The Gift of Professional Maturity by Arthur G. Bedeian
The main idea of Bedeian in the text ‘The gift of professional maturity’ is that the history of management studies should be learnt by all the graduate management students by dint of its value. Bedeian sources the title of the article from a phrase coined by E.G. Boring, a historian from one of his writings. According to Bedeian, studying the history of a discipline is essential and in this regard, Bedeian goes ahead to come up with a number of lessons that can be learned from the same. Lesson number one includes the avoidance of what he calls ‘pathetic fallacy’. Secondly is consuming knowledge received in an informed manner and third is looking for sources that are original. Finally we have at number four facts being wrong in most times and lastly the past and its special advantage.
By dint of being a Boyd Professor as well as a Louisiana state university professor of management, Bedeian’s piece can be said to be reliable and in that respect, his standing as a professional I the field of management helps to enhance the reliability as well as validity of the article. It can be noted that the author in this case comes up with an argument that can be said to be logical and in that regard, his extensive review of literature is largely impressive and it also goes a long way to enhance the reliability of the article. The lessons to be learnt in this case are brought out clearly.
However, the author fails to review recent or modern literature extensively and this can be said to be one of the author’s undoing. According to Badke (2004), over reliance on texts written which appear to be older may interfere with the practicability of the concept under consideration. Most of the literature the author reviews is based on texts written pre 1980s and this raised questions about the applicability of his principles in the modern day and age. However, it should be noted that though the literature review is not current, it remains to be largely relevant and reliable. Similarly, the author’s use of older texts should and cannot be taken to interfere with the validity of the conclusion. Hence towards that end, the conclusion can be said to be rightly valid based on the substance of the paper.
In the need therefore, it can be said that Bedeian is successful in putting his points across. In that regard, I completely agree with the author as far as the relevance of insistence on the history of management studies.
It is also important to note that the discussion Bedeian brings about in this article creates a wide avenue for a further study in this area. Hence his conclusion invites other researchers to carry out more research on the appropriateness of including a management course history in the curricula of graduate management especially at a higher level (professional). According to Kreitner (2006), who supports the argument put forward by Bedeian, management has witnessed commendable evolution both as a science and as an art. He hence argues that to disregard this evolution in the study of management courses is undesirable and ill informed. In conclusion, it can be noted that the historical development of the management discipline is still relevant in the modern management theory.
Badke, W.B. (2004). Research strategies: finding your way through the information fog.
Kreitner, R. (2006). Management. Cengage Learning