Has Management Studies Lost Its Way? Ideas for More Imaginative and Innovative Research

Despite the huge increase in the number of management articles published during the three last decades, there is a serious shortage of high‐impact research in management studies. We contend that a primary reason behind this paradoxical shortage is the near total dominance of incremental gap‐spotting...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of management studies Jg. 50; H. 1; S. 128 - 152
Hauptverfasser: Alvesson, Mats, Sandberg, Jörgen
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.01.2013
Blackwell
Schlagworte:
Business Administration
Dominance
Domination
Economics and Business
Ekonomi och näringsliv
Företagsekonomi
Identity
Innovation
Innovations
Institutionalism
interesting theories
Management
Management theory
Methodology
problematization
Professional identity
Professionalism
research methods
research problems
research questions
Samhällsvetenskap
Social Sciences
Studies
Theorie
Theorie-Praxis-Verhältnis
theory development
Wissenschaftliche Methode
ISSN:0022-2380, 1467-6486, 1467-6486
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Despite the huge increase in the number of management articles published during the three last decades, there is a serious shortage of high‐impact research in management studies. We contend that a primary reason behind this paradoxical shortage is the near total dominance of incremental gap‐spotting research in management. This domination is even more paradoxical as it is well known that gap‐spotting rarely leads to influential theories. We identify three broad and interacting key drivers behind this double paradox: institutional conditions, professional norms, and researchers' identity constructions. We discuss how specific changes in these drivers can reduce the shortage of influential management theories. We also point to two methodologies that may encourage and facilitate more innovative and imaginative research and revisions of academic norms and identities.
Bibliographie:ark:/67375/WNG-5NRSQCMR-5
istex:5177A105532306421C99227E93A1ACD2B6A2D380
ArticleID:JOMS1070
The copyright line for this article was changed on 25 August 2017 after original online publication.
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Article-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0022-2380
1467-6486
1467-6486
DOI:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01070.x