Peter Drucker's ontology: understanding business relationships and networks

Abstract

Purpose: The paper considers the underlying premises of Peter Drucker's managerial writing and focuses on three main aspects: humans and relations, an evolutionary perspective and a pragmatic perspective. These ontological views are taken to a new level and applied to explore the world of networked firms.Design/Methodology/Approach: The paper is a conceptual contribution based on a literature study by the author.Findings: An examination of Drucker's ontology shows how his world perspective led him to an understanding of managers and organizations. The three elements of his ontology discussed are applied to research in business networks. Research implications:Argues for research on human perspectives of business relationships and networks; particularly of issues such as time, timing, partner integration, relational and network embeddedness, network sensing, network horizons, and network identity. Practical implications:Drucker's ontological view enabled him to make pronouncements that cut through to the truth of reality in our organizationally shaped world. Understanding Drucker's ontology provides managers with ways to deepen their understanding of an individual's role at every level within an organization. Originality/Value of paper:The linking of Drucker's ontology to research on new ways to organize and manage networked firms opens areas of future research.

Economic sociology and the ARA interaction model

“…Can be chosen by some, but mostly prescribed for others. An important relational externality Akerlof and Kranton (2000); Cerulo (1997); Thomas (1996); Gleitman (1996); Tajfel and Turner (1979);Brown (1986;Wetherell (1996) La Rocca (2011); Anderson et al (1994); Medlin (2004); Holmen and Pedersen (2003); Ford et al (2002); Medlin (2012)…”

“…This should motivate managers to transcend their transaction and relationshipmarketing understanding of business relationships and networks. As Medlin's (2012) recent focus on the "human perspective of relationships and networks" shows, the actors involved in business relationships should become human and be managed accordingly -not just at the individual but also at organizational and network levels. Managing business actors as "humans" should build on the acknowledgement of economic actors as "socially constructed entities" (Smelser and Swedberg, 2005, p. 4).…”

Maintaining business relationships: resilience through institutional work

“…This type of simultaneous work for and against an institution has only recently received attention in the institutional work literature, and according to Lawrence, Leca and Zilber (2013, p. 1029), “we need to attend to the experience of individuals as they engage in and are subjected to, institutional work”. Our focus on the key individuals and their interactions and interpretations of the business relationship opens an alternative way to approach institutionalization through the mundane everyday activities performed in the relationship (Medlin, 2012; Goffman, 1983; Guercini et al , 2014).…”

“…We disagree with this line of thinking as the only way to understand business relationship institutionalization. In contrast, we consider humans more capable of navigating business relationships to the desired direction (Medlin, 2012; Guercini et al , 2014; Rindova et al , 2009). To fully explain our argument, we proceed with a theoretical discussion related to institutional work.…”

Conceptual Framework on Resource Availability and Performance of MSE in Africa: A Case of Jinja District, Uganda

“…Evidently, business operating in premises assigned by government agencies had better chances of survival compared to those set ups in privately rented premises Leza et al (2016). According to Drucker (1954), as cited in Medlin (2012), availability of resources (human, financial and material) is very important because of its role in the attainment of organizational or business objectives.…”