Someone should make a study about management theories. The issue is that the major examples of management theories were ... fraud. Taylor ... was a fraud [1].

Someone should make a study about management theories. The issue is that the major examples of management theories were ... fraud. Taylor ... was a fraud [1]. Lied about his data in order to get paid more. Even paid the people he "tested his theory on" to act out the outcomes he wanted to see for company higher ups. And he acted like what I've come to expect from managers: first he commits scientific fraud, then writes a book and titles it "Principles of Scientific Management". Because when you go for bullshit, the big lesson is: don't just bullshit a little. Go all out. Weber and Fayol were no different, and even Ford ... let's just say that if you focus on his technical accomplishments and skip all the management bullshit you will not be missing much (besides a big part of Ford's ideas were high wages, so I doubt many managers will be repeating it). As can be seen, among many other places, on wikipedia [2], the fact that Taylorism was an outright fraud has not stopped pretty much every management school in the country from expanding and pushing on with his "work". It's like most of the famous economists. The top ones were simply frauds, who got important positions like chairman of the Fed, or secretary of the Treasury and just happened to be in office during big events. Their theories were wrong (really fraudulent, as they didn't believe in it at the time, which makes it a fraud rather than just being wrong, and Keynes, Hayek, Friedman and Greenspan have admitted as much, and let's face: they were "the greats". If they were frauds, then people like our current Mnuchin, Powell or Geithner aren't even frauds : they're ignorant and actually proud of that (Mnuchin has said in an interview that not understanding much economics makes him a better secretary of the treasury). Yellen actually had credentials, and seems to need another year or two before she'll confirm she was a fraud too, she has already admitted her theories were wrong, so all she has to do is also admit that she knew they were wrong when she decided to implement them. And boy, she was, like Keynes, more than a little bit wrong). Once money or power gets involved, humans, "scientist" or not, become lying bastards. At least this research was honest. But it's not saying what people want to hear, and so it will be ignored, as it wouldn't contribute (and that's being polite) to the careers of the decision makers implementing these policies. Meanwhile, Trump is happily pushing on Obama's efforts in this regard, who simply continued from Bush's policies, ... and so on and so forth. Don't worry: Trump is not about to let such a detail as science stand in the way of looking good to a few people, and let's just not kid ourselves that Hillary or whoever gets elected in 2020 will be better. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/06/the-management-myth/304883/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/06/the-man... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_management#Relationship_to_Fordism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_management#Relation...