Management, Theology and Moral Points of View: Towards an Alternative to the Conventional Materialist‐Individualist Ideal‐Type of Management*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
abstract Weber's (1958 ) argument suggests that there are four ideal‐types of management, and that conventional management is underpinned by a moral‐point‐of‐view associated with a secularized Protestant Ethic, which can be characterized by its relatively high emphasis on materialism (e.g. productivity, efficiency and profitability) and individualism (e.g. competitiveness). Weber calls on management scholars and practitioners to become aware of their own moral‐points‐of‐view, and to develop management theory and practice that de‐emphasizes materialism and individualism. Our paper responds to this challenge, as we draw from an Anabaptist‐Mennonite moral‐point‐of‐view to develop a radical ideal‐type of management that is characterized by its emphasis on servant leadership, stakeholding, job crafting and sustaincentrism. Implications for management theory and practice are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".