To read this content please select one of the options below:

Business process reengineering leadership: princes of Machiavelli

Dan Mertens (College of Business and Industry, Jacksonville State University, Jacksonville, Alabama, USA)
Salvador G. Villegas (School of Business, Northern State University, Aberdeen, South Dakota, USA)
Marlon G. Ware (School of Business and Management, Azusa Pacific University System, Azusa, California, USA)
Edward F. Vengrouskie (Department of Management, Fort Hays State University, Hays, Kansas, USA)
Robert Lloyd (Department of Management, Fort Hays State University, Hays, Kansas, USA)

Journal of Management History

ISSN: 1751-1348

Article publication date: 4 July 2023

Issue publication date: 11 January 2024

269

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to establish a supported and validated reference point for Machiavellianism as an antecedent to the contemporary management philosophy of business process reengineering (BPR).

Design/methodology/approach

This paper analyzes BPR and Machiavellianism by using the seminal work of Hammer and Champy (1993) on BPR and the original writings of Machiavelli coupled with the personal correspondence of Machiavelli with his contemporaries.

Findings

The findings of this research indicate that the constructs of Machiavellian thought transcend the five centuries since the publication of The Prince, and can be found in the contemporary managerial framework of BPR. This comparison of historical leadership frameworks demonstrates how recent management decisions in companies show the rise of Machiavellian as BPR. In an analysis of these theories, the authors show similarities in five significant tenets of business leadership and argue how these repackaged ideas and prescriptions undermine employee-centric advances.

Research limitations/implications

This comparison reviews the managerial frameworks presented in Machiavelli’s The Prince and Hammer and Champy’s book Reengineering the Corporation through the theoretical tenets of leadership.

Practical implications

Employment of Machiavellianism and BPR results in an expendable utilization of followers and employees. Implications abound for modern managers, as the authors emphasize the elements and outcomes which lead to deleterious organizational outcomes.

Social implications

In an analysis of these theories, the authors argue how these strategies undermine employee-centric advances within human relations by embracing these repackaged ideas and concepts.

Originality/value

This research leverages historical perspective to provide a qualitative understanding of the follies of recycled versions of Machiavelli’s ideas. The overall study and inquiry of BPR from a leadership perspective is not robust and leaves antecedents and influences critically unevaluated.

Keywords

Citation

Mertens, D., Villegas, S.G., Ware, M.G., Vengrouskie, E.F. and Lloyd, R. (2024), "Business process reengineering leadership: princes of Machiavelli", Journal of Management History, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 41-59. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMH-07-2022-0026

Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2023, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles