Work, Profit and Dignity. Towards Integrative Management
Fragment książki (Materiały konferencyjne)
MNiSW
5
spoza wykazu
| Status: | |
| Autorzy: | Mazur Barbara, Mazur Mateusz |
| Dyscypliny: | |
| Aby zobaczyć szczegóły należy się zalogować. | |
| Wersja dokumentu: | Drukowana | Elektroniczna |
| Język: | angielski |
| Strony: | 45 - 52 |
| Efekt badań statutowych | NIE |
| Materiał konferencyjny: | TAK |
| Nazwa konferencji: | 5th International Scientific Symposium“Economics, Business & Finance” |
| Skrócona nazwa konferencji: | PROCEEDINGS, 2019 |
| Termin konferencji: | 9 lipca 2019 do 13 lipca 2019 |
| Miasto konferencji: | Jurmala |
| Państwo konferencji: | ŁOTWA |
| Publikacja OA: | TAK |
| Licencja: | |
| Sposób udostępnienia: | Witryna wydawcy |
| Wersja tekstu: | Ostateczna wersja autorska |
| Czas opublikowania: | W momencie opublikowania |
| Abstrakty: | angielski |
| Purpose The main purpose ofthis article is to present two opposing paradigms of management -economic and humanistic -and to indicate the sources of their dissimilarities. In particular, the paper focuses on such notions as ‘labor’/’work’ and their definitions in economics and sociology -specifically -the notions of "economic action" and "non economic action", as they appear in scientific literature. MethodologyThis article is conceptual in its nature and aims to create a deeper understanding of economic and humanistic paradigms of management. During the research, a comparative analysis was carried out to sort out the differences in the definitions of labor in economics and sociology. The dialectical methods to understand the issue of labor as aneconomic and a non-economic action were applied.Findings The main thesis of the article is that the economy and sociology have different understanding of labor. This difference is significant and gives birth for two opposing paradigms of management. Inmodern economy the prevailing paradigm is the economic one. It treatslabor as ‘an economic action’while the humanistic paradigm draws attention to work asa‘non-economic action’. Thus, in a modern neoclassical view on labor, in which economic motive still dominates, the results are reduced to profit, and an acting agent is an individuum who does not perceivelabor as a complex and various action. Therefore, aintegrativemodel of management based on social theory of labor in economics is needed to consider such aspects of labor as creativity, individuality, and diversity. It is possible to change this economic view on labor through this integrative model. Social implicationsThe presented integrative approach including the objectives of economic management supplemented with the goals of humanistic management will ensure employees the achievement of material (financial) well-being and social well-being (associated with the creation of social relations based on respect for dignity). This will prevent negative organizational behavior such as mobbing, as well as phenomena such as burnout of individual employee.Originality/value The paper is the first conceptual paper investigating how the notion of labour in economics and sociology influence the economic and humanistic paradigm of management. |
