Hatcher 2013
Hatcher 2013
Hatcher 2013
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:464745 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
EJTD
37,4 Robert Owen: a historiographic
study of a pioneer of human
resource development
414
Tim Hatcher
Department of Leadership, Policy, Adult and Higher Education,
Received 13 February 2013
Accepted 14 February 2013 North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Downloaded by East Tennessee State University At 05:18 25 June 2016 (PT)
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the ideals and activities of the nineteenth century
Welsh industrialist and reformer Robert Owen (1771-1858), and how they informed modern human
resource development (HRD) concepts and practices and provided evidence of Owen as a HRD pioneer.
Design/methodology/approach – Historiography provided a method to understand how historical
figures, and the context in which they lived and worked, inform contemporary research and practice.
Findings – Contextual factors of economics, politics and societal demands and the influences of
Owen’s early life, his immersion within the British factory system and the creation of the New Lanark
mill village, Owen’s great work experiment, revealed a strong impact on his thinking and actions.
Thematic findings included: managing people and profit, education and training, pioneering
workplace innovations, and the failure of the New Harmony, Indiana community. Themes provided
unique historical evidence that education and development of workers, and the creation of humane
work and community environments are linked across time and contexts to modern concepts of human
resource development and thus supported Owen as a HRD pioneer.
Practical implications – Understanding the ideals and workplace experiments and contextual
influences on a historical figure such as Robert Owen illustrate how modern concepts of workforce
training and education, diversity, equality and justice and social responsibility originated and the
importance of contexts on their development and success.
Social implications – Contexts of economics, politics and societal demands greatly influence
organizations and the creation of humane workplaces that nurture human potential.
Originality/value – The study brings history and historiography as a research method to the
forefront of HRD research and practice. The study provides the beginnings of a collective historical
memory that can contribute to HRD defining itself and establishing its identity as a discipline.
Keywords Robert Owen, Human resource development, Historiography, Work reform, Social reform,
Communitarianism, Utopianism, British industrial revolution, British factory system, Management
Paper type Conceptual paper
Purpose
To bring history to the forefront in HRD research and address how historical figures
inform current practices and concepts, I began to study Robert Owen in 1999. I set out
to examine his and others’ historical writings and artifacts to see if there was a
relationship between his ideas and endeavors and the human resource concepts upon
which contemporary workplaces are developed. This historiographic study is an effort
to provide evidence of Robert Owen as a pioneer of HRD.
historical memory serves as the basis for establishing the identity of a discipline”
(Carson and Carson, 1998, p. 38).
The present study is significant in a number of ways. First, it is one of only a few
empirical studies of Robert Owen as a pioneer in any work-related position (Butt, 1971).
Next, only a handful of historical studies of individuals related to HRM or personnel
management were located. The study is significant because only one publication was
found on the origins of HRD, namely Swanson’s (2001) work on Channing Dooley’s
contributions to training during the Second World War, and finally an extensive search
revealed no human resource development studies using a historiographic research method.
This study of Owen is also significant in helping HRD and related professionals
value what they are trying to create in modern workplaces through insights into what
has come before. Historical figures and their contexts can and should play a role in how
people are treated and developed within contemporary workplaces.
Contextual influences
With few exceptions, HRD-related research discounts the historical contexts in which
people live and work. This is unfortunate, because contextual factors such as
economics, politics and societal demands greatly influence workers and workplaces.
Wren (1987) suggested that an individual’s “contributions can only be evaluated in
light of the context of the times” (p. 341). HRD professionals can and should learn by
understanding the connections of contexts over time. A good example is a comparison
between the impact that the growth of technology during the British Industrial
Revolution had on the workplace with the technological explosion within US and
global organizations of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.
To better understand Robert Owen within the context in which he lived and worked,
it was necessary to examine biographical, historical and socio-economic contexts of the
British Industrial Revolution for the period 1790-1850 as the backdrop against which
his philosophy and principles were cultivated.
Early life
Robert Owen was born in 1771 in Newtown, Powys, in central Wales. Being Welsh
gave him a bilingual upbringing and education. Owen senior was a minor official and
local craftsman; thus, young Robert was expected to work at a young age (Claeys,
1993). Throughout his youth he had exceptional work experiences that developed in
him a unique combination of business competence and a vivid curiosity of the
environment in which people lived and worked.
EJTD From his varied work experiences and employer associations he expanded his
37,4 management capabilities and matured in his social skills, honesty, and autonomy.
From 1781 to 1785, McGuffog, a successful draper, employed, befriended and mentored
Robert in efficient business practices, how best to communicate with various
customers (Owen, 1857; Butt, 1971; Cole, 1930), and provided him with a “well selected
library”, which he “freely used” (Owen, 1857, p. 13) Readings included Seneca’s “Views
418 on Humanity”, a stoic philosophy that promotes the essential value of all people.
While working for a year in large retail firms in London, Owen began to appreciate
the frenetic retail business while the “slavery of every day” challenged his previous
views of the work environment. These early experiences were the foundation for his
burgeoning curiosity of the role of the environment in developing human character.
Owen left London for Manchester some time between 1786 and 1788[2].
Downloaded by East Tennessee State University At 05:18 25 June 2016 (PT)
standards were non-existent and where many were killed or maimed by accidents.
Owen was dismayed by this treatment. He said that factory owners must “be aware of
the injustice and useless cruelty, inflicted upon the most helpless in our society” (Owen,
1818, p. 132). He was determined to solve the problem of child labor and in 1815
introduced a bill that called for a reduction in work hours.
While he did adjust hours, breaks and conditions, the reality is that Owen changed
work hours only minimally. In his Second Essay, he wrote: “But it was absolutely
necessary that the children be employed from six o’clock in the morning till seven in
the evening” (Owen, 1813). Work hours for child labor at New Lanark were still fewer
than those required by his fellow industrialists.
Owen realized that the implications of industrialism were not confined to physical
changes, but also the cause of grave social dilemmas that not only ruined people’s
well-being but also oppressed the character of society. He sought to reform the factory
system and how it negatively influenced the lives of people through social experiments
with education and community development. For many of his colleagues these
measures were not unique, but were rather an example of “enlightened management”,
grounded on hard actuarial and financial principles. “The whole operation [New
Lanark] could never be mistaken for anything other than what it was: a profit-making
cotton mill” (Harrison, 1969, p. 155). But New Lanark was more than a factory. It was
also a genuine attempt at community organization (Harrison, 1969). Owen strongly
believed in what he was trying to accomplish at New Lanark. He attempted to influence
his fellow businessmen through his focus more on human than material capital. In his
address to the Superintendents of Manufactories (1816) he said:
Will you not afford some of your attention to consider whether a portion of your time and
capital would not be more advantageously applied to improve your living machines? [. . .] I
venture to assure you that your time and money so applied, if directed by a true knowledge of
the subject, would return you not five, ten or fifteen percent, for your capital so expended, but
often fifty and in many cases a hundred percent (Owen, 1816a; cited in Gorb, 1951, p. 137).
Although an advocate of new technologies, Owen was against the loss of social
standing and humanity that was evidenced by rampant industrialism. He wrote in his
Report to the County of Lanark . . ., that technology had “inflicted evils on society
which now greatly overbalance the benefits which are derived from them”. He argued
that the wealth of a few was “produced by the industry of the many” (Owen, 1821). In a
pamphlet containing three letters, entitled Mr Owen’s Proposed Arrangements,
London, 1819, he proposed to the famous economist David Ricardo that abysmal Robert Owen
social conditions could be significantly changed not by revolution, but rather by
rational behavior. He stated that “famine, crime, poverty, and general misery could be
repressed by increasing the means of subsistence”, through his “village scheme [. . .]
self-support” and humane work (Owen, 1819, pp. 21-2).
The prevailing economic theory of value, i.e. the argument that prices of commodities
are determined by the hours of labor expended in their production attributed to David 421
Ricardo, the famous economist was challenged by Owen by demonstrating that a
company could make a good profit by treating its (human capital) employees well.
“Indeed, he would argue that it was by the very act of breaking Ricardo’s ‘iron law of
wages’ that he had made his workers more productive” (O’Toole, 1996, p. 203).
Throughout his career he used his status as factory owner to question authority and
push for reforms. Owen worked diligently to influence the British government to
Downloaded by East Tennessee State University At 05:18 25 June 2016 (PT)
transform child labor laws and amend existing Poor Laws. His ideas on using flexible
work hours and using half-day work and half-day school schemes for young workers
were finally included in a much diluted Factory Act of 1844.
The uniqueness of the great technological, economic and social changes brought on
by the Industrial Revolution shaped and molded an utterly unconventional individual
in Robert Owen. Without historical contexts our ability to relate Owen’s ideas and
actions to modern HRD is debatable and thus little more than polemic.
Although his approach to paternalistic management was not unique, Owen’s ideas
about education tied to economics and benefitting workers was unconventional. He
suggested that education benefits children when they grow up to be “industrious [. . .]
and faithful to employers” (Owen, 1857; McLaren, 2000). In a speech in Glasgow, in
1812 he declared: “Much has been said and written in relation to education, but few
persons are yet aware of its real importance in society [. . .] as the primary source of all
good and evil, misery and happiness” (Glasgow Herald, April 20, 1812; cited in
Harrison, 1969).
At New Lanark, through his Essays on the Formation of Character (1812-1814) and
in papers he presented at his Institute for the Formation of Character, attention was
devoted to the role of education and training, which had proved vital in removing
“unfavorable circumstances” (Donnachie, 2000, p. 118). The Institution was a factory
school for children by day and a lecture hall or dance hall for adult workers in the
evenings. It had a central role “highlighting the importance of relaxation to the
workforce” (Owen, 1857; Donnachie, 2000, p. 118) and “a center for adult education and
recreation” (Harrison, 1969, p. 160).
In his Report to the County of Lanark (Glasgow, 1821), Owen stated: “It is only by
education, rightly understood, that communities [. . .] can ever be well governed, and by
means of such education every object of human society will be attained with the least
labour and the most satisfaction” (Owen, 1821; cited in Silver, 1969, p. 184). For Owen,
education was to train citizens for a new moral world. The school was “greatly superior
to the mechanical instruction of the age” and “adapted to the capacities” of the learner
(Harrison, 1968, p. 30).
Owen’s New Lanark Institute was a mixture of educational ideas from Lancastrian
and Pestalozzian principles. It is ironic that even though many of his “ideas on
education were no doubt derived from Pestalozzi” (Podmore, 1907, p. 129), education at
New Lanark did not include “any kind of craft or constructional work” (Cole, 1953,
p. 83), or vocational training per se, yet Pestalozzi’s concepts were the foundation of
modern vocational education.
Educational innovations within the Institute are perhaps more illustrative of
learning theories such as the experiential learning theory of Kolb and Fry (1975) and
Knowles’s (1990) andragogy. For example, children were taught to develop their own
style; that they understood what they were learning and why, and that they applied
what they learned. Owen believed that education should be by “practical application
and clear understanding of subject matter (Altfest, 1977, p. 83). Learners were “always
EJTD allowed to ask their own questions for explanations” (Owen, 1857). Anderson (2002)
37,4 added that “Owen’s plan calls for students to share the responsibilities for teaching; in
doing so, he [Owen] blurs the distinctions on which hierarchies are built” (p. 431).
Owen instilled the novel idea of learning as an integral part of a happy, egalitarian,
work-based community. The Institute served the purpose not only as education for
children but also as enhancing the character of workers. From A New View of Society
424 (1816), Owen’s experiment at New Lanark was “Reform in the training and in the
management of the poor, the ignorant, the untaught and the untrained”. Education was
but one component, albeit an important one, of a larger social agenda that proposed
and highlighted Owen’s New Lanark as a model solution to the evils caused by poverty
and early industrialism.
Downloaded by East Tennessee State University At 05:18 25 June 2016 (PT)
the stores made an average profit of £700 annually. Profit was reinvested in
maintenance of the factory schools (Podmore, 1907; Morton, 1962).
And while not all of his workers embraced his reforms, a majority apparently cared
deeply for him. In 1813, after a trip to meet with new Quaker partners, upon his return
to New Lanark the community unharnessed Owen’s horses from his carriage and
“drew him in triumph through the streets” (Harrison, 1969).
Many of his workers appeared to adore him, and visitors to New Lanark celebrated
his success as a manager and owner. However, veneration of Robert was far from
unanimous. Robert Southey, a friend and person of note visited New Lanark in 1819, and
reported that “the persons under him [. . .] aare as much under his absolute management
as so many slaves” (Southey, 1891; cited in New Lanark Conservation Trust n.d.a) and,
according to Robertson (1971, p. 150; cited in Pollard and Salt, 1971) his attempt at moral
improvement was “imposed upon workers without consultation” (p. 150). Even the
buildings, structures and Institutes were criticized as “symbolism of the early welfare
state; the bell turret reminds me of workhouses, the Institutes reminds me of orphanages,
and the mills could just as easily be Poor Law infirmaries” (Barker, 1998, pp. 127-32).
Owen’s single-minded focus to create a new view of work and society at New
Lanark insulated him to some extent from the sting of his critics. He was much more
interested in envisioning a workplace utopia and experimenting with his ideals of a
just society than conforming to the narrow-mindedness of many of his contemporaries.
He chose not to diminish his vision by clinging to the status quo.
on site or procured with great difficulty. Dissention grew in the winter of 1825-1826
with the arrival of Owen’s “Boatload of Knowledge”, a group of intellectuals, educators
and aristocrats who arrived by keelboat from Philadelphia. They were secured to run
the schools and provide intellectual, moral and communitarian leadership. Bestor
(1950) reported that the “cleavage between the so-called Literati and the rest of the
community’s members produced the deepest and most enduring division” (p. 179). As
New Harmony continued to decline, Owen’s transformation from a manager to a
“utopian prince” (Duncan, 2004) was complete.
Continuing economic, social and organizational problems and the intense stresses of
pioneer life took their toll. As a communitarian experiment New Harmony “virtually
came to an end with Owen’s departure in June, 1827” (Harrison, 1969, p. 165). He
returned to Great Britain that same year. He never saw New Harmony again.
As he grew older, more socialistic and radical Owen became a leading figure for
working class institutions and cooperative worker and trade movements such as the
Grand National Moral Union of the Productive and Useful Classes and the Grand
National Consolidated Trades Union.
During the last two decades of his life Owen spent his time lecturing, writing and
working on sectarian doctrines and government reforms while living on a meager
income. Robert Owen died in 1858 at the age of 87 pursuing spiritualism, a belief he
had bitterly admonished most of his life.
“It was an uninspiring end for a man whose influence was so great in many
movements which were not to achieve fruition until recent times [. . .] he attributed much
importance to the ethical principles and social ideas which he felt pay as the basis of any
organization” (Gorb, 1951, p. 147) which he found antithetical to business of his time.
personal and reciprocal relationship with his workers “whose lives he wanted
passionately to improve” (Anderson, 2002, p. 427). As an aristocratic factory owner he
was expected to be detached from the lower classes.
While there is some evidence that Owen did not associate himself much with his
workers and saw them in a detached, fatherly way, he admonished his fellow
industrialists for referring to workers as “bad, worthless and wicked” (“Address to the
inhabitants of New Lanark”; Owen, 1816a, b).
Another way to see Owen’s relationship with his workers is as a precedent of
organizational culture and socialization. In his Third Essay (Owen, 1814) he observes
that people are “trained and formed by its leading existing, and the character of the
lower orders in Britain is now formed chiefly by trade, manufacturers, and commerce”
(Anderson, 2002, p. 426). In “A New View of Society” (Owen, 1816a, b), he stated:
To remedy this evil, not one legal punishment was inflicted, not one individual imprisoned; but
checks and other regulations of prevention were introduced; a short plain explanation of the
immediate benefits they would derive from a different conduct was inculcated by those
instructed for the purpose [. . .] Those employed became industrious, temperate, healthy; faithful
to their employers, and kind to each other, while the owners received benefits far beyond those
which could be obtained by any other means than those of mutual confidence and kindness.
And even if he was less than “democratic” as a leader, he was within the political
debates of the time among those who pressed the hardest for civic and human rights
for the lower working class (Tsuzuki, 1992).
The present study identified Owen’s visions and actions to achieve greater
autonomy and justice in the workplace, and the optimistic belief that this goal and
more can be achieved through the creation of a positive work community. Owenism,
the notion that humans can find ideal solutions to the complex problems of society and
the workplace, has been supplanted by labels such as “visionary” and “socially
responsible”, accolades and monikers for leaders who work for the betterment of
organizations and society (O’Toole, 1996).
desire to achieve greater autonomy and human rights in the workplace, and the
optimistic belief that this goal can be achieved through development of human
resources and related workplace reforms towards a new kind of organization
where financial success is a result of developing human potential.
(3) Historiography as a research method has potential for HRD research. It should be
considered a supplement to more traditional research techniques, especially in
areas where methods are required to assess multiple causes from multiple
time-bound contexts. Indeed, researchers may benefit for the creativity, skepticism,
and reticence demanded by historiography (Goodman and Kruger, 1988).
(4) Finally, on tracing the origins of our current thinking on matters of humane
workplaces and developing human potential on the job, we can see that Owen’s
work and ideas as a businessman and workplace reformer an early attempt to
integrate a set of social and ethical ideas into a socio-workplace framework that
linked the development of human resources with social reforms.
The evidence cited herein suggests that Robert Owen implemented and enhanced
many of today’s HRD-related activities and concepts. He was one of the first recognized
business leaders to focus on employees and their well-being and the relationship
between work and society. Thus, Robert Owen should be considered and accepted as a
true pioneer of human resource development.
Notes
1. My sincere appreciation to the Hon. Hatton Davidson, past Curator of the Robert Owen
Museum, Newtown, Powys, Wales for his hospitality during my visit in 2002 and his
thoughtful critique of an earlier draft of this manuscript.
2. Some dates are inconsistent within the historical record.
References
Altfest, K.C. (1977), Robert Owen as Educator, Twayne Publishers, Boston, MA.
Anderson, R. (2002), “Misery made me a fiend: social reproduction in Mary Shelley’s
Frankenstein and Robert Owen’s early writings”, Nineteenth-Century Contexts, Vol. 24,
pp. 417-438.
Barker, P. (1998), “In New Lanark Robert Owen tried to forge a new society. Today, his model Robert Owen
village is a visitor center”, New Statesman, Vol. 127, pp. 4-6.
Bedeian, A. (1998), “Exploring the past”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 4, pp. 4-15.
Bestor, A. (1950), Backwoods Utopias: The Sectarian Origins and the Owenite Phase of
Communitarianism Socialism in America: 1663-1829, University of Pennsylvania Press,
Philadelphia, PA.
Booth, D. (2005), “Evidence revisited: interpreting historical materials in sport history”, 429
Rethinking History, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 459-483.
Branigin, R.D. (1972), “Robert Owen’s New Harmony: an American heritage”, in Pitzer, D.E. (Ed.),
Robert Owen’s American Legacy, Proceedings of the Robert Owen Bicentennial Conference,
Vol. 18, Indiana Historical Society, Indianapolis, IN, p. 22.
Brown, R. (1991), Society and Economy in Modern Britain 1700-1850, Routledge, London.
Downloaded by East Tennessee State University At 05:18 25 June 2016 (PT)
Butt, J. (1971), Robert Owen: Prince of Cotton Spinners, David & Charles, Newton Abbot.
Carson, P.P. and Carson, K.D. (1998), “Theoretically grounding management history as a relevant
and valuable form of knowledge”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 29-42.
Chaloner, W.H. (1954), “Robert Owen, Peter Drinkwater and the early factory system in
Manchester, 1788-1800”, Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and
Philosophical Society, Vol. LXXXII.
Claeys, G. (1993), The Selected Works of Robert Owen, The Pickering Masters, Vol. 4 vols,
Pickering and Chatto, London.
Cole, G.D.H. (1925), Robert Owen, Little, Brown and Company, London.
Cole, G.D.H. (1930), The Life of Robert Owen, Macmillan, London.
Cole, M. (1953), Robert Owen of New Lanark, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Donnachie, I. (2000), Robert Owen: Owen of New Lanark and New Harmony, Tuckwell Press,
Edinburgh.
Duncan, F.H. (2004), The Utopian Prince: Robert Owen and the Search for Millennium, Xlibris,
Bloomington, IN.
Galenson, D. (1981), White Servitude in Colonial America: An Economic Analysis, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Godwin, W. (1793), Political Justice, Vol. I.
Goodman, R.S. and Kruger, E.J. (1988), “Data dredging or legitimate research method?
Historiography and its potential for management research”, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 13, pp. 315-325.
Gorb, P. (1951), “Robert Owen as a businessman”, Bulletin of the Business Historical Society,
Vol. 25, pp. 127-148.
Handlin, O., Schlesinger, A.M., Morison, S.E., Merk, F., Schlesinger, A.M. Jr and Buck, P.H.
(1970), Harvard Guide to American History, Atheneum, New York, NY.
Harrison, J.F.C. (1968), Utopianism and Education: Robert Owen and the Owenites, Teachers
College Press, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Harrison, J.F.C. (1969), Robert Owen and the Owenites in Britain and America: The Quest for the
New Moral World, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Hatcher, T. (1998), “An alternative view of human resource development”, in Stewart, B. and
Hall, H. (Eds), Beyond Tradition: Preparing HRD Educators for Tomorrow’s Workforce,
University Council for Workforce and Human Resource Development, Columbia, MO,
pp. 33-54.
EJTD Jenkins, K. (1999), “After history”, Rethinking History, Vol. 3, pp. 7-20.
37,4 Kolb, D.A. and Fry, R. (1975), “Toward an applied theory of experiential learning”, in Cooper, C.
(Ed.), Theories of Group Process, Wiley, London.
Knowles, M.S. (1990), The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species, Gulf Publishing, Houston, TX.
Lawrence, B.S. (1984), “Historical perspective: using the past to study the present”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 9, pp. 307-312.
430 Lee, M. (2001), “A refusal to define HRD”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 3,
pp. 327-341.
Morton, A.L. (1962), The Life and Ideas of Robert Owen, Lawrence and Wishart, London.
Lockyear, R. (1984), “Writing history: Roger Lockyear on writing historical biography”, History
Today, November, pp. 46-49.
Downloaded by East Tennessee State University At 05:18 25 June 2016 (PT)
McLaren, D.J. (2000), “Education of citizenship and the new moral world of Robert Owen”,
Scottish Educational Review, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 107-117.
New Lanark Conservation Trust (n.d.a), South Lanarkshire Education Resources, New Lanark
Conservation Trust, New Lanark.
New Lanark Conservation Trust (n.d.b), “Journey of a Tour of Scotland”, Robert Southey, 1891,
cited in Investigating New Lanark 1785-1830, New Lanark Conservation Trust, New
Lanark.
O’Toole, J. (1996), Leading Change: The Argument for Values-based Leadership, Ballantine
Books, New York, NY.
Owen, R. (1813), A New View of Society: Or, Essays on the Principle of the Formation of Human
Character, (2nd Essay), London.
Owen, R. (1814), A New View of Society: Or, Essays on the Principle of the Formation of Human
Character, (3rd Essay), London.
Owen, R. (1816a), A New View of Society: Or, Essays on the Principle of the Formation of Human
Character, 2nd edition of the complete work, London.
Owen, R. (1816b), A New View of Society: Or, Essays on the Principle of the Formation of Human
Character, address to the Superintendants of manufactories, prefixed to the Third Essay
on the Formation of Character, London, pp. 71-74.
Owen, R. (1818), Observations on the Effect of the Manufacturing System: With Hints for the
Improvement of Those Parts of It Which Are Most Injurious to Health and Morals, 3rd ed.,
London.
Owen, R. (1819), “Mr. Owen’s proposed arrangement for the distressed working classes, shown to
be consistent with sound principles of political economy”, Three Letters Addressed to
David Ricardo, London.
Owen, R. (1821), Report to the County of Lanark of a Plan for Relieving Public Distress and
Removing Discontent, Glasgow, Scotland.
Owen, R. (1857), Life of Robert Owen. Written by Himself. With Selections from his Writings and
Correspondence, London.
Podmore, F. (1907), Robert Owen: A Biography, Haskell House, New York, NY.
Pollard, S. (1999), Labour History and the Labour Movement in Britain, Ashgate, Aldershot.
Pollard, S. and Salt, J. (1971), Robert Owen Prophet of the Poor: Essays in Honour of the Two
Hundredth Anniversary of his Birth, Macmillan, London.
Popper, K. (1972), The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Robertson, A.J. (1971), “Robert Owen, cotton spinner: New Lanark, 1800-25”, in Pollard, S. and Robert Owen
Salt, J. (Eds), Robert Owen Prophet of the Poor: Essays in Honour of the Two Hundredth
Anniversary of his Birth, Macmillan, London, pp. 145-165.
Rule, L. (1986), The Laboring Classes in Early Industrial England 1750-1850, Longman, London.
Scott, W.G. (1996), “Do historical facts speak for themselves”, Journal of Management History,
Vol. 2 No. 9, pp. 85-89.
Silver, H. (1969), Robert Owen on Education, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 431
Swanson, R.A. (2001), “Origins of contemporary human resource development”, Advances in
Developing Human Resources, Vol. 3 No. 2.
Taylor, A. (1995), “New views of an old moral world: an appraisal of Robert Owen”, Labor
History, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 88-94.
Thompson, M. (1969), “Making of the English working class”, in Morton, A.L. (Ed.), The English
Downloaded by East Tennessee State University At 05:18 25 June 2016 (PT)