"A long tradition (in terms of the history of industrial capitalism) tells us that business management is to be considered as a proper subject for "scientific" study. One of the reasons supporting this is that management is based on a rationalistic attitude of mind: to achieve optimum use of resources with a view to maximisation of corporate profits. However, a much older tradition teaches us that it would be unwise, from the scientific and rationalistic standpoints, to assume that the business manager is motivated solely, or even essentially, by the goal of maximum profit. To illustrate and define the ideas we shall be developing in the main body of this paper, let us first take a brief look at a rather different field, often known as the "history of art criticism"...To come back to our starting point, it is clear that, while management can benefit from general techniques, applicable in companies of all kinds and themselves reflecting some changes in fashion, it must make allowance for the conditions prevailing within each particular company. This can be done only through experience, given that classroom tuition cannot cover the whole gamut of combinations of factors which have to be handled in practice. This means that a manager may perform brilliantly in one context but poorly in another (in the same way as some painters are at their best with portraits, others with landscapes, and so on). Consequently, one of the talents of the true manager lies in his ability to discover the working environment best suited to his particular gifts."
"In the first place, it might be said that the work has a more overall dimension that the decision: a decision may form part of a work (just as an iconographic motif may be an integral part of a painting). In that case, we must allow that the decisions are not necessarily of the "hard" type (i.e. based on strict economics), but may be of the "soft" variety we have discussed elsewhere. The work comprises perception of the need for something to be done at some point, evaluation of the right decision needed and, finally, implementation of that decision in practical form. There are of course many decision-theories which make due allowance for these three phases, but what we are more, particularly concerned with here is the extent to which each phase leaves room for personal initiative;
The creative work commences when its author starts to realise, on the basis of random information - chatting in the corridor, a glimpse of a computer print-out, a report by a consultant, something said at a staff meeting, etc -, that a specific action of some kind will be called for in due course. The creative manager -displaying one of his characteristics to which we come back later - feels that possibility in the form of an impulse, a violent desire for action. He then has to convey to other people all or part of his initial "intuition" - assuming, of course, that others will have to be involved. To this end, he may have to adapt his project to suit the corporate culture context, and relevant external trends (fashions) which could help to support it. In practice, this process is not so clear-nut and deliberate as thus expressed. Owing to this adaptation, the project may fit in with a prevailing "style" or reflect a local "taste" (cultural segment). One way in which he displays his personal talent is his skilful use of the factors in presence when mobilising his entourage to mete the project feasible. He may, for example, be led to formulate it in rationalistic terms as a means of demonstrating its advantages for the corporation, and this reformulation process may affect his original intention. In the same way, there have been times when external factors (patrons, critics) have affected the composition or the subject of a painting."