt, P.C. & Wilson, D. C. (2010). Handbook of decision making. Wiley-Blackwell Lunn, J. (2010). Religion & Liberty: John Wesley's Social Ethic. 3.6. Action University. Rao, M.S. (2021). Peter Drucker’s Principles, Philosophies, and Practices. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership. 14.2. Swaminathan, S. (2009). Wesley, John (1703–1791), Methodism, and Social Reform. 1-2. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198073.wbierp1559 Vickers, J. A. (2003). John Wesley at 300. Historian, (79), 28-33. https://2q21e1s6o-mp01-y- https-www-proquest-com.proxy.lirn.net/scholarly-journals/john-wesley-at-300/docview/275037337/se-2
Show More
Share by: