| Item Type |
Article |
| ID |
|
| Preview |
| Image |
|
| Caption |
|
|
| Full text |
AN00234698-20231200-0019.pdf
| Type |
:application/pdf |
Download
|
| Size |
:2.1 MB
|
| Last updated |
:Jun 4, 2024 |
| Downloads |
: 31 |
Total downloads since Jun 4, 2024 : 31
|
|
| Release Date |
|
| Title |
| Title |
ドイツ経営経済学における学問の境界問題 : シュライエグの所説を中心に
|
| Kana |
ドイツ ケイエイ ケイザイガク ニ オケル ガクモン ノ キョウカイ モンダイ : シュライエグ ノ ショセツ オ チュウシン ニ
|
| Romanization |
Doitsu keiei keizaigaku ni okeru gakumon no kyōkai mondai : Shuraiegu no shosetsu o chūshin ni
|
|
| Other Title |
| Title |
Demarcation problem between German business administration and neighboring disciplines : a discussion focused on the argument of G. Schreyögg
|
| Kana |
|
| Romanization |
|
|
| Creator |
| Name |
榊原, 研互
 |
| Kana |
サカキバラ, ケンゴ
|
| Romanization |
Sakakibara, Kengo
|
| Affiliation |
慶應義塾大学商学部
|
| Affiliation (Translated) |
|
| Role |
|
| Link |
|
|
| Edition |
|
| Place |
|
| Publisher |
| Name |
慶應義塾大学出版会
|
| Kana |
ケイオウ ギジュク ダイガク シュッパンカイ
|
| Romanization |
Keiō gijuku daigaku shuppankai
|
|
| Date |
| Issued (from:yyyy) |
2023
|
| Issued (to:yyyy) |
|
| Created (yyyy-mm-dd) |
|
| Updated (yyyy-mm-dd) |
|
| Captured (yyyy-mm-dd) |
|
|
| Physical description |
|
| Source Title |
| Name |
三田商学研究
|
| Name (Translated) |
Mita business review
|
| Volume |
66
|
| Issue |
5
|
| Year |
2023
|
| Month |
12
|
| Start page |
19
|
| End page |
29
|
|
| ISSN |
|
| ISBN |
|
| DOI |
|
| URI |
|
| JaLCDOI |
|
| NII Article ID |
|
| Ichushi ID |
|
| Other ID |
|
| Doctoral dissertation |
| Dissertation Number |
|
| Date of granted |
|
| Degree name |
|
| Degree grantor |
|
|
| Abstract |
近年ドイツ経営経済学は「厳しい試練」に直面しているという。かつては絶大な支持を集めていたグーテンベルクやハイネンのパラダイムが求心力を失い，それに代わる新たなパラダイムが現れないなかで，経営経済学は2極分解の事態に見舞われている。それは一方でミクロ経済学への統合の動きであり，他方で下位学問分野への分割・独立の動きである。本稿では，こうした事態を打開すべくシュライエグによって提唱された「実践科学としての経営経済学」の構想を紹介するとともに，その妥当性を検討する。
In recent years, German business administration has faced "severe challenges"'. The paradigms of E. Gutenberg and E. Heinen, which once enjoyed tremendous support, have lost their centripetal force, and with no new paradigm emerging to replace them, business administration is experiencing a polarization situation. On the one hand, this is a movement toward integration into microeconomics, and on the other hand, there is a movement toward division into subdisciplines. In this paper, we will introduce the concept of "business administration as a practical science" proposed by G. Schreyögg to overcome this situation, and examine whether this attempt was successful.
|
|
| Table of contents |
|
| Keyword |
|
| NDC |
|
| Note |
|
| Language |
|
| Type of resource |
|
| Genre |
|
| Text version |
|
| Related DOI |
|
| Access conditions |
|
| Last modified date |
|
| Creation date |
|
| Registerd by |
|
| History |
|
| Index |
|
| Related to |
|
