evolution of management theory essay

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Management’s Three Eras: A Brief History

• Rita McGrath

We’ve entered the age of empathy.

Organization as machine – this imagery from our industrial past continues to cast a long shadow over the way we think about management today. It isn’t the only deeply-held and rarely examined notion that affects how organizations are run. Managers still assume that stability is the normal state of affairs and change is the unusual state (a point I particularly challenge in The End of Competitive Advantage ). Organizations still emphasize exploitation of existing advantages , driving a short-term orientation that many bemoan. (Short-term thinking has been charged with no less than a chronic decline in innovation capability by Clayton Christensen who termed it “the Capitalist’s Dilemma.” ) Corporations continue to focus too narrowly on shareholders , with terrible consequences – even at great companies like IBM .

• Rita McGrath is a Professor at Columbia Business School and a globally recognized expert on strategy in uncertain and volatile environments. She is the author of The End of Competitive Advantage (Harvard Business Review Press), and most recently, Seeing Around Corners (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt).

History of Management Thought The Evolution of Management Theory

Upon completing this chapter, you should be able to: Explain the setting in which management theory first developed. Describe the ways in which a theory can be useful. Distinguish the scientific management school, the classical organization theory school, the behavioral school, and the management science school of management theory. Understand the historical context in which the systems approach, the contingency approach, and the dynamic engagement approach to management theory have developed. THE APOSTLE OF MASS PRODUC'TION Henry Ford and the Model have long been symbols of the industrial age. Even the subsequent growth and success of Ford's rival, General Motors, was due in large part to GM's need to find an innovative response to the Model T. In large measure, the managerial approach of Henry Ford, as well as his preferences in managerial theory, is a paradigm of much that was constructive and much that was imperfect‐‐in early approaches to management The son of a poor Irish immigrant, Henry Ford was born in 1863 and grew up on a farm in rural Michigan. He was fascinated by machinery and was quite skilled in repairing and improving almost any machine. He started the Ford Motor Company in 1903, and by 1908, the Model T was built. In the part of the century when automobiles were introduced, they were a symbol of status and wealth, the near exclusive province of the rich. Ford intended to change that: the Model T was to be for the masses‐‐a car that virtually anyone could afford. He understood that the only way to make such a car was to produce it at high volume and low cost. Ford focused his factory efforts on efficiency, mechanizing wherever possible, and breaking down tasks into their smallest components. One worker would perform the same task over and over, producing not a finished part, but one of the operations necessary for the production of the whole; the incomplete part would then be passed on to another worker, who would contribute a successive operation. Ford was able to achieve remarkable efficiencies: Although the first Model T took over 12 ½ hours to produce, only 12 years later, in 1920, Ford was producing one Model T every minute. By 1925, at the peak of the car's popularity, a Model T was rolling off Ford's assembly lines at the rate of one every 5 seconds. However, mechanization of the plant had some adverse effects. The faster Ford pushed his workers, the more disgruntled they became. In 1913, turnover was 380 percent, and Ford had to hire ten times more workers than he needed just to keep the line moving. In an action that at the time was unprecedented, Ford simply decided to double wages in order to get the best people and motivate

Related Papers

Radoslav Radonja

Henry Ford is widely known as the car constructor, the founder of the Ford Motor Company, the pioneer of mass production and the inventor of the moving assembly line, which many consider as the world’s greatest contribution to manufacturing. In 1908, Ford started production of the Ford Model T, which has become one of the most successful automobile in automotive history. But his contribution far surpasses these excellent accomplishments. What are not well known are Ford’s contributions to the just-in-time production, product platforming, mass customization, vertical integration, designs for maintainability, ergonomic considerations, employee management and other features of the manufacture. The Ford’s production system has become the characteristic American mode of production widespread all over the world.

RePEc: Research Papers in Economics

Ronald Jean Degen

Stefan J Link

Alfred D. Chandler’s theory of the managerial revolution culminates with the triumph of General Motors over the Ford Motor Company in the American automobile market of the 1920s. In Chandler’s view, the relative decline of Ford vis-à-vis General Motors was a direct consequence of the modernization of management under Alfred Sloan’s leadership in the face of Ford’s outdated managerial methods. Based on previously unexploited material from the Ford Motor Company Archives, and on Chandler’s research papers located at Harvard’s Baker Library, the paper revsits this pivotal episode of American business history. It makes three points. First, it suggests that Chandler’s account resembles an idealtypical Weberian modernization narrative. Second, it argues that Ford did not simply fail to modernize; rather, he advocated an illiberal business model very much at odds with the American corporate mainstream of the 1920s and 1930s. Finally, the paper traces the influence of Chandler’s collaboration on Sloan’s memoir, My Years With General Motors (1964), on his thinking about the GM/Ford episode in particular, and the managerial revolution at large. The paper ends by suggesting that politics, not managerial efficiency, played a larger role in the making of industrial strategy and structure than Chandler appreciated.

Best Paper Proceedings Academy of Management Boston

Giulio Ferrigno

A succession of technological discontinuities and dominant designs between automakers has historically epitomized the automotive industry. This is a complex and uncertain process of innovation in which the technology variable is intertwined with business decisions. In this regard, innovation scholars have questioned the conditions under which the succession of technological discontinuities and dominant designs can be successfully managed. This article joins the debate through a detailed historical analysis of the strategies pursued by Henry Ford from 1896 to 1914. The case study suggests that Ford dynamically managed this succession by pursuing five strategies: 1) experimentation with product architecture; 2) short-term partnerships for knowledge exchange; 3) the democratization of product architecture; 4) a transition from rational to emotional advertising; and 5) the vertical integration of an integrated moving assembly line. Drawing on these insights, we provide theoretical contributions and an original historical comparison of Ford Motor Company with Tesla, Inc.

Scandinavian Journal of History

Peter Swenson

Journal of Labor Economics

Daniel Raff

Prof. Ramanuj Ganguly

siti zulaiha

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization

David Gartman

RELATED PAPERS

Elżbieta Smolarkiewicz

Composite Structures

Dr. Ali Mehboob

Ola Helenius

Laura Hayman

Revista Da Spagesp

Marciana Farinha

Alejandra Alvarez cones

Dermatologic Therapy

Melike Ordu

Zagreb International Review of Economics and Business

Irena Raguž Krištić

Balance-Unbalance International Conference, Noosa, Queensland, Australia, 2013, 2013

Diego Bernini

布鲁克大学毕业证书 购买加拿大学历BU文凭学位证书成绩单

Animal Bioscience

Tehnicki Vjesnik-technical Gazette

Dragana Barjaktarevic

RSC Advances

Ahmed El-Fiqi

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science

Mamoun Filali

Revista brasileira de história da matemática

jose luiz Goldfarb

Ulster毕业证书 阿尔斯特大学UU毕业证

Yoram Bresler

Health Promotion International

William Mahan

Biological Psychiatry

Ziad Kronfol

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

The Evolution Of Management

Peter Ferdinand Drucker, one of the leading management gurus, said it best—“Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the…

Peter Ferdinand Drucker, one of the leading management gurus, said it best—“Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things”.

In any organization, teamwork and leadership act as catalysts for business success. The way someone manages their team or the entire workforce has a direct impact on the organization’s growth and profitability. The evolution of management can be studied in the way different theories emerged at different points in time.

Over time, different management theories emerged, evolved and continue to be practiced in several business environments. Read on to explore various types of management theories and how they contributed to the evolution of management principles.

An Introduction To Evolution Of Management

Tracing the evolution of management through theories.

Understanding the evolution of management thought is important as it helps determine what management principles and practices work best for your team and your organization. It can help you manage your team and workplace more effectively. So, what is the meaning of evolution of management thought? To understand this, we need to go back in time.

The Industrial Revolution in the early 19th century brought monumental changes in the workplace. As factories were the primary source of employment, management theorists studied the operations and workforce present on the factory floors. There were times when the demand was high but the lack of productivity and efficiency held workplaces back. The Industrial Revolution gave birth to multiple management theories and concepts that developed over time and are still relevant today.

Management theories help you study an organization, its corporate designs, structures and behavior of individuals or groups. By studying the impact of internal and external business environments, these theories provide a lens to address critical questions about how a business works or operates. Management theories can be grouped under three categories—classical theory, neoclassical theory and modern management theory. ( aessoil.com ) Let’s take a look at the individual theories in detail:

Classical Theory Of Management

The theories that emerged under the classical evolution of management thought are:

Scientific Management

Fredrick Winslow Taylor, an engineer, proposed and developed the Scientific Management Theory. He is also known as the Father of Scientific Management and his school of thought came to be known as Taylorism. He introduced a scientific approach to productivity, which meant that an increase in efficiency can lead to higher productivity and profits. He believed that research-backed and standardized procedures were necessary for effective management.

Administrative Management

Henry Fayol, a French mining engineer, laid down five functions and 14 principles of management under the theory of Fayolism. This gave way to the school of administrative management. He believed that these functions and principles can guide managers to fulfill their responsibilities effectively and they should have the liberty to determine how to use them.

Neoclassical Theory Of Management

The theories that emerged under the neoclassical evolution of management practices are:

Human Relations Management

Developed by Elton Mayo, an Australian psychologist, the Human Relations Theory of Management was proposed after a series of experiments, also known as Hawthorne Studies or Hawthorne Experiments. This theory emerged as a response to the criticism faced by the classical management theories, where social factors such as human behavior and attitudes weren’t considered important.

Behavioral Management

Behavioral approaches to management set the pace for how modern workplaces build an employee-friendly culture. Abraham Maslow, an American psychologist, proposed the hierarchy of need, where employee need and expectations were prioritized. The theory suggests that human relations and behavior are essential in driving efficiency in teams and managing the workforce successfully.

Modern Theory Of Management

The theories that emerged with the modern evolution of management needs are:

Systems Approach

The Systems Theory of organization has its roots in biology and systems science. This concept broke away from classical management theory that viewed organizations as machines and moved toward a more holistic view that sees them as networks of people, procedures and activities. Systems Theory allows for an understanding of the connections between various parts of the organization and how they interact with one another.

Contingency Approach

The Contingency Management Theory suggests that there isn’t any perfect way to organize a business or corporation. The optimal solution lies in the situation that an organization operates in. A business is contingent (depends) upon internal or external environments.

It’s evident that in the long history of the evolution of management, the focus has shifted from the structure and authority to the people behind the scenes. Many of these principles hold relevance in modern workplaces even if society continues to evolve. Practicing the principles of various management theories will not only bring success to your organization but also improve your relationship with your team. Harappa’s Managing Teamwork course is designed to equip you with tools to imbibe team culture and collaborate with diverse people. Meet organizational goals with greater efficiency by learning how to trust your team and progress with them. Try Harappa and see the change for yourself!

Explore Harappa Diaries to learn more about topics such as  14 Principles Of Management ,  Advantages Of MBO ,  Importance Of Strategic Management  and  Management Skills  to become a well-rounded professional.

The Evolution of Management Thought and the Evolution of Management Theories

Knowing the story behind the evolution of management thought and the evolution of theories is essential. If you are familiar with them, including the development that brought about the current practices in business, then you will have a better understanding of management principles that can help you to manage people more effectively.

The point is that a lot has changed about management . Emphasis on structure and authority is no longer as strong as it used to be in the past. Now the focus is on employees. However, there are theories on the factors that motivate employees, but understand that knowing how these theories came about can give you the needed knowledge to manage your employees appropriately. Read to understand the evolution of management thought and management theories.

Evolution of Management Concept

The evolution of management thought is a process that started in the early days of man. It began since the period man saw the need to live in groups. Mighty men were able to organize the masses, share them into various groups. The sharing was done accord to the masses’ strength, mental capacities, and intelligence.

The point is that management has been practiced in one way or the other since civilization began. If you want a good example where advanced management principles were applied, consider the organization of the olden days Roman Catholic Church, military forces as well as ancient Greece. These are all excellent examples. But the industrial revolution brought drastic change. And suddenly, the need to develop a more holistic and formal management theory became a necessity.

Explain the Evolution of Management Thought

Stages of the evolution of management thought

This topic is broad, and it also requires careful explanation and thought process. One cannot understand what it entails or appreciates how it happened without looking at the various areas where the said evolution occurred. For better understanding, the evolution of management thought will be shared into four different stages. These include:

• Pre-scientific management period
• Classical theory
• Neo-classical theory or behavior approach
• Bureaucratic Model of Max Weber

The Pre-Scientific Management Period

The industrial revolution that took place in the 18th century had a significant impact on management as a whole . It changed how businesses, as well as individuals, raised capital; organize labor and the production of goods. Entrepreneurs had access to all the factors of production such as land, labor, and capital. Theirs was to make an effort to combine these factors to achieve a targeted goal successfully.

However, the new dimension that management took following the industrial revolution cannot be discussed without mentioning notable personalities who contributed their quarter. They were able to introduce useful ideas and approaches to give management a precise and universally acceptable direction. Here are some of them.

• Professor Charles Babbage – United Kingdom (1729 – 1871)

Prof Babbage, a renowned professor in mathematics at Cambridge University discovered that manufacturers were relying on guesswork and suggestions and urged them to utilize mathematics and science to be more accurate and productive.

• Robert Owens – United Kingdom (1771 – 1858)

Robert was regarded as the father of personnel management because of his approach and focus on employee welfare. He introduced co-operation and trade unions. Robert believed that employee welfare could determine their performance to a large extent. He encouraged the training of workers, education for their children, canteens in the workplace, shorter working hours, among others.

Other Contributors to the Pre-Scientific Management Period Include:

• Henry Robson Towne – USA
• James Watt Junior – United Kingdom
• Seebohm Rowntree – United Kingdom

The Classical Theory

Prof Babbage, Robert Owens, and other names earlier mentioned can be regarded as the pioneers of management. But their contribution to the evolution of management is little. The beginning of what is known as the science of management started in the last decade of the 19th century. Names like Emerson, F.W. Taylor, H.L. Grant, and others, paved the way for the establishment of what is called scientific management.

During the classical period, management thought was focused on job content, standardization, the division of labor, and a scientific approach towards the organization. It also was closely related to the industrial revolution as well as the rise of large-scale enterprises.

The Neo-Classical Theory

This period of evolution of management thought is an improvement of the classical theory. In other words, it modified and improved upon the classical theory. For instance, Classical theory focused more on the area of job content, including the management of physical resources, while neo-classical theory gave more profound emphasis on employee relationships in the work environment.

The Bureaucratic Model

A German Sociologist called Max Weber proposed this model. And it includes a system of rules, division of labor hinged on functional specialization, legal authority, and power, the hierarchy of authority, and placement of employees based on their technical competence.

The Evolution of Management Theories

Organizations have been shaped and through the writings of several writers. Their write-up consisted of governance of kingdoms and management of humans. And these formed the literature that helped in the development of management theories . And these management models were also offered by the military, political and religious organizations.

For instance, Sun Tzu’s book “The Art of War” was written in the 16th century BC. Sun was also a Chinese army general. However, the writings in Sun’s book were also used for managerial purposes.

The book highlights that it’s possible to achieve success by using the strength of the organization to exploit the weakness of rivals. Another great book was Chanakya’s Arthashastra. It was written in the third century BC and focused on the governance of the kingdom concerning the formulation of policies of governance and management of people.

The evolution of management started from civilization. So, what we have now is refined and improved management thoughts and theories. But knowing how this evolution came about is vital. It will help to improve one’s knowledge of the process and effectively utilize management principles for the betterment of the organization.

About Sonia Kukreja

I am a mother of a lovely kid, and an avid fan technology, computing and management related topics. I hold a degree in MBA from well known management college in India. After completing my post graduation I thought to start a website where I can share management related concepts with rest of the people.

Related Posts...

How to Know You Need Project Portfolio Management Software

Importance of Time Tracking and Can You Do It in Asana & How?

Advantages of Pursuing a Higher Education

Investing with a Gold IRA Company in 2023

What Is the Significance of Time Reporting?

3 Strategic Management Decisions to Take Your Business to the Next Level

Evolution of Management Theory

Table of Contents

• 1 What is Evolution of Management Theory?
• 2 Evolution of Management Theory
• 3.1 Scientific Management
• 3.2 Administrative Management
• 3.3 Bureaucratic Management
• 4.1 Human Relations
• 4.2 Behavioural Science
• 5.1 Management Science (Operations Research)
• 5.2 Production and Operations Management
• 6 Systems Approach
• 7 Contingency Approach
• 8 Different Types of Management Theories
• 9.1 What are the classical approaches to management?
• 9.2 What is behavioural approach?

What is Evolution of Management Theory?

The practice of management is as old as human civilization. The ancient civilizations of Egypt the great pyramids), Greece (the leadership and war tactics of Alexander the Great) and Rome displayed marvellous results of good management practices. The origin of management as a discipline was developed in the late 19th century.

Over time, management thinkers have sought ways to organize and classify the voluminous information about management that has been collected and disseminated. These attempts at classification have resulted in the identification of management approaches.

The approaches of management are theoretical frameworks for the study of leadership. Each of the management approaches is based on somewhat different assumptions about human beings and the organizations for which they work.

The following different approaches of management are:

The Classical Approach

The behavioural approach, the quantitative approach, systems approach, contingency approach.

The formal study of management is largely a twentieth-century phenomenon, and to some degree, the relatively large number of management approaches reflects a lack of consensus among management scholars about basic questions of theory and practice.

The classical approach is the oldest formal approach of management thought. Its roots pre-date the twentieth century. The classical approach of thought generally concerns ways to manage work and organizations more efficiently. Three areas of study that can be grouped under the classical approach are:

Scientific Management

Administrative management, bureaucratic management.

Frederick Winslow Taylor was an American mechanical engineer who sought to improve industrial efficiency. He was one of the first management consultants. Taylor was one of the intellectual leaders of the Efficiency Movement and his ideas, broadly conceived, was highly influential in the Progressive Era (the 1890s – 1920s). Taylor summed up his efficiency techniques in his 1911 book The Principles of Scientific Management , which in 2001 Fellows of the Academy of Management voted the most influential management book of the twentieth century.

His pioneering work in applying engineering principles to the work done on the factory floor was instrumental in the creation and development of the branch of engineering that is now known as industrial engineering. Taylor made his name in, and was most proud of his work in, scientific management; however, he made his fortune patenting steel-process improvements.

The scientific method consists essentially of (a) Observation, (b) Measurement, (c) Experimentation and (d) Inference. He advocated thorough planning of the job by the management and emphasized the necessity of perfect understanding and cooperation between the management and the workers both for the enlargement of profits and the use of scientific investigation and knowledge in industrial work.

He summed up his approach in these words: Science, not the rule of thumb, Harmony, not discord, Cooperation, not individualism, Maximum output, in place of restricted output and the development of each man to his greatest efficiency and prosperity.

Administrative management focuses on the management process and principles of management . In contrast to scientific management, which deals largely with jobs and works at the individual level of analysis, administrative management provides a more general theory of management.

Henry Fayol is the major contributor to this approach of management thought. The Principles of Management are the essential, underlying factors that form the foundations of successful management. According to Henri Fayol in his book General and Industrial Management (1916), there are fourteen ‘Principles of Management.

Bureaucratic management focuses on the ideal form of organization. Max Weber was a major contributor to bureaucratic management. Based on observation, Weber concluded that many early organizations were inefficiently managed, with decisions based on personal relationships and loyalty.

He proposed that a form of organization, called a bureaucracy, characterized by division of labour, hierarchy, formalized rules, impersonality, and the selection and promotion of employees based on ability, would lead to more efficient management. Weber also contended that managers’ authority in an organization should be based not on tradition or charisma but on the position held by managers in the organizational hierarchy.

The behavioural approach of management thought developed, in part, because of perceived weaknesses in the assumptions of the classical approach. The classical approach emphasized efficiency, process, and principles. Some felt that this emphasis disregarded important aspects of organizational life, particularly as it related to human behaviour. Thus, the behavioural approach focused on trying to understand the factors that affect human behaviour at work.

Human Relations

Behavioural science.

The Hawthorne Experiments began in 1924 and continued through the early 1930s. A variety of researchers participated in the studies, including Elton Mayo. One of the major conclusions of the Hawthorne studies was that workers’ attitudes are associated with productivity.

Another was that the workplace is a social system and informal group influence could exert a powerful effect on individual behaviour. A third was that the style of supervision is an important factor in increasing workers’ job satisfaction .

Behavioural science and the study of organizational behaviour emerged in the 1950s and 1960s. The behavioural science approach was a natural progression of the human relations movement. It focused on applying conceptual and analytical tools to the problem of understanding and predicting behaviour in the workplace.

The behavioural science approach has contributed to the study of management through its focus on personality , attitudes, values, motivation, group behaviour, leadership, communication, and conflict, among other issues.

The quantitative approach focuses on improving decision-making via the application of quantitative techniques. Its roots can be traced back to scientific management.

Management Science (Operations Research)

Production and operations management.

Management science (also called operations research) uses mathematical and statistical approaches to solve management problems. It developed during World War II as strategists tried to apply scientific knowledge and methods to the complex problems of war.

The industry began to apply management science after the war. The advent of the computer made many management science tools and concepts more practical for industry.

This approach focuses on the operation and control of the production process that transforms resources into finished goods and services. It has its roots in scientific management but became an identifiable area of management study after World War II.

It uses many of the tools of management science. Operations management emphasizes the productivity and quality of both manufacturing and service organizations. W. Edwards Deming exerted a tremendous influence in shaping modern ideas about improving productivity and quality.

Major areas of study within operations management include capacity planning, facilities location, facilities layout, materials requirement planning, scheduling, purchasing and inventory control, quality control, computer-integrated manufacturing, just–in–time inventory systems, and flexible manufacturing systems.

The systems approach focuses on understanding the organization as an open system that transforms inputs into outputs. The systems approach began to have a strong impact on management thought in the 1960s as a way of thinking about managing techniques that would allow managers to relate different specialities and parts of the company to one another, as well as to external environmental factors.

The systems approach focuses on the organization as a whole, its interaction with the environment, and its need to achieve equilibrium.

The contingency approach focuses on applying management principles and processes as dictated by the unique characteristics of each situation. It emphasizes that there is no one best way to manage and that it depends on various situational factors, such as the external environment, technology, organizational characteristics, characteristics of the manager, and characteristics of the subordinates.

Contingency theorists often implicitly or explicitly criticize the classical approach for its emphasis on the universality of management principles; however, most classical writers recognized the need to consider aspects of the situation when applying management principles.

Different Types of Management Theories

These are the different types of management theories:

FAQ Related to the Evolution of Management Theory

What are the classical approaches to management.

The classical approach is the oldest formal approach of management thought. Its roots pre-date the twentieth century. The classical approach of thought generally concerns ways to manage work and organizations more efficiently. Three areas of study that can be grouped under the classical approach are: 1. Scientific Management 2. Administrative Management 3. Bureaucratic Management.

What is behavioural approach?

The behavioural approach of management thought developed, in part, because of perceived weaknesses in the assumptions of the classical approach. The classical approach emphasized efficiency, process, and principles. Some felt that this emphasis disregarded important aspects of organizational life, particularly as it related to human behaviour.

Related posts:

• Why do We Study Management? 6 Tips
• 8 Types of Decisions
• 6 Nature of Organizing
• 5 Elements of Organizing in Management
• 11 Principles of Organization
• 22 Key Principles of Organizations
• Importance of Directing: Elements of Directing
• Coordinating: Importance, Principles, Process, Types, Features
• Effective Control System
• Advantages of Controlling in Management
• 13 Methods of Coordination
• Bureaucratic Approach to Management
• 7 Classical Theory of Management
• Nature of Planning
• Strategic Planning Process

• {{subColumn.name}}

AIMS Mathematics

• {{newsColumn.name}}
• Share facebook twitter google linkedin

On the controllability results of semilinear delayed evolution systems involving fractional derivatives in Banach spaces

• Lijuan Qin , 
• College of Science, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou Gansu 730070, China
• Received: 02 March 2024 Revised: 04 May 2024 Accepted: 06 May 2024 Published: 27 May 2024

MSC : 34K30, 34K35, 93C25

• Full Text(HTML)
• Download PDF

The paper investigated the exact controllability of delayed fractional evolution systems of order $ \alpha\in (1, 2) $ in abstract spaces. At first, the exact controllability result is obtained when the nonlinear term $ f $ is locally Lipschitz continuous. Then, the certain compactness conditions and the measure of noncompactness conditions were applied to demonstrate the exact controllability of the concerned problem. The discussion was based on the fixed point theorems and the cosine family theory.

• the cosine family theory ,
• exact controllability ,
• fractional evolution equations ,
• fixed point theorem

Citation: Lijuan Qin. On the controllability results of semilinear delayed evolution systems involving fractional derivatives in Banach spaces[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 17971-17983. doi: 10.3934/math.2024875

Related Papers:

• This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ -->

Supplements

Access history.

• Corresponding author: Email: [email protected]

Reader Comments

• © 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 )

通讯作者: 陈斌, [email protected]

沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

Article views( 18 ) PDF downloads( 2 ) Cited by( 0 )

Associated material

Other articles by authors, related pages.

• on Google Scholar
• Email to a friend
• Order reprints

Export File

• Terms and Conditions
• Join the OMT Division

Organization and Management Theory OMT

Call for papers | IMRC 2024 @ IIM Ahmedabad, India

1.  call for papers | imrc 2024 @ iim ahmedabad, india.

Greetings from the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad! 

IIM Ahmedabad is happy to announce its inaugural  India Management Research Conference (IMRC 2024): IIM Ahmedabad, a three-day mega event  scheduled to take place at IIMA during   7th - 9th December 2024. The conference will serve as a platform that presents research scholars, academics, and industry practitioners with an opportunity to network, explore diverse research themes, and gain valuable insights into IIMA's cutting-edge research. Besides increasing the visibility of the institute's research, another core objective of the IMRC is to serve as a recruitment forum for exceptional Ph.D. students. Over the years, IMRC hopes to evolve as a premium management conference in India. 

Call For Conference Submissions IMRC 2024 invites submissions under the broad theme of,  'Confluence of Growth, Sustainability, and Resilience'  across various multidisciplinary research areas. Tracks have varying submission requirements and hence, participants can visit the  conference website  where the section, 'Call for Conference Submissions' provides access to individual track:  -Leadership Research & Practice in the Context of Changes in the World of  Work

We hope to bring a good mix of practitioners & scholars, domestic & international research/perspectives on various themes of the conference during the event. The three-day event will consist of plenary research presentations, keynote speeches from thought-leaders and panel discussions on emerging topics bringing industry leaders and academics. While the conference will prioritize sustainability and emerging markets, empirical research papers related to all aspects of various themes/geographies are welcome for submission.  

Conference Dates : December 07-09, 2024

Conference Timeline

We request you to please circulate this within your institution and across networks. We look forward to welcoming participants from your institution. In case of any queries, please feel free to contact us at  [email protected]

Thanks & Regards

IMRC 2024 Organizing Committee

IMRC 2024  Website

IMRC 2024 Conference Submission  Link

New Best Answer

Community tags.

• Annual Meeting

Main Navigation

• Contact NeurIPS
• Code of Ethics
• Code of Conduct
• Create Profile
• Journal To Conference Track
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Proceedings
• Future Meetings
• Exhibitor Information
• Privacy Policy

NeurIPS 2024

Conference Dates: (In person) 9 December - 15 December, 2024

Homepage: https://neurips.cc/Conferences/2024/

Call For Papers 

Abstract submission deadline: May 15, 2024

Full paper submission deadline, including technical appendices and supplemental material (all authors must have an OpenReview profile when submitting): May 22, 2024

Author notification: Sep 25, 2024

Camera-ready, poster, and video submission: Oct 30, 2024 AOE

Submit at: https://openreview.net/group?id=NeurIPS.cc/2024/Conference  

The site will start accepting submissions on Apr 22, 2024 

Subscribe to these and other dates on the 2024 dates page .

The Thirty-Eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2024) is an interdisciplinary conference that brings together researchers in machine learning, neuroscience, statistics, optimization, computer vision, natural language processing, life sciences, natural sciences, social sciences, and other adjacent fields. We invite submissions presenting new and original research on topics including but not limited to the following:

• Applications (e.g., vision, language, speech and audio, Creative AI)
• Deep learning (e.g., architectures, generative models, optimization for deep networks, foundation models, LLMs)
• Evaluation (e.g., methodology, meta studies, replicability and validity, human-in-the-loop)
• General machine learning (supervised, unsupervised, online, active, etc.)
• Infrastructure (e.g., libraries, improved implementation and scalability, distributed solutions)
• Machine learning for sciences (e.g. climate, health, life sciences, physics, social sciences)
• Neuroscience and cognitive science (e.g., neural coding, brain-computer interfaces)
• Optimization (e.g., convex and non-convex, stochastic, robust)
• Probabilistic methods (e.g., variational inference, causal inference, Gaussian processes)
• Reinforcement learning (e.g., decision and control, planning, hierarchical RL, robotics)
• Social and economic aspects of machine learning (e.g., fairness, interpretability, human-AI interaction, privacy, safety, strategic behavior)
• Theory (e.g., control theory, learning theory, algorithmic game theory)

Machine learning is a rapidly evolving field, and so we welcome interdisciplinary submissions that do not fit neatly into existing categories.

Authors are asked to confirm that their submissions accord with the NeurIPS code of conduct .

Formatting instructions:   All submissions must be in PDF format, and in a single PDF file include, in this order:

• The submitted paper
• Technical appendices that support the paper with additional proofs, derivations, or results 
• The NeurIPS paper checklist  

Other supplementary materials such as data and code can be uploaded as a ZIP file

The main text of a submitted paper is limited to nine content pages , including all figures and tables. Additional pages containing references don’t count as content pages. If your submission is accepted, you will be allowed an additional content page for the camera-ready version.

The main text and references may be followed by technical appendices, for which there is no page limit.

The maximum file size for a full submission, which includes technical appendices, is 50MB.

Authors are encouraged to submit a separate ZIP file that contains further supplementary material like data or source code, when applicable.

You must format your submission using the NeurIPS 2024 LaTeX style file which includes a “preprint” option for non-anonymous preprints posted online. Submissions that violate the NeurIPS style (e.g., by decreasing margins or font sizes) or page limits may be rejected without further review. Papers may be rejected without consideration of their merits if they fail to meet the submission requirements, as described in this document. 

Paper checklist: In order to improve the rigor and transparency of research submitted to and published at NeurIPS, authors are required to complete a paper checklist . The paper checklist is intended to help authors reflect on a wide variety of issues relating to responsible machine learning research, including reproducibility, transparency, research ethics, and societal impact. The checklist forms part of the paper submission, but does not count towards the page limit.

Please join the NeurIPS 2024 Checklist Assistant Study that will provide you with free verification of your checklist performed by an LLM here . Please see details in our  blog

Supplementary material: While all technical appendices should be included as part of the main paper submission PDF, authors may submit up to 100MB of supplementary material, such as data, or source code in a ZIP format. Supplementary material should be material created by the authors that directly supports the submission content. Like submissions, supplementary material must be anonymized. Looking at supplementary material is at the discretion of the reviewers.

We encourage authors to upload their code and data as part of their supplementary material in order to help reviewers assess the quality of the work. Check the policy as well as code submission guidelines and templates for further details.

Use of Large Language Models (LLMs): We welcome authors to use any tool that is suitable for preparing high-quality papers and research. However, we ask authors to keep in mind two important criteria. First, we expect papers to fully describe their methodology, and any tool that is important to that methodology, including the use of LLMs, should be described also. For example, authors should mention tools (including LLMs) that were used for data processing or filtering, visualization, facilitating or running experiments, and proving theorems. It may also be advisable to describe the use of LLMs in implementing the method (if this corresponds to an important, original, or non-standard component of the approach). Second, authors are responsible for the entire content of the paper, including all text and figures, so while authors are welcome to use any tool they wish for writing the paper, they must ensure that all text is correct and original.

Double-blind reviewing:   All submissions must be anonymized and may not contain any identifying information that may violate the double-blind reviewing policy.  This policy applies to any supplementary or linked material as well, including code.  If you are including links to any external material, it is your responsibility to guarantee anonymous browsing.  Please do not include acknowledgements at submission time. If you need to cite one of your own papers, you should do so with adequate anonymization to preserve double-blind reviewing.  For instance, write “In the previous work of Smith et al. [1]…” rather than “In our previous work [1]...”). If you need to cite one of your own papers that is in submission to NeurIPS and not available as a non-anonymous preprint, then include a copy of the cited anonymized submission in the supplementary material and write “Anonymous et al. [1] concurrently show...”). Any papers found to be violating this policy will be rejected.

OpenReview: We are using OpenReview to manage submissions. The reviews and author responses will not be public initially (but may be made public later, see below). As in previous years, submissions under review will be visible only to their assigned program committee. We will not be soliciting comments from the general public during the reviewing process. Anyone who plans to submit a paper as an author or a co-author will need to create (or update) their OpenReview profile by the full paper submission deadline. Your OpenReview profile can be edited by logging in and clicking on your name in https://openreview.net/ . This takes you to a URL "https://openreview.net/profile?id=~[Firstname]_[Lastname][n]" where the last part is your profile name, e.g., ~Wei_Zhang1. The OpenReview profiles must be up to date, with all publications by the authors, and their current affiliations. The easiest way to import publications is through DBLP but it is not required, see FAQ . Submissions without updated OpenReview profiles will be desk rejected. The information entered in the profile is critical for ensuring that conflicts of interest and reviewer matching are handled properly. Because of the rapid growth of NeurIPS, we request that all authors help with reviewing papers, if asked to do so. We need everyone’s help in maintaining the high scientific quality of NeurIPS.  

Please be aware that OpenReview has a moderation policy for newly created profiles: New profiles created without an institutional email will go through a moderation process that can take up to two weeks. New profiles created with an institutional email will be activated automatically.

Venue home page: https://openreview.net/group?id=NeurIPS.cc/2024/Conference

If you have any questions, please refer to the FAQ: https://openreview.net/faq

Abstract Submission: There is a mandatory abstract submission deadline on May 15, 2024, six days before full paper submissions are due. While it will be possible to edit the title and abstract until the full paper submission deadline, submissions with “placeholder” abstracts that are rewritten for the full submission risk being removed without consideration. This includes titles and abstracts that either provide little or no semantic information (e.g., "We provide a new semi-supervised learning method.") or describe a substantively different claimed contribution.  The author list cannot be changed after the abstract deadline. After that, authors may be reordered, but any additions or removals must be justified in writing and approved on a case-by-case basis by the program chairs only in exceptional circumstances. 

Ethics review: Reviewers and ACs may flag submissions for ethics review . Flagged submissions will be sent to an ethics review committee for comments. Comments from ethics reviewers will be considered by the primary reviewers and AC as part of their deliberation. They will also be visible to authors, who will have an opportunity to respond.  Ethics reviewers do not have the authority to reject papers, but in extreme cases papers may be rejected by the program chairs on ethical grounds, regardless of scientific quality or contribution.  

Preprints: The existence of non-anonymous preprints (on arXiv or other online repositories, personal websites, social media) will not result in rejection. If you choose to use the NeurIPS style for the preprint version, you must use the “preprint” option rather than the “final” option. Reviewers will be instructed not to actively look for such preprints, but encountering them will not constitute a conflict of interest. Authors may submit anonymized work to NeurIPS that is already available as a preprint (e.g., on arXiv) without citing it. Note that public versions of the submission should not say "Under review at NeurIPS" or similar.

Dual submissions: Submissions that are substantially similar to papers that the authors have previously published or submitted in parallel to other peer-reviewed venues with proceedings or journals may not be submitted to NeurIPS. Papers previously presented at workshops are permitted, so long as they did not appear in a conference proceedings (e.g., CVPRW proceedings), a journal or a book.  NeurIPS coordinates with other conferences to identify dual submissions.  The NeurIPS policy on dual submissions applies for the entire duration of the reviewing process.  Slicing contributions too thinly is discouraged.  The reviewing process will treat any other submission by an overlapping set of authors as prior work. If publishing one would render the other too incremental, both may be rejected.

Anti-collusion: NeurIPS does not tolerate any collusion whereby authors secretly cooperate with reviewers, ACs or SACs to obtain favorable reviews. 

Author responses:   Authors will have one week to view and respond to initial reviews. Author responses may not contain any identifying information that may violate the double-blind reviewing policy. Authors may not submit revisions of their paper or supplemental material, but may post their responses as a discussion in OpenReview. This is to reduce the burden on authors to have to revise their paper in a rush during the short rebuttal period.

After the initial response period, authors will be able to respond to any further reviewer/AC questions and comments by posting on the submission’s forum page. The program chairs reserve the right to solicit additional reviews after the initial author response period.  These reviews will become visible to the authors as they are added to OpenReview, and authors will have a chance to respond to them.

After the notification deadline, accepted and opted-in rejected papers will be made public and open for non-anonymous public commenting. Their anonymous reviews, meta-reviews, author responses and reviewer responses will also be made public. Authors of rejected papers will have two weeks after the notification deadline to opt in to make their deanonymized rejected papers public in OpenReview.  These papers are not counted as NeurIPS publications and will be shown as rejected in OpenReview.

Publication of accepted submissions:   Reviews, meta-reviews, and any discussion with the authors will be made public for accepted papers (but reviewer, area chair, and senior area chair identities will remain anonymous). Camera-ready papers will be due in advance of the conference. All camera-ready papers must include a funding disclosure . We strongly encourage accompanying code and data to be submitted with accepted papers when appropriate, as per the code submission policy . Authors will be allowed to make minor changes for a short period of time after the conference.

Contemporaneous Work: For the purpose of the reviewing process, papers that appeared online within two months of a submission will generally be considered "contemporaneous" in the sense that the submission will not be rejected on the basis of the comparison to contemporaneous work. Authors are still expected to cite and discuss contemporaneous work and perform empirical comparisons to the degree feasible. Any paper that influenced the submission is considered prior work and must be cited and discussed as such. Submissions that are very similar to contemporaneous work will undergo additional scrutiny to prevent cases of plagiarism and missing credit to prior work.

Plagiarism is prohibited by the NeurIPS Code of Conduct .

Other Tracks: Similarly to earlier years, we will host multiple tracks, such as datasets, competitions, tutorials as well as workshops, in addition to the main track for which this call for papers is intended. See the conference homepage for updates and calls for participation in these tracks. 

Experiments: As in past years, the program chairs will be measuring the quality and effectiveness of the review process via randomized controlled experiments. All experiments are independently reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB).

Financial Aid: Each paper may designate up to one (1) NeurIPS.cc account email address of a corresponding student author who confirms that they would need the support to attend the conference, and agrees to volunteer if they get selected. To be considered for Financial the student will also need to fill out the Financial Aid application when it becomes available.