Lyndall Urwick (1891–1983) British management consultant
Source: 1940s, The Elements of Business Administration, 1943, p. 53
Chandler commented: To illustrate more clearly these lines of authority, McCallum drew up a detailed chart-certainly one of the earliest organization charts in an American business enterprise. (p. 103)
Source: Report of the Superintendent of the New York and Erie Railroad to the Stockholders (1856), p. 40. Partly cited in: Chandler (1977, p. 102)
Lyndall Urwick (1891–1983) British management consultant
Source: 1940s, The Elements of Business Administration, 1943, p. 53
“The superior in one group is a subordinate in the next group, and so on through the organization.”
Rensis Likert (1903–1981) American statistician
Source: New patterns of management, (1961), p. 105.
Joan Woodward (1916–1971) British sociologist
Source: Management and technology, Problems of Progress Industry, 1958, p. 30
Kenneth Burke (1897–1993) American philosopher
Source: Towards a Better Life (1966), p. 9
Rosa Luxemburg (1871–1919) Polish Marxist theorist, socialist philosopher, and revolutionary
Leninism or Marxism? (1904)
Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901–1972) austrian biologist and philosopher
Source: General System Theory (1968), 3. Some System Concepts in Elementary Mathematical Consideration, p. 68 cited in: T.E. Weckowicz (1989). Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901-1972): A Pioneer of General Systems Theory. Working paper Feb 1989. p. 2
Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856–1915) American mechanical engineer and tennis player
Source: Principles of Scientific Management, 1911, p. 64.
Joseph Stalin (1879–1953) General secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
Report to the Seventeenth Party Congress on the Work of the Central Committee of the C.P.S.U. (B.) https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1934/01/26.htm (January 26, 1934) <br class="br">Stalin's speeches, writings and authorised interviews <br class="br">Context: Still others think that war should be organised by a "superior race," say, the German "race," against an "inferior race," primarily against the Slavs; that only such a war can provide a way out of the situation, for it is the mission of the "superior race" to render the "inferior race" fruitful and to rule over it. Let us assume that this queer theory, which is as far removed from science as the sky from the earth, let us assume that this queer theory is put into practice. What may be the result of that? It is well known that ancient Rome looked upon the ancestors of the present-day Germans and French in the same way as the representatives of the "superior race" now look upon the Slav races. It is well known that ancient Rome treated them as an "inferior race," as "barbarians," destined to live in eternal subordination to the "superior race," to "great Rome", and, between ourselves be it said, ancient Rome had some grounds for this, which cannot be said of the representatives of the "superior race" of today. (Thunderous applause.) But what was the upshot of this? The upshot was that the non-Romans, i. e., all the "barbarians," united against the common enemy and brought Rome down with a crash. The question arises: What guarantee is there that the claims of the representatives of the "superior race" of today will not lead to the same lamentable results? What guarantee is there that the fascist literary politicians in Berlin will be more fortunate than the old and experienced conquerors in Rome? Would it not be more correct to assume that the opposite will be the case?