Abstract:This article examines organization, management, and leadership theory development and evolution from the perspectives of legitimacy and efficacy. Based on this examination, we support rigorous testing and grounded theory approaches, advocate the use of evidence-based theory development, and offer the 5P's Model of Strategic Leadership as an example of a model that originated from evidence-based theory development. We suggest that researchers, faculty members, and business practitioners should be able to contemplate and debate the usefulness of various theories and models with the understanding that application is essential for substantiation of their worth. In this article, we analyze existing organizational theory, but we also advocate the introduction of new organization theories. This can occur if researchers in the various educational institutions, business organizations, professional organizations, and media outlets are more open to the creation of a variety of models and theories, the legitimacy and usefulness of which can later be substantiated through application. Introduction The objectives of this article are: (1) to examine the history of various organization theories and their development from the perspective of legitimacy and efficacy, (2) to analyze selected debates regarding theory development and various theories, (3) to advocate the use of evidence-based theory development, and (4) to provide an example of a model and related theories that we created after reviewing existing theories and determining gaps in terms of implementation and alignment. We are not rejecting the need for rigorous testing of theories. We are simply advocating the proposal of conceptual theories and models for debate and potential usefulness. Then through application of the theories, they can be tested in terms of validity and the extent to which they are useful. This paper suggests that many very useful new organizational theories and models as well as extensions and adaptations of other theories and models have been, and are being, developed. The difficulties in getting these theories and models considered for legitimacy and usefulness range from realistic questions to superciliousness as struggles and debates continue among theorists, practitioners, and empirical scientists. Walsh, Meyer, and Schoonhoven (2006: 657) suggest other potential problems including "the irrelevance of organization theory," the debates among two groups-those who "argue for closer ties to business practice" and those who "argue for maintaining our academic distance," and the fact that organization theorists "find ourselves so self-critical and . . . fundamentally, adrift." We would not go so far as to say that we are adrift, but we are perhaps so self-critical that we do not allow theories to be presented so that they can be debated. We believe that an understanding of, and appreciation for, the history of management and organization theory is valuable. Yet we as management and organization theorists, scholars, and researchers are also aware that times have changed, and continue to change, dramatically. Business planning horizons are much shorter and competitive pressures (often intense) lead to a more rapid rate of business innovation than ever before. We propose that we, as the academicians studying these phenomena, should be thinking innovatively about the theory development process. We suggest that the originators of new theories and models and extensions of existing theories and models should be able to present in the literature for debate and later testing for application potential. To facilitate organization theory development for introduction and application in today's rapidly changing environment, we advocate the evidence-based approach and other innovative approaches to the creation of new, and the extension of existing, theories and models. Debates among Theorists While various management and organization theories have been empirically tested over the years, many of them were initially proposed as conceptual theories and models and as such, accepted as legitimate prior to empirical testing. …

Fairness and the Main Management Theories of the Twentieth Century: A Historical Review, 1900–1965

Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow

How Justice Theory and Research Can Help Address Organizational and Societal Problems

Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.

Impacts Of Social Comparison And Fairness Facet Preference On Justice Judgments

The fairness of human resource management practices: an assessment by the justice sensitive

How do people judge fairness in supervisor and peer relationships? Another assessment of the dimensions of justice

Riding the Fifth Wave: Organizational Justice As Dependent Variable

Fairness at the collective level: A meta-analytic examination of the consequences and boundary conditions of organizational justice climate.

Chinese Conceptions Of Justice And Reward Allocation

It's not only what you do, but why you do it: How managerial motives influence employees' fairness judgments

Role Theory Perspectives: Past, Present, and Future Applications of Role Theories in Management Research

Fairness at the Organizational Level: Examining the Effect of Organizational Justice Climate on Collective Turnover Rates and Organizational Performance

Justice as a Social Bargain and Optimization Problem

Justice versus fairness in the family business workplace: A socioemotional wealth approach

The Legitimacy and Efficacy of Current Organizational Theory: An Analysis

Fairness Is an Emergent Self-Organized Property of the Free Market for Labor

Fairness Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence: A Review and Path Forward

An actor-focused model of justice rule adherence and violation: The role of managerial motives and discretion.

Achieving Fairness in Policing

Fairness in human resource management, social exchange relationships, and citizenship behavior: testing linkages of the target similarity model among nurses in the United States