11–20 of 133 posts
I'm not a Marxist BTW. I just think we are slowly evolving toward a society in which equals interact economically on equal terms.
First management theorists or first recorded management theorists? I feel like there are similarly (or nearly as) advanced cultures in this approximate era for whom we unfortunately have significantly less recorded material - and often what we do have was created by other civilizations (such as Rome itself or Greek city-states) who interacted with said people. These persons surely had theories of management for their…
> These persons surely had theories of management for their assets, which undoubtedly would include slaves and indentured servants. Yes, exactly. I'm sure the Egyptian pharaohs who built the pyramids a thousand years earlier had some theories regarding management.
I find the concept of this article not just pointless but somewhat obnoxious in projecting a conceptual parallel between roman aristocratic slave holders and modern employment relations. Both have their pathologies but we shouldn't blend them into one category imo.
> Most Romans ... thought cruelty to slaves was shocking
but also
> did not hesitate to punish their slaves, and to punish brutally. Floggings, crucifixions, torture by means of the rack and breaking the legs with iron bars would all be carried out in public to maximise the impact on the observers. Or a slave’s children might be sold off, never to be seen again.
... so, not that shocking?
This is a confused article. > Most Romans ... thought cruelty to slaves was shocking but also > did not hesitate to punish their slaves, and to punish brutally. Floggings, crucifixions, torture by means of the rack and breaking the legs with iron bars would all be carried out in public to maximise the impact on the observers. Or a slave’s children might be sold off, never to be seen again. ... so, not that shocking?
Rome had cruelty laws for how to treat slaves. I'm not an expert but perhaps if the slave did their job then floggings, torture, and crucifixion were illegal, but were allowed if they broke the law.
People will look back and probably think US execution is terrible and cruel while currently, a large portion thinks its acceptable. Heck, they may think we're cruel for eating meat or running over crickets with our tractors. We just don't know what lense we'll be judged by yet. We should afford the same understanding for past peoples while not condoning it.
What a strange piece. Putting the reader in the master's perspective certainly is a choice. It fails to investigate that almost anyone in its ostensible audience of corporate managers is both a "master" and "slave" (mangers have managers). An incredibly grim takeaway as well. It acknowledges the exploitation in both systems, but doesn't ask you to do anything about it or interrogate it deeper. There's no way that you…
I can see how this could be offensive or distasteful but from a purely academic point of view it's interesting to see that a master-slave relationship was more than a contractual relationship. Leadership was just as important in that relationship as it is in a manager-employee relationship. And although we have since abolished slavery, we will always need leadership skills.
If your mind is open and is able to understand nuance (able to keep similar concepts separate amid complexity) then you can learn from history and take lessons from the masters (bad joke).
/joke
What a strange piece. Putting the reader in the master's perspective certainly is a choice. It fails to investigate that almost anyone in its ostensible audience of corporate managers is both a "master" and "slave" (mangers have managers). An incredibly grim takeaway as well. It acknowledges the exploitation in both systems, but doesn't ask you to do anything about it or interrogate it deeper. There's no way that you…
There are some interesting incentives and punitive practices that come into play, but I don't think they're applicable to the comparison being made.