Search results

In recent years, scientific research on humanistic perspectives and their impact on management has grown exponentially. This study aims to explore the overview and its essential features of humanism management and its precursors (i.e., humanism). Bibliometric findings on the advent and current developmental patterns of humanistic management publications are described.

Terminology confusions (e.g. humanism philosophy vs humanistic management) are identified and addressed in bibliometric analyses using the 160 peer-reviewed articles on humanism in management for the duration between 2000 and 2020. Four metrics such as citation analysis, co-citations, bibliographic coupling and keywords co-occurrences are measured.

This study presents a new methodological approach by identifying the most significant authors, articles and journals and determining the three thematic clusters, such as empirical humanism research, humanistic in practice and humanism philosophy.

While humanistic business management is a discipline in its infancy, the attention of management researchers has expanded considerably in recent years as numerous literature streams emerge. The three keywords that appeared the most in the analysis are human (18), humanistic (17), and human dignity (16), and these keywords seem to consist mainly of three thematic clusters. Studies on humanistic management have progressed from an earlier focus on philosophy subjects (oldest keywords) to more practical studies on humanistic management, leadership, and dignity.

Organizations that prioritize humanistic responsibility create an environment of value for their employees as the most important stakeholders. However, despite the numerous corporate social responsibility (CSR) models and research highlighting stakeholder considerations, the long-standing “social” aspect of CSR has inhibited its humanism responsibility. In response, this study proposes to move beyond the antecedents and outcomes of CSR to explore how perceived CSR can promote its humanistic responsibility both inside and outside of organizations.

The authors followed Sendjaya et al. (2008) ’s methodology for developing and validating the perceived corporate humanistic responsibility (CHR) scale. Study 1 validated the CHR's content. Study 2 established the measure’ reliability, internal consistency, unidimensionality and discriminant validity. The authors describe each of the studies in the forthcoming sections.

This research has produced a comprehensive set of perceived CHR items for business leaders based on earlier CHR/humanism concepts. Through the deconstruction of CHR theory, the granular conceptualization provides employee-centric workplaces, healthy internal communication, holistic compensation, CSR-committed behaviors and holistic training and development, equipped to assess how their CHR fosters humanistic workplaces that encourage socially responsible behaviors. This, in turn, would have an immense impact on employee well-being that, in turn, flourishes societal well-being.

Although the perceived CHR scale's psychometric properties were confirmed using multiple tests ranging from qualitative to quantitative studies, this newly developed scale requires further investigation to explore whether internal or external relevance factors affect organizations' humanistic responsibility.

CSR is about caring for humans and the planet. The authors have unpacked what and how the human side of CSR operates for business leaders to advance their CHR practices and responsible management learning. The perceived CHR dimensions can guide business leaders to promote multidimensional humanistic behaviors inside and outside workplaces that transcend how to strengthen the humanistic responsibility behaviors of corporations to promote CHR by articulating how the “Social” aspect of CSR ought to function for employee well-being first.

This study responds to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) most aligned with the SDG 3 (good health and well-being) and SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth) by promoting humanistic workplaces with implications for United Nation's Principles for Responsible Management that encourages universities to educate students on humanism concepts in business management.

The originality lies in the empirical study of CHR. By incorporating the original concepts of humanism/humanistic management and CHR, the authors empirically articulate how CHR may be practically implemented as an elaborated humanistic synthesis for corporations.