PHILOSOPHY MANAGEMENT: PARALLELISM AND CORRELATIONS IN THOUGHT EVOLUTIONS

: This study aims to trace the historical parallelism and correlation in thought evolutions between Philosophy and Management. Historical parallelism speaks about the side-by-side progress of Philosophy and Management as distinct disciplines, whereas correlation deals with how they relate and interact with each other. Philosophy and Management, though in themselves are distinct and self-determining disciplines, are significantly interrelated. The central problem in this research paper is to find out when, how and why do Philosophy and Management mutually impact and enrich each other. Consequently, this study is conducted using the historical-hermeneutical research methodology, which requires reading a lot of resources on the thought evolutions of both sciences. The analysis progresses by first looking separately into the early thought developments of Philosophy and Management, wherein a general treatment on the nature and essential elements of both Philosophy and Management are laid down. Afterwards, the researcher focuses on how these two disciplines advanced and converged as related thoughts, which are articulated in the following formulations: “Philosophy in Management” and “Philosophy of Management.” Hopefully, the outcome of this study would significantly aid students to find more meaning and relevance in studying Philosophy and Management as correlated and integrated sciences.

Many of the ideas proposed by Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and others have helped set the agenda for much of the subsequent development of Western philosophy. These three philosophers started to place man at the center of philosophizing. This has been the trend until today. Philosophy is meant for bringing out the best in man and society. This stage in the ancient period is called the Socratic times, or the ancient medieval period.
Medieval In other words, this period took place when the philosophical thought of Greek philosophers meets the thought of Christian philosophers. For this reason, medieval philosophy is also known as the medieval Christian philosophy. This philosophical stage can be split up into four different periods: the Dark Ages (476-800 CE), the Carolingian Renaissance to the rediscovery of Aristotle (800-1200 CE), the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Renaissance (1200-1400 CE), and the Renaissance to the end of Scholasticism (1400-1600 CE).
Modern Period. (1600-1800 CE) The demarcation line between modern philosophy and its predecessors, which are the ancient and medieval philosophy, can hardly be established with absolute accuracy (Modern Management Theory, n.d.), (Introduction to Modern Philosophy, n.d.). Unlike traditional philosophy, which had certain aspects that had not been property explored and were based on myths, modern philosophy is a school of thought based on research findings. Facts about modern philosophy are written down unlike the traditional ones that were passed from one generation to another.
Modern philosophy can be characterized mainly into Rationalism and Empiricism. Rene Descartes (1596-1650 CE), Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677 CE) and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646( -1716 were the leading rationalists. For rationalism, reason is superior to experience as a source of knowledge. Whereas for empiricism, experience or sense perception is more reliable source and basis of knowledge. The first great empiricist was John Locke (1632-1704 CE) of England. George Berkeley of Ireland (1685( -1753 and David Hume of Scotland (1711-1776 CE) further developed empiricism.
Contemporary Period. (1800-present) Contemporary philosophy technically refers to the philosophy characterized by increasing professionalization of the discipline and the rise of analytic and continental philosophy (Hussain et al., 2019). It may be described as the present period in the history of Western philosophy beginning at the end of the nineteenth century with the rise of analytic and continental philosophy. Hence in contemporary terms Western philosophy refers to two main traditions of Contemporary philosophy: Analytic philosophy and Continental philosophy.
Analytic philosophy follows in the tradition established by the great late-nineteenth and early-twentieth philosophers Gott lob Frege and Bertrand Russell. It is marked by a focus on questions about the nature of language, meaning and thought, and how does the mind relate to the world. Analytical philosophers pursued these questions through methods of argument and proof similar to those used in mathematics and logic.
Continental philosophy started with the works of Franz Brentano (1838-1917CE), and Edmund Husserl (1859-1938 on the development of the philosophical method of phenomenology. It is often characterized by a focus on certain themes, like: history, politics (particularly the politics of gender and sexuality), the self and self-consciousness, freedom, desire and the will. The techniques of continental philosophy are as wide-ranging as its subject matter, from close historical analysis of texts, to creative reading of ancient and modern literature, to reflection on one"s own lived experience.

Major Branches
In its systematic pursuit for answers to life"s most basic questions, philosophy is usually divided into four major branches of study, namely: logic, ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology. What follows is a brief elaboration of each.
Logic. One important aspect in the study of philosophy is learning the art and science of correct inferential thinking. This is the role of logic. It provides sound means for distinguishing good from bad reasoning. It does not only study the nature and structure of arguments. It also helps to find arguments where one might simply see a set of loosely related statements, discover hidden personal assumptions, and formulate the minimum claims to prove a point.
Ethics. The study of ethics often concerns with what we ought to do and the way to do it best. In struggling with this issue, larger questions about what is good and right arise. An ethicist attempts to answer such questions as: What is good? What makes actions or people good? What is right? What makes actions right? Is morality objective or subjective? How should I treat others?
Ethics takes up the meanings of our moral conceptssuch as right action, obligation and justiceand formulates principles to guide moral decisions, whether in private or public life. What are our moral obligations to others? How can moral disagreements be rationally settled? What rights must a just society accord its citizens? What constitutes a valid excuse for wrongdoing?
Epistemology. As a study of knowledge, epistemology is concerned about the nature and scope of knowledge. More succinctly, it deals with man"s knowing capability. The distinctive questions it deals with are: What is knowledge? Do we know anything at all? How do we know what we know? Can we be justified in claiming to know certain things? What does it mean to know the truth? And what is the nature of truth? What sorts of things can be known? Is there knowledge beyond the reach of science? What are the limits of self-knowledge?
Metaphysics. The study of metaphysics is primarily the study of the nature of reality, its world existence, likeness, and order. Metaphysicians normally ask questions like the following: Is there a God? What is truth? Who is a person? What makes a person the same through time? Is the world strictly composed of matter? Do people have minds? If so, how is the mind related to the body?
In other words, metaphysics seeks basic criteria for determining what sorts of things are real or that which exists outside the mind. This concern would lead one to further ask the following questions: Are there mental, physical, and abstract things? Or is there just the physical and the spiritual? Are persons highly complex physical systems? Or do they have properties not reducible to anything physical?

Management
Management has become a very popular and extensively used term. All organizations are involved in management, since in terms of fundamental function, management helps and directs the various efforts towards a definite purpose. But what does management exactly mean? What are its pivotal stages of development, and its major branches of specialties?

Definition
Management can be generally described as a universal phenomenon, a purposive activity, something that directs group efforts towards the attainment of a fixed goal. As a working process of achieving organizational goals, it creates a conducive environment, both internal and external, which enables and empowers people to do their tasks effectively and efficiently. Being effective means being capable of doing the suitable assigned task, whereas being efficient means doing the task properly at the least possible cost and with minimum wastage of resources. More particularly, Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856-1915 defined management as an art of knowing what to do, when to do and see that it is done in the best and cheapest way. Harold Koontz (1909-1984 on his part defined management as an art of getting things done through and with the people in formally organized groups.

Pivotal Stages
It is very important to know the background in the evolution of management thought and the corresponding development that brought about the current business practices (Nkemdilim, 2020). Such knowledge enables one to better understand the management principles that are helpful in managing people more effectively and efficiently. The evolution process of management thought started since the time man considered living in groups (The Evolution of Management Thought, 2002). Indeed, management has been practiced to a great extent since civilization began. Excellent examples of this are the well-trained military forces of ancient Greece and the cohesive organization of the Roman Catholic Church in the olden days. To better understand and appreciate the evolution of management thought (Agogbua & Abugbum, 2017), it shall be presented in different stages or periods, namely: early management thought period, scientific management period, social man management period, and modern management period.
Early Management Thought Period. Before the industrial revolution, a great amount of management happens at home, where managers are usually the heads of the family handling family members as workforces for limited and local production. Obviously, in this kind of arrangement, filial attachment comes almost inescapably in the workplace.
With the inventions of steam engine, electricity and the telegram in the 18th century, the means of transportation and communication quadrupled in speed and efficiency. This paved the way for industrialization, which had significant impact on management as a whole. The market expansion in terms of area coverage and bulk demand for varied commodities drastically changed how businesses raise capital, organize labor and produce goods. Suddenly, entrepreneurs had access to all the factors of production such as land, labor, and capital. The management focus at this time was in combining these aspects to attain a targeted goal successfully.
The Classical Management Theory system of belief pronounces that employee are only motivated by physical and economic needs. It calls for a clear structure of management where the workforce is divided into owners, middle management, and supervisors. This theory views the workplace as an assembly line, with each worker completing a specialized task instead of multitasking. People who subscribe to this theory believe that workers are motivated by financial rewards based on the competency of their work. When companies put this theory to practical use, they often see an increase in productivity. It can help restructure a company and make employees focus on the bottom line.
But since the theory does not take much into consideration social needs, job satisfaction, and human relationships, it can also lead to a sizable amount of burnout among employees. This model exerts a great deal of control over human behaviors and treats employees as part of the machine. For many companies, Classical Management Theory fell out of favor in the past 60 years as more modern theories emphasized the humanity of the workforce.
In short, during the classical period, which was closely related to the industrial revolution as well as the rise of large-scale enterprises, management thought was focused more on production through the standardization, and the division of labor.
The Scientific Management Period. This was the period when each part of an individual's work is analyzed "scientifically" to devise the most efficient method for a given enterprise. Then, the most suitable person to take on the job is likewise "scientifically" selected (Gulzar, 2015). The individual is trained to do the job according to the plan. According to F. W. Taylor, the main proponent of scientific management, everyone had the ability to be "first-class" at a particular job (Taylor, n.d.). And it was management's role to find out which job suited each employee and then train them until they become first-class.
F. W. Taylor came up with this theory at the end of the 19th century. He believed that using the scientific method will get the best results out of workers in the office. The first step is to use the scientific method to determine the best way to perform a specific task. Next, assign workers to tasks that match their abilities and train them to maximize their output. One must monitor the workers constantly to ensure they are using the most efficient methods. Finally, managers should spend their time training and planning for future work.
Parts of the Scientific Management Theory are still in use today. Managers offer help and advice when needed, and they always look towards the future. However, now workers get more say about how they think their job should be done and are usually not hired to perform just one specific task. The Scientific Management Theory was best suited to large companies at the turn of the century, not small modern offices.
Under the management of "initiative and incentive" practically the whole problem is "up to the workman" while under the scientific management, fully one-half of the problem is "up to the management". The main object of management should be to secure the maximum prosperity for the employer, coupled with the maximum prosperity for each employee. F. W. Taylor believed that all workers spent little of their time putting in full efforts. To overcome this, he strives to analyze every job in a scientific way to determine how much work could and should be done in a day. For him, every single act of every workman can be reduced to a science.
Taylor's effort to scientifically increase the performance of the workers was regarded by many as inhumane since his methods were extremely hard and sometimes had the opposite effect. The way that Taylor wrote about unskilled workers was often disdainful and insensitive.
The Social Man Management Period. The great crash of 1929, also known as the Black Tuesday, ushered in the great depression, caused the increase of unemployment from 1.5 million to 13 million. Despite government efforts to create jobs, business continued to fail, incomes dropped, people lost even their homes as family savings were wiped out causing the national morale to hit an all-time low rating. Consequently, many people were forced to do things way below the normal healthy human standards. Thus, the Social Man Era was an era of economic misfortunes, massive social maladies due to industrial dislocations, and political shifts, which heralded a transformation in traditional relationships. Accordingly, the social era person is one who strives to escape from bad economic conditions, conflict and social ills, and alterations in political milieu.
In the midst of all this, Elton Mayo (1890( -1949 proposed the concept of Social Man. He managed to postulate man as a social animal through his involvement in the Hawthorne Studies. Man is a social animal by the fact that he lives with other human beings in the context of a society. Living in a society with others regulates his basic behavioral pattern. Then, Mary Parker Follett (1868-1933) on her part believed that management refers to the art of getting things done through people. She encourages that managers have direct contact with people so as to avoid unnecessary misunderstandings. She was famous for her thoughts on group thinking and conflict resolution.
The social man differs from the economic man. On the one hand, economic man is inclined to be concerned primarily with producing goods and services, and with quantitative problems. He expresses values in financial terms. He is mainly driven by work and discipline in the tradition of the Puritan Ethic and in the environment of competition. Lastly, the economic man pursues his self-interest in the laissez-faire way. In contrast, the social man is more concerned with how goods and services are distributed among people, and with qualitative matters. He tends to measure more readily in human terms. The driving force behind social man is self-realization in an environment of cooperation. Social Man involves himself in the problems of his fellow men.
The Modern Management Period. Classical Management Theory somehow claims that employees are only motivated by money. As a direct response to this, Modern Management Theory recognizes that workers are complex and have many reasons for wanting to succeed in their job. The proponents of Modern Management Theory believe that rapidly changing technology is a double-edged sword. It can both cause and solve many problems in the workplace.
The strength of Modern Management Theory lies in the fact that it recognizes and respects the changes that come with technology. There is potential danger in the use of technology, but when used properly, it could usher in positive changes in the workplace. For example, when people were forced to stay at home due to the danger posed by COVID 19 virus, many human transactions, like in business and education, continue to flow with the aid of enhanced digital communication.

Major Branches
The Classical School. The classical school of management thought was promulgated by Frederick Winslow Taylor, Henry L. Gantt (1861-1919 CE), Frank and Lillian Gilbreth (1868-1924CE, 1878-1972CE), and Charles Bedaux (1887-1944. This school of thought comprises of scientific management and administrative management. The scientific management involves the use of scientific approach in achieving maximum output, minimum input, and elimination of waste and reduction of inefficiency. In contrast, Jules Henry Fayol (1841-1925 and Max Weber (1864-1920 CE) advocated administrative management that deals with the use of management principles in structuring and management of an organization.
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 workplace.
The Contemporary School. In the 1980s, the convergence of economies resulted to the growth and increase in competitive level in the global economy. As organizations strive to address newer management issues, this shifted the focus from traditional management theories to scientific theories (Hussain et al., 2019). In turn, this shift in perspective led to the emergence of several management thoughts or approaches, such as: systems approach, quantitative approach, qualitative approach, contingency approach, information technology approach, and bail-out and reco1very approaches.
Contemporary management started with Peter Drucker (1909-2005, who proposed the concept of Management by Objective. His work was different from the classical and behavioral methods of the past since contemporary management involves planning, leading, organizing and controlling operations to realize corporate goals. The building up of skills in making decisions, monitoring information and supervising personnel are essential for success. In these modern times, challenges include managing a diverse workforce, sustaining a competitive edge, behaving ethically and using accessible technologies.
These changes in the work environment resulted to three management theories, namely: quantitative theory, systems theory, and contingency theory. The Quantitative Approach uses statistical models, paradigms, and computer analysis to address management choices. It addressed the need in management to integrate people, equipment, and systems during the World War II. The Systems Approach claims that an organization is a system compose of interdependent parts functioning as one for some purpose. Therefore, each division is part of an overall system, which is under the influence of several variables, such as: inputs, transformation process, outputs, feedback, and the environment. Contingency Theory believes that organizational performance is dependent on its environment. In other words, organizational performance depends largely in how organization interacts with the environment.

Methodology
Basically, evolution pertains to a chronological growth and development. In which case, thought evolution focuses more specifically on the nuances in the advancement of ideas, theories, and concepts with their corresponding understanding. Therefore, the fitting research methodology is a combination of both historical and hermeneutical research approaches, which is set alongside a thematic and theoretical approach since the researcher relies heavily on the writings of published articles and other secondary data.
Historical research methodology is a qualitative technique of recapturing the distinctions, characters, and thoughts of past events that helped fashioned the present. It primarily aims to recreate the past, through existing records and their interconnections (Torou et al., 2009). Whereas hermeneutics is a science of interpretation or the science of "explaining and understanding" (Rasool, 2018). It also concerns both the usage of language and the process of using language. Thus, hermeneutics is likewise considered as an art of understanding (Agrey, 2014). It tends to question not only how meaning is constituted but also, and more importantly, how one should seek to find the right meaning in any particular case (Davies, 2009).
Historical-hermeneutical research method, therefore, focuses on grasping the meaning of past happenings to understand the facts and clarify their causes. Such understanding will enable people to determine the effects of past actions to the present and future events (Paterson & Higgs, 2015). Basically, this research method is highly useful in the search for meaning, beliefs, and values from past events through looking for wholes and relationships with other wholes (Higgs, 2001, p.49). Understanding the past empowers one to see patterns that might otherwise be invisible in the present and thus gain decisive perspective to manage current and future difficulties.
This research paper proceeds by laying down first the general historical developments of both Philosophy and Management. And then, the pivotal understanding gained thereof shall be used to trace the interrelatedness of both disciplines. This is done by contrasting and comparing their main tenets and functions, and finally point out the way they mutually serve and benefit from each other.

Discussion
Philosophy and Management or Management and Philosophy, both articulations would render similar results. There is not much of a difference between the two. It"s just a plain parallel approach to both disciplines (Adeoti et al., 2013). However, the act of tracing the parallel growth of both disciplines would enable one to study some of the world"s leading thinkers, which in turn affords one to the benefit of understanding more profoundly how life and the business world works. In short, much of what is acquired in philosophy can be applied in practically any endeavor since philosophy touches on so many fields of study, and its systems are usable in any subject matter (The Evolution of Management Thought, 2002).
In general, here are some of the practical uses of philosophy: First: General Problem Solving. The study of philosophy sharpens one's problem-solving acumen. It helps a person analyze concepts, definitions, arguments, and problems. Organizing ideas and issues, dealing with questions of worth, and extracting what is essential from assortment of information comes easy for one trained in philosophy. Moreover, Philosophy also helps people to synthesize a variety of views or perspectives into a unified whole.
Second: Communication Skills. Philosophy also uniquely improves a person"s capacity to fluently express and effectively communicate ideas. It enhances one"s skills in presenting ideas through well-constructed, and systematic arguments. In short, it enables people to articulate what is distinctive about their views; enhances their ability to explain difficult material; and helps them eliminate ambiguities and vagueness from their writing and speech.
Third: Persuasive Powers. Philosophy offers training in the formulation of clear statements, solid arguments, and fitting examples. Philosophy, therefore, hones in the person the ability to be convincing. It equips people to construct and defend their own views, appreciate rival positions, and point out forcefully the reason why they consider their own views preferable to alternatives. Other than reading and writing in philosophy, these skills are developed also in and outside the classroom through the philosophical dialogue.
Fourth: Writing Skills. In the study of philosophy, one is required to read challenging texts and then put into writing one"s own ideas and views of what has been read in an orderly and logical way. Structure and technique, then, are emphasized in philosophical writing. Originality is also encouraged, and philosophers are generally urged to use their imagination and develop their own ideas.
Fifth: Understanding Other Disciplines. This is one of the main strengths of philosophy. For this reason, philosophy is linked closely to many if not all disciplines. Philosophy finds home in other sciences as evidence by the following coinages: Philosophy of Science, Philosophy of Literature, Philosophy of History, Philosophy of Management, etc. Since all fields of knowledge employ reasoning and must set standards of evidence, philosophy proves essential in assessing the various standards of evidence used by other disciplines. All the above points do suggest that people trained in philosophy in just about every field. Philosophers are not only into teaching, they are also into medicine, law, computer science, management, publishing, sales, criminal justice, public relations, and many other fields.
In addition to all these, there is one further use of philosophy to take note, one that pertains to entire life. The use of philosophical insights goes far beyond its contribution to one's livelihood since it broadens the range of things that one can understand and enjoy. Philosophy provides self-knowledge, foresight, and a sense of direction in life. It affords distinct pleasures of insight to reading and conversation, which can lead to self-discovery, expansion of consciousness, and self-renewal. In all of this, it nurtures individuality and self-esteem. Thus, its value to individual life can be innumerable, and its benefits for common life as a citizen can be endless.
Based on the literature gathered on both disciplines, it is quite obvious that in terms of use or actual practice, management has been present alongside with philosophy. But in terms of growth and maturity as a science or a specific study, philosophy is way ahead than management. That is why, the parallelism between philosophy and management differs in the level of theory and in the level of practice. In practice, philosophy and management have been working side by side since the time of the Greek philosophers and even earlier. But as stablished disciplines, they correlate more seriously and penetratingly work hand in hand quite relatively new, more distinctly during the classical management era.
What follows now are the points of divergence and the points of convergence between philosophy and management (Navoda & Zoysa, n.d.). The points of divergence, on the one hand, explain why despite the overwhelming benefits that philosophy offers to management practitioners, still some people have difficulty availing those benefits. The points of

Points of Divergence
There are two points of divergence between Philosophy and Management. The first one has something to do with language barrier, while the other one has something to do with layers of understanding.

Language Barrier
Just like other sciences, philosophy has its own unique set of vocabularies. The fact that philosophy has been articulated in several languages, starting with the Greek language, moving on to Latin and later still to hundreds and thousands of other languages, some of them are already considered "dead" languages, further thickens the language barrier, so called. The word "being", for instance, can mean different things depending on whether the letter used at the beginning was a capital letter "B" or small letter "b". "Being" in capital "B" would refer to God as the creator, whereas "being" in small "b" would refer to the rest of creation or the lesser beings. Furthermore, the words "essence" and "existence" are pretty common words nowadays. But when used as a philosophical term, especially when viewed from their original Latin root words "esse" and "existere", almost instantly they become complicated words pregnant with meaning! Of course, this phenomenon is not something unique to Philosophy. Other disciplines have their share of technical words also proper to their line of expertise. But this is especially palpable and significantly problematic in Philosophy since as a discipline it primarily deals, not with concrete things, but with abstract concepts to be expressed and communicated in words.
At this point, it is safe to say that in every philosophy class, it would be very helpful to introduce first the essential terms that are used in the discussion. This is to avoid compounding confusion among those joining the discussion, especially to those who are not familiar yet with basic philosophical terms.

Layers of Understanding
In addition to the technical aspect of philosophical terms, another source of difficulty in grasping the intended meaning in a philosophical discourse is the layers of meaning possibly present in a single term. For instance, when Friedrich Nietzsche declared that "God is dead", what does he mean by such statement? More specifically, what does he mean by the terms "God" and "dead"? Both are familiar words at the surface meaning, but underneath them are hidden meanings and significations.
Thus, for one whose concept of God is a personal God, the declaration of Nietzsche is deadly hilarious and so ridiculously meaningless. But for those who picked up Nietzsche"s idea of God as the foundation of reason, and therefore by declaring that "God is dead", he was actually trying to shaken the very foundation of reason, which has become the determinant source of social progress and advancement at that time, one may begin to make sense out of what Nietzsche was trying to convey.
To overcome this difficulty, one has to acquire the skill of distinguishing sharply and precisely the various possible meanings and implications of a given concept. Good philosophy professors are those who can provide students concrete signs and indicators to follow in identifying the hidden significance of a given abstract concept or phenomenon.

Points of Convergence
There are two points of convergence between Philosophy and Management. The first one is expressed in the phrase Philosophy in Management, while the other one is expressed in the phrase Philosophy of Management.

Philosophy in Management
In a nutshell, Philosophy in Management is an attempt to establish the way philosophy helps corporate people understand and account for managerial practices. Applying philosophical theories and questions to contemporary business matters has demonstrated to be inspirational and fruitful. Anyone who wants to thrive in a commercial venture, public administration, and politics must be capable in seeing quickly through complex issues.
Moreover, the manager should be able also to readily come up with resounding arguments for or against a given proposal, screen pertinent information from irrelevant ones, check the reliability and soundness of policy papers, decide which problems are critical and clarify the issues that are still unclear. These skills of rigorous analysis, critical examination and sound judgement are the basics of philosophy. No discipline sharpens one"s ability for unswerving, and methodical thought better than philosophy. This is one pivotal role that philosophy plays in management.
For instance, a sound management program aims to develop business professionals who are aware and alive to their social responsibilities to the community as well as to the needs of investors, shareholders and employers. One must develop a deeper understanding of the role and interrelationship between strategic management, human resource management and operations management. Developing this kind of program requires one with critical thinking and problemsolving skills, which are needed in the competitive world of business. This is where philosophy sets in. Indeed, philosophy helps management in handling notions like intentionality, practical reason, ethics, and truth, among so many others concepts. In the expression "creative thinking", the crucial word is not creativity, but thinking. Philosophy helps one rediscover the art of thinking.
Furthermore, creativity requires the capability to liberate ourselves from predictable ways of thinking. One is encouraged to "think outside the box". But once outside the box, what comes next? One has to construct a new box or anew intellectual framework that would enable a person manage his new environment. Only in doing so can a person produce truly game-changing ideas. This is what Mary Parker Follett did to management. As a political philosopher, she saw exactly what was happening to the society in her time (Melé, 2006). People were living in subhuman conditions due to the economic depression. Sensitive to this reality, she introduced the concept of "whole man". Man is not simply a part, much more a machine part or an industrial tool for massive production, which is a far cry from the truth that man is not only a body but more so a soul (Armada, 2018, p. 194). Instead, human resource is the most important and significant resource since people working together mean "whole men" working within groups. She then moved for the promotion of man"s welfare and well-being. One significant move she did along this line was to come up with practical and helpful guides for conflict resolution. This is philosophy in management, which led some to declare Mary Parker Follett as the "Mother of Modern Management." Indeed, in developing people"s full potentials and in the process befriending them is of much greater value than gold (Armada, 2013, p. 112).

Philosophy of Management
Yet, a philosophy of management aims at going even further (Balsas & Silva, 2018). In this case, management does not simply avail of philosophical skills for their enabling and empowering interventions but really allowing philosophy to tinker into the core being of managementits governing personal mind-set and corporate guiding principles.
Philosophy of management is slowly emerging. However, most of these efforts simply tend to focus on the use of philosophy and philosophers in management trainings. A more ambitious project would be developing a philosophy of management itself, which requires the uncovering of what is behind managerial practices, beyond practical requirements. It goes deeper into the character and lifestyle of the manager or the leader.
Put simply, management philosophy refers to set of beliefs or rules employed by managers to help them make decisions (Charles Ingraham, et al, n.d.). It looks simple enough, but as a philosophy, it means that there is always another layer to it. The extra layer refers to the meaning or reason as to why one would choose to use those rules. This is important because it provides a leader a powerful sense of purpose and motivation. A good management philosophy gives direction and cohesion to the leader and to the organization at large.
Sometimes, individuals are promoted to a management position without ever receiving managerial training. Unfortunately, without training, managers will often struggle to find success in their new roles. Trial and error method of management can be fatal and costly. So, what can one do to ensure he is doing the best possible job as a manager? One of the best ways to ensure a person to be a strong, efficient, and a loyal manager is to develop a management philosophy and follow it to the best of his ability. Articulating in writing a management philosophy is a great way to remind oneself, day in and day out, of one"s work ethics. It reminds oneself of personal set goals and priorities. All human beings need to be grounded in who they are as leaders. Philosophy of Management serves as moral compass about how one will lead and inspire his team.
The more consistently one applies these principles, the greater likelihood one will build a team that will thrive and perform beyond normal expectations.
In Servant Leadership Model, one finds an example of a management style where philosophy becomes one with management. This is because servant leadership style is not a mere management technique but a way of life (Chiniara & Bentein, 2016). Servant Leadership refers to a leader who insist on satisfying the needs of his followers to the point of sacrificing his own personal benefit (Rezaei et al., 2011). Servant Leadership is indeed a common concept. But it difficult to live by since it is characterized by a focus on followers" growth and empowerment, and on leaders" altruism, empathy, sense of ethics and community stewardship (Pawar et al., 2020). Servant leadership is unique in that the leader is viewed as a "servant" attending to followers" needs. This is philosophy and management mutually impacting and enriching each other at its best.

Conclusion
How did Philosophy and Management thoughts evolve in time? In tracing the history of both disciplines, the author identifies the major stages in their developments as guide. Philosophy has four: Ancient, Medieval, Modern and Contemporary. Management has four also, which includes the Early classical stage to the Classical, Behavioral and Modern stages.
The ensuing discussion clearly points out that every manager is a philosopher. Meaning to say, philosophy is at the center of management studies. It pervades all of what people think, feel, do in reality or even in mere imagination. In an age where management research is increasingly judged by its social impact, it is critical that scholarly works are built on a strong intellectual foundation. Philosophy is that foundation.
It pays to have a succinct overview of the field of management philosophy as well as a roadmap for those who wish to explore the terrain further. All knowledge inquiry invokes philosophy and philosophical thinking, and that the artificial separation between philosophy and management is fallacious. Just as philosophy is everywhere, so is management issues. And for better or for worse, they go hand in hand.
The study of philosophy develops a person"s ability to solve problems, to communicate, to organize ideas and issues, to assess pros and cons, and to simplify complex data. These capacities are transferable skills from philosophy to non-philosophy areas. For this reason, people trained in philosophy are prepared to do many kinds of management tasks.
Nevertheless, it has to noted that for philosophy and management to mutually impact and enrich each other, it would be helpful if the persons involved in the process are being oriented first to the crucial philosophical terms and ways of thinking. Other than the technical terms specific to philosophy, one has to wrestle also with the possible layers of meaning in a single given concept.