과학, 인문학 그리고 경영학 : 미국의 경영대학 발전사에서 얻는 교훈 = Science, the Humanities, and Management : Lessons from the History of American Business Schools

국문 초록 (Abstract)

최근 한국의 기업들 사이에 ‘열풍’이라는 단어가 부족할 정도로 인문학에 대한 관심이
고조되고 있다. 민감한 경영학자들은 이 현상을 호기심 어린 눈으로 바라보겠지만
대부분의 경영학자들은 이를 무관심으로 대하고 있다. 한국의 기업들은 왜 갑자기
인문학에 관심을 보이는가? 이 현상은 다른 나라의 기업들에서도 발견되는 보편적 경향
일까? 이러한 질문들에 대한 답을 찾기 위해 이 논문은 근대적 경영학이 발원한 미국으로
시각을 돌려 미국의 경영대학들이 인문학과 역사적으로 어떤 관계를 맺어왔는지, 그
과정에 영향을 미친 요소들은 무엇이었는지, 그리고 최근의 발전상은 어떤 것인지 등을
살펴보았다. 그 결과 19세기 말 경영학이 대학사회에 최초로 진입하던 시기에는 경영
대학을 대학사회의 일원으로 위치시키는 문제, 즉 정당성 확보의 문제가 매우 중요
했음을 알 수 있었다. 그래서 당시의 경영대학들은 기업 경영을 전문직(profession)으로
격상시킨다는 명분을 전면에 내세웠는데, 당시의 전문직이란 전문적 지식 이외에도
공익을 수호하는 책임의식과 윤리적 판단능력을 보유하는 직업군을 의미하였다. 따라서
최초의 경영대학들은 정체성 확보의 중요 방편으로서 인문학을 강조할 수밖에 없었다.
그러나 오래지 않아 경영대학에서 인문학이 점하는 위상은 점점 쇠퇴하였다. 특히
Carnegie 재단과 Ford 재단이 미국 경영학의 실태를 조사한 보고서들이 1959년에 나란히
출간되었는데, 이때를 기점으로 해서 경영학은 과학으로서의 정체성을 확보하는 작업에
몰두하였고 인문학적 요소의 상대적 중요성도 크게 감소하기 시작하였다. 그러나 과학
으로서의 경영학은 그 후 50년이 넘는 기간 동안 그렇게 큰 성과를 산출하지 못했고,
경영학계는 유용한 지식을 축적하지 못했다. 그리하여 학계에는 현대경영학의 위기,
혹은 쓸모없음(irrelevance)을 지적하는 경영학자들이 적지 않고, 산업계에서도 경영학의
유용성을 의심하는 시각이 광범위하게 유포되어 있다. 이러한 시대적 상황에서 경영학의
위기를 극복하기 위해서는 인문학이 도입되어야 한다는 주장이 다시 등장하고 있는데,
현재 한국 기업들이 몰두하고 있는 인문학 열풍도 이런 흐름 중의 하나로 볼 수 있다.
그러나 그 실상을 자세히 들여다보면 많은 문제점들이 발견된다. 이 논문은 한국 기업들의
인문학 수용의 현 상태에 대한 진단, 바람직한 방향, 그리고 이를 위해 한국의 경영학계가
수행해야 할 과제들을 제안하는 것으로 마무리된다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

During the last decade or so, many Korean firms have enthusiastically pursued the idea of using various disciplines of the humanities (i.e., philosophy, history, literature, and art) to boost corporate performance. For example, many firms are offering various in-house, humanities-related lectures to their employees, and in this milieu, outside training and education organizations and some humanities scholars are also busy seeking opportunities in this burgeoning market. So in Korean companies, especially large ones, corporate lectures that cover various humanities topics such as ancient history or the works and thoughts of great thinkers (e.g., Socrates, Goethe, Confucius, or Michelangelo) are very common. Books that try to bridge the humanities and business world, however clumsy and without elegance they may be, are also extremely popular among various
ranks of Korean businessmen. As bizarre as they may seem, on a surface level these developments may well be viewed as the arrival of a new management paradigm in Korea. As a matter of fact, these developments, often dubbed ‘humanities fever’, are affecting all of Korean society, not just the business world. However, most of the management scholars and educators in Korean business schools are silent on these curious developments. Given the long-standing coevolution of the business world and business schools, this silence is unusual and awaits plausible explanations. This paper thus raises the following questions: Why are Korean firms so fervently trying to embrace the humanities while management scholars pay little attention to them? Have Korean firms become humanized through these endeavors? And, can these developments be observed globally and thus signify some fundamental changes, or are they just peculiar to Korean companies? To satisfactorily answer these
questions, this paper begins by examining the history of the early years of American business schools and trying to gauge the nature and transformation of the relationship that the humanities have maintained with the business world. Since American business schools are widely emulated in many parts of the world and Korea is no exception, it was expected that understanding how the humanities were assimilated by American business schools and the trajectory of that relationship over the years would provide insights and a frame of reference by which
the developments in Korea can be comprehended. The findings can be summarized as follows: First, the humanities played a very important role in the formative stages of American business schools. In particular, the establishment of business schools on university campuses was pioneered by such institutions as Wharton, Tuck and Harvard Business School, which actively mobilized the ‘professionalization of businessmen’discourse as a rationale for their inclusion during a time when most university constituents were quite hostile about the idea.
As the humanities were considered a necessary ingredient of the professionalization project, liberal arts education was heavily emphasized and, in the case of the Wharton School for example, historical approaches were deeply incorporated into the very core of business education. Second, the status of the humanities vis-à-vis science began to diminish rapidly as the business world became increasingly uncomfortable with humanitarian values and perspectives. Thus, business schools turned away from the humanities and began to emphasize the scientific aspects of managerial practices. This trend persisted during the first part of the 20th century and, in 1959, it culminated in Ford and Carnegie Foundation research reports on the state of business education. Since then, research in business schools has become a quasi-scientific activity and as a consequence management education has become detached from the real world.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
• Ⅱ. 미국 경영대학의 성립과 인문학 수용의 변천사
• Ⅲ. 경영학의 위기와 인문학적 전환의 필요성
• Ⅳ. 결론을 대신하여: 한국 기업들의 인문학 열풍에 대한 제언
• 참고문헌

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 최성환, "지식의 지평2: 인문정신과 인문학" 103-122, 2007

2 박헌준, "중국 경영사상에 관한 역사적 문헌연구" 한국경영학회 32 (32): 181-201, 2003

3 파이낸셜 뉴스, "정용진, “스마트 시대, 읽고 듣고 토론하며 ‘생각의 근육’ 키워라”"

4 삼성경제연구소, "인문학이 경영을 바꾼다" 818 : 1-20, 2011

5 김영식, "인문학과 과학 : 과학기술 시대인문학의 반성과 과제" 돌베개 2009

6 한국일보, "이공계만 찾는 기업들… 취업률 0인 인문계 학과 전국 402곳"

7 유태영, "위기의 자본주의: 경영과 조직 이론에 관한 새로운 이해" 한국인사조직학회 21 (21): 195-227, 2013

8 여운승, "역사적 관점에서 본 기업이론의전개과정" 한국경영학회 28 (28): 539-564, 1999

9 서동진, "싸우는 인문학" 반비 17-26, 2013

10 배종석, "서론 : 경영 패러다임 변화의 현상과 해석" 한국인사조직학회 21 (21): 1-34, 2013

11 윤석철, "삶의 정도" 위즈돔하우스 2010

12 이태수, "삶, 반성, 인문학: 인문학의 인식론적 구조" 태학사 5-20, 2003

13 장경렬, "삶, 반성, 인문학: 인문학의 인식론적 구조" 태학사 121-153, 2003

14 정정훈, "불온한 인문학: 인문학과 싸우는 인문학" 휴머니스트 출판그룹 91-124, 2011

15 김혜숙, "멋진 과거 세계와 신세계 사이의인문학" 한국학술협의회 (창간) : 88-102, 2006

16 윤석철, "기업의 흥망을 설명하는 경영학이론 : 역사학과 경영학의 학제적 접근" 한국경영학회 23 (23): 57-70, 1994

17 이재혁, "거울 앞에 선 근대: 어느 사회과학자의 소묘" 한국학술협의회 (창간) : 103-126, 2006

18 Thompson, P., "Work organizations : A critical introduction" Macmillan 1995

19 Madsbjerg, C., "Why the humanities need to be saved" 2013

20 Broehl, W. G., "Tuck and Tucker : The origin of the graduate business school" University Press of New England 1999

21 Micklethwait, J., "The witch doctors : Making sense of the management gurus" Times Books 1996

22 Chandler, A. D., "The visible hand" Belknap Press 1977

23 Snow, C. P., "The two cultures : A second look" Cambridge University Press 1963

24 Clark, P., "The treatment of history in organization studies:Towards a historic turn?" 46 (46): 331-352, 2004

25 Baritz, L., "The servants of power: A history of the use of social science in American industry" Wesleyan University Press 1960

26 Sass, S. A., "The pragmatic imagination: A history of the Wharton School, 1881-1981" University of Pennsylvania Press 1982

27 O’Connor, E. S., "The politics of management thought : A case study of the Harvard Business School and the human relations school" 24 : 117-131, 1999

28 Kanigel, R., "The one best way : Fredrick Winslow Taylor and the enigma of efficiency" Viking 1997

29 Lens, S., "The labor wars : From the Molly Maguires to the sit downs" Haymarket Books 2009

30 Veblen, T., "The higher learning in America : A memorandum on the conduct of universities by business men" A. M. Kelley 1918

31 Carnegie, A., "The empire of business" Cosimo Classics 2007

32 Pierson, F. C., "The education of American businessmen : A study of universitycollege programs in business administration" McGraw-Hill 1959

33 Allen, F. L., "The big change: America transforms itself, 1900-1950" Harper 1952

34 Byrne, J. A, "The best B-schools : Is research in the Ivory Tower fuzzy, irrelevant, pretentious?" 29 (29): 62-66, 1990

35 Burrell, G., "Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis" Heineman 1980

36 Clark, K. A., "Social science’s ‘physics envy.’"

37 Walsh, J. P., "Social issues and management : Our lost cause found" 29 (29): 859-881, 2003

38 Peknik, P. J., "Shaping the future of business education: relevance, rigor, and life preparation" Palgrave Macmillan 19-25, 2013

39 Daniels, J. D., "Relevance in international-business research : A need for more linkages" 22 (22): 177-186, 1991

40 Hall, R., "Professionalization and bureaucratization" 33 (33): 92-104, 1968

41 Freidson, E., "Professionalism, the third logic : On the practice of knowledge" University of Chicago Press 2001

42 Chambers, C, "Physics envy: Do ‘hard’sciences hold the solution to the replication crisis in psychology?" 2014

43 Leblebici, H., "Organizations in time:History, theory, methods" Oxford University Press 2014

44 Walsh, J. P., "On the relationship between research and practice : Debate and reflections" 16 (16): 128-154, 2007

45 Varadarajan, P. R., "Musing on relevance and rigor of scholarly research in marketing" 31 (31): 368-376, 2003

46 Zald, M. N., "More fragmentation? Unfinished business in linking the social sciences and the humanities" 41 : 251-261, 1996

47 Gillespie, R., "Manufacturing knowledge : A history of the Hawthorne experiments" Cambridge University Press 1991

48 Abrahamson, E., "Management fashion : Lifecycles, triggers, and collective learning processes" 44 (44): 708-740, 1999

49 Collins, D., "Management fads and buzzwords : Critical-practical perspectives" Routledge 2000

50 Gibson, J. W., "Management fads : Emergence, evolution, and implications for managers" 15 (15): 122-133, 2001

51 Flyvbjerg, B., "Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again" Cambridge University Press 2007

52 Daniel, C. A., "MBA : The first century" Bucknell University Press 1998

53 Braverman, H., "Labor and monopoly capital : The degradation of work in the twentieth century" Monthly Review Press 1974

54 Dubofsky, M., "Industrialism and the American worker, 1865-1920" H. Davidson 1920

55 Warrell, H, "Humanities graduates shine in UK business world, study shows"

56 Bennis, W. G., "How business schools lost their way" 83 (83): 98-104, 2005

57 Gordon, R. A., "Higher education for business" Columbia University Press 1959

58 Bramel, D., "Hawthorne, the myth of the docile worker, and class bias in psychology" 36 (36): 867-878, 1981

59 Khurana, R., "Harvard Business Case" 2005

60 Khurana, R., "From higher aims to hired hands: The social transformation of business schools and the unfulfilled promise of management as a profession" Princeton University Press 2007

61 Bensabat, I., "Empirical research in information systems : The practice of relevance" 23 (23): 3-16, 1999

62 Bruce, K., "Elton Mayo and the deification of human relations" 32 (32): 383-405, 2011

63 Ferraro, F., "Economics language and assumptions : How theories can become self-fulfilling" 30 (30): 8-24, 2005

64 Barley, S. R., "Design and devotion : Surges of rational and normative ideologies of control in managerial discourse" 37 (37): 363-399, 1992

65 Birkinshaw, J., "Debating the future of management research" 51 (51): 38-55, 2014

66 Cheit, E. F., "Business schools and their critics" 27 (27): 43-62, 1985

67 De George, R. T., "Business as a humanity" Oxford University Press 11-26, 1994

68 Green, R. M., "Business as a humanity" Oxford University Press 27-32, 1994

69 Ghoshal, S., "Bad management theories are destroying good management practices" 4 (4): 75-91, 2005

70 McGahan, A., "Academic research that matters to managers : On zebras, dogs, lemmings, hammers, and turnips" 50 (50): 748-753, 2007

71 Metzger, W. P., "Academic freedom in the age of the university" Columbia University Press 1961

72 Agarwal, R., "A Faustian bargain? The growth of management and its relationship with related disciplines" 50 (50): 1304-1322, 2007