The Getting of Wisdom

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014

Essentially, management and philosophy contribute each other in ever aspects and this is creating a managerial philosophy since managers face uncertainties during their decision making process in every day. Managers could not realize their creativity without any philosophical thought and questioning (Moseley,2010). Philosophy is a love of wisdom, however , wisdom could be determined according to what individuals think and what they see. Unwise people, close their minds, emotions and senses, they prefer not to observe ,feel and think (McKenna and David, 2005).Wisdom implies combination of knowledge and thoughts around predetermined principles.Wisdom includes both rational (scientific) intellectual practices and mental processes.In that case, our vision and related strategies explain meaning of our lives and how we could spend such life. Human beings are trying to make sense the world around them with limited knowledge , struggle to create a synergy between the mind and character and to balance both sides well being and truths (McKenna and David, 2005). Todays managers are obliged to make strategic decisions in every day and during this process they analyze their immediate environments and look at their personal backgrounds.Some of them reap the rewards of positive returns , on the other hand, the others stand to failures (Malan and Kriger, 1998). Regarding to this difference, we will be aware of some latent concept " wisdom" , that has not been analyzed in the management and organization literature, especially in leadership studies until now. Even this concept has not been discussed in the psychology literature until 1980s,but both disciplines has just begun to analyze it recently (McKenna,Rooney and Kenworthy, 2013). Although many researches in this field are interested in developing a valid definition but there is no agreement on the precise definition of wisdom (Schmit,Muldoon and Pounders,2012). However, definition efforts made for twenty years could be considered constructive in clarifying old but newly emerged concept. Besides, the point of multidimensional construct of wisdom is supported by many researchers.(Webster, 2003). Wisdom is referred to the top of an inner voice about human nature and the tools leading to the attainment of life objectives (Baltes and Staudinger, 2000). In other words,wisdom represents an idea about complicated and uncertain situations such as cognitive functioning, intellectual development, life planning and management. It denotes a process rather than a specific situation(Ardelt, 2003; 2004). Wisdom dimensions on which there is an agreement includes practical, reflective, openness to experience, interactional tendency, tolerance for ambiguities, ethical sensitiveness and having an experience (Munro, 2012; Schmit vd. 2012; Webster, 2003).Thus, this study aims to gain holistic perspective with explicit and implicit assumptions regarding wisdom by using different definitions made before. Also, this study aims to suggest clues on how to develop wisdom and how to apply it into the management field, i.e managerial wisdom.This descriptive research tries to light the way of new applications of "wisdom" rather than measuring managerial wisdom levels of individuals via empirical research. Main research question of this study is whether it is sufficient to have a technical knowledge in any field in order to be successful.

2011

Wisdom is a little discussed and poorly understood human faculty in the dominant discourse that pervades today's management practices (Brague 2003; McKenna et al. 2000). Modern managerial discourse is very much a product of a dominant discourse characterised by the ideologies of neo-liberalism, including rational managerialism, and of positivist science incorporating methodological reductionism. We call this technocratic discourse (McKenna et al. 2000), and argue that it privileges rational scientific method and technical knowledge in managerial problem-solving. It is not surprising that managing and utilizing knowledge has been theorised largely within this hegemonic technocratic discourse. Nonetheless, it is true that subjective and imaginative or transcendent mental processes, which we argue are critical to managerial wisdom and success, do occur in management theory and practice. It is also true that there is a considerable body of research in the sociology of science that demonstrates the importance and unavoidability of these 'other' forms of intellection in the practice of innovative science (Kuhn 1970). Why is it, then, that wisdom, the highest form of knowing, is not accorded the same status as rational, objective knowledge in management science? Although not expressly referring to these ideological and discursive features of contemporary managerial discourse, management theorists such as Mintzberg (2000) and Srivastva et al (1998) have criticised the lack of wisdom-based theory and practice in contemporary orthodox management. Nonetheless, a small number of

Journal of Management & Organization, 2015

This paper reports on an exploratory investigation into the concept of managerial wisdom. Six senior managers from diverse and large organisations in New Zealand were interviewed about their conception of managerial wisdom. The findings show that senior managers have a practical and positive conception of wisdom consisting of four factors: experience and knowledge, emotional intelligence, mentorship, and deliberation and consultation. The findings show that concepts of ‘spirituality’, ‘religiosity’, and, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, ‘ethics’, are all absent from the participants’ descriptions of wise managers. A tentative definition of managerial wisdom is proposed based on these findings as well as an explanation for the absence of ethics. As interest in wisdom and management continues to grow, this exploratory empirical research serves as a base for further research on the understanding and place of wisdom in management.

2019

This chapter returns to a more general discussion on the nature of wisdom in decision-making. It first reminds of the central thesis of the book: failures in decision-making or forecasting demonstrate often a lack of philosophical wisdom and associated capability for intuitive reflexivity. The rest of the chapter then discusses the ways to enhance and sustain wisdom among decision-makers and leaders. The first theme deals with the importance of gaining multifaceted experience from different sorts of situations as well as learning from a variety of organisational and societal experiences. This is then followed by a contemplation on the practical arrangements needed for management to adapt wisdom in its decision-making processes. Contemporary management education offers few possibilities for the participants to develop philosophical wisdom or intuitive sensitivity. Similarly, the broader university system is geared more towards productivity than lifelong nurturing of classical wisdom....

Management, 2020

This qualitative study was conducted to provide a model of managerial practical wisdom in public hospitals in order to define the components affecting managerial practical wisdom, development strategies and its results in hospitals based on interpretive paradigm using Grounded strategy and content analysis technique and based on paradigm model of Corbin and Strauss (2008). To this end, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 hospital managers, professors and experts in the field of health care management. The basic themes of the interviews during the data analysis and coding stage identify the central class, causal, contextual, intervening factors, strategies and consequences of managerial practical wisdom in the form of a paradigm model and finally to create Grounded theory about managerial practical wisdom in these hospitals. Accordingly, the dimensions and components of practical wisdom among the managers of the mentioned hospitals were cognitive abilities and managerial competencies, factors affecting its development including individual factors (personal experiences, personality pattern, and individual values) and organizational factors (spirituality at work, organizational values and organizational will).Moreover, the results of developing this type of wisdom among the mentioned managers can be categorized as individual results (mental and psychological well-being), organizational results (improving service quality, stakeholder satisfaction, organizational dynamism and agility, organizational vitality and organizational citizenship behaviors) and social outcomes (social capital development). These results can be used in the creation and development of quantitative tools for measuring managerial practical wisdom and as a qualitative complement in evaluating the quality of decisions among hospital managers.

Management Learning, 2014

Wisdom is not a possession one can acquire in its complete form from another, although one can delineate its characteristics and modes of learning as the authors reviewed in this first (overview) paper seek to do. Wisdom is the never-ending search for an emergent sense of rightness, wholeness, and well-being at the point where an individual’s inner experience, relational experience with others, systemic structures in the communal surround, and environmental dynamics coincide. In the second (in depth) paper I will attempt a theoretical outline of one way to conceptualize a wise organization.

Social Epistemology, 2007

Scandinavian Journal of Management, 2013

Please cite this article in press as: Izak, M. The foolishness of wisdom: Towards an inclusive approach to wisdom in organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management (2012), http://dx.