Response to Dennis Tourish’s “The Triumph of Nonsense in Management Studies”

Peter Bamberger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2020.0130

2020-06-01

Academy of Management Learning and Education

Abstract:Original article: Tourish, Dennis, "The Triumph of Nonsense in Management Studies," https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2019.0255

management,education & educational research

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Enduring Interest Trap in Debating the State of a Field

Gavin M. Schwarz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2020.0122

2020-06-01

Academy of Management Learning and Education

Abstract:Original article: Tourish, Dennis, "The Triumph of Nonsense in Management Studies," https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2019.0255

management,education & educational research
Musings on management. Ten ideas designed to rile everyone who cares about management

H Mintzberg

Abstract:Henry Mintzberg, a professor of management at McGill University in Canada and at INSEAD in France, takes aim at the hype surrounding management fads and gurus and dares to suggest that the emperor has no clothes. In order to rile all who care about management and get them thinking creatively, he presents ten contrarian observations on such topics as the meanness of leanness, the folly of CEOs who fancy themselves strategists, the disempowering that so-called empowerment creates, the myopia of purely financial measures, and the inadequacy of M.B.A. programs. Mintzberg maintains, for example, that it is time to delayer the delayerers. He argues that delayering has created more problems than it has solved be cause it is, in essence, a process by which people who barely know what's going on get rid of those who do--a process ensuring that the real database of the organization, the key to what was its future, lines up at the unemployment office. Too many managers, he says, dream of becoming the next turnaround doctor. They fail to understand that great organizations, once created, don't need great leaders: if a company can't function on its own, a hero won't help. A leader who draws out the knowledge embedded in all parts of an organization is a leader who can help a company function alone--without heroes. Such leaders often practice what Mintzberg calls the craft style of management (as opposed to the professional style or the boss style). It is about inspiring, not empowering. It is based on mutual respect rooted in common experience and offers hope for improving what is now wrong with management.
Management education and the theatre of the absurd

Kenneth Starkey,Sue Tempest,Silvia Cinque

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507619875894

2019-10-22

Management Learning

Abstract:In this article, we recommend the drama of theatre of the absurd as a novel space for critically reflecting upon management and management education as shaped by the forces of emotion, irrationality and conformism rather than reason. We discuss the theatre of the absurd as uniquely relevant to understanding our troubled times. We present a brief overview of the history of business schools and management education. We apply the idea of absurdity to the world of business schools and management education, focusing on the work of one of the theatre of the absurd’s leading proponents, Eugène Ionesco. We emphasise the importance of fiction and fantasy as key aspects of organisation and education. We contribute to debates about management education by reflecting on possible futures for management education and the business school, embracing the humanities as a core disciplinary focus. We suggest that this will help rebalance management education, retaining the best of the existing curriculum, while re-situating the study of management in its broader historical and philosophical nexus.

management
Herd mentality and Autopoiesis in B-Schools’ Research: Here to Stay?"

Reynold James

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19080/arr.2023.09.555752

2023-05-05

Annals of Reviews & Research

Abstract:While the academic literature reveals that significant parts of management research generated by B-Schools has provenly been worthless for over four decades, what’s surprising is that there seems to be no end in sight to this predicament, attributed mostly to ‘physics envy’ and the bureaucratization of B-School research. This article enriches this debate by foregrounding the aspects of herding and autopoiesis that have been rather underplayed in the literature concerning the mostly worthless B-School research.
Restoring a Taste for Science: Enhancing Strategic Management Knowledge by Changing the Governance of Academic Journals

Rudi K. F. Bresser,David B. Balkin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1561/111.00000037

2022-01-01

Strategic Management Review

Abstract:Too many strategic management scholars may have lost their passion for research or what Robert Merton has defined as the 'taste for science.' A lack of passion curtails the pursuit of original, creative research, and the knowledge generated often may be of questionable value for the field's advancement and business practices. We argue that the reduction of a scholar's passion for research and an insufficient generation of meaningful knowledge are influenced by a flawed academic governance system. The current governance system of our academic journals and universities undermines attaining the legitimate interests of individual faculty, the scientific community, and broader society. To resolve this situation, we propose a new governance system based on open access and open evaluation. We demonstrate how this alternative system can meet the interests of its stakeholders, encourage more meaningful research and knowledge, and restore a scholar's 'taste for science.'
Between Sweet Harmony and a Clash of Cultures: Does a Joint Academic–Practitioner Review Reconcile Rigor and Relevance?

Alexander T. Nicolai,Ann-Christine Schulz,Markus Göbel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886310390866

2010-12-28

The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science

Abstract:A substantial body of literature discusses the so-called rigor—relevance gap in management science and possible ways of overcoming it. A frequently advocated approach, in line with Gibbons, Limoges, Nowotny, Schwartz, and Trow’s “Mode 2” idea of creating “hybrid fora,” is the introduction of joint academic—practitioner review processes in management journals. In an empirical case study of one of the oldest management journals in the world, the authors show that the demands of academic and practitioner reviewers are hardly compatible, and, to some extent, inversely correlated. In contrast to other studies, here the authors show that the reason for the tension between academics and practitioners with regard to this issue does not lie in differences in the evaluation criteria of each group. Rather, the different worldviews of academics and practitioners lead to different interpretations of these criteria and a striking incongruence between the two groups’ ideas of practical relevance.
Theory, explanation, and understanding in management research

Jean-Etienne Joullié,Anthony M. Gould

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444211012414

2021-05-04

BRQ Business Research Quarterly

Abstract:Theory production has been a central focus of management research for decades, mostly because theory legitimizes both management research and, through its application, management practice as professional endeavors. However, such an emphasis on theory glosses over one of its constraining and particularized roles in scientific explanation, namely that theory codifies predictive knowledge. Committing to a ‘traditional’ or ‘critical’ understanding of theory thus amounts to embracing the view that prediction is achievable within a circumscribed field of study. Such an embrace is non-controversial in natural science. However, within the realm of management studies, it necessitates and smuggles in a strawman view of human existence, one which does not accommodate freedom and responsibility. This limitation of management theory explains its inadequate utility. This article argues that alternative avenues for management research exist. JEL CLASSIFICATION: M10

management,business
The Static and Dynamic Mechanics of Competition: A Comment on Hunt and Morgan's Comparative Advantage Theory

Peter R. Dickson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299606000409

IF: 15.36

1996-10-01

Journal of Marketing

Abstract:The author provides constructive criticism of Hunt and Morgan's (1995) promotion of the dynamic disequilibrium paradigm and explains why their comparative advantage and market orientation theory is not dynamic enough. He discusses what creates market diversity and comparative advantage, why competitive markets are more efficient, how competitive markets fail, and how management of failed markets can fail. The author's goal is to demonstrate the explanatory power of the dynamic paradigm and encourage the use of it to focus on how firms can learn to improve their competitive processes.

business
Citizenship Behavior: Different Theoretical Perspectives to Understand the Predictors and Outcomes

Peter Bamberger,Patrick Flynn,Russell Eric Johnson,Szu-Han Lin,Yiduo Shao,I-Heng Wu,Bruce Avolio,Amrou Awaysheh,Chu-Hsiang Chang,Aaron Hill,Hun Whee Lee,Emily Poulton,Junqi Shi,Tara S. Wernsing,Mengjie Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2019.11768symposium

2019-01-01

Abstract:This symposium presents cutting-edge research on citizenship behavior. The existing literature has suggested that citizenship behavior is an important and complicated phenomenon that is not fully understood. To reconcile the conflicting views in on-going investigations of this phenomenon, this symposium presents five studies that examine how employees at different organizational levels perceive citizenship behavior and how they enact and react to such behavior. Drawing from multiple theoretical perspectives, these studies advance our understanding regarding the various motives for citizenship behavior and the outcomes of such behavior for the actor, the team, and the organization. Peter Bamberger, who has made a foundational contribution to the workplace helping literature and is currently the Editor-in-Chief of Academy of Management Discoveries, will comment on the papers and facilitate an interactive discussion with the audience. Opening Up the Black Box Between CEO Self-Esteem and Firm Performance: The Mediation Role of CEO Helping and TMT Managerial Consensus Presenter: Yiduo Shao; U. of Florida Presenter: Yifan Song; Temple U. Presenter: Jaclyn Koopmann; Auburn U. Presenter: Aaron Hill; U. of Florida Presenter: Junqi Shi; Lingnan U. / Sun Yat-sen U. The Top of the Top: Psychological Entitlement as a Mediator in Explaining High Performers' Social Behavioral Outcomes Presenter: I-Heng Wu; U. of Iowa Presenter: Min-Hsuan Tu; U. of Florida The Dark and Bright Sides of Empathic Concern: A Conservation of Resources Perspective Presenter: Szu-Han Lin; U. of Massachusetts, Amherst Presenter: Emily Poulton; U. of Massachusetts, Amherst Presenter: Mengjie Xu; U. of Massachusetts, Amherst Presenter: Min-Hsuan Tu; U. of Florida Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Its Implications for Moral Licensing Presenter: Russell Eric Johnson; Eli Broad School of Business, Michigan State U. Presenter: Hun Whee Lee; Michigan State U. Presenter: Chu-Hsiang Chang; Michigan State U. The Effects of Authentic Leadership on Sustainability Presenter: Tara S. Wernsing; IE Business School Presenter: Amrou Awaysheh; Indiana U. - Kelley School of Business Presenter: Patrick Flynn; North Carolina State U. Presenter: Bruce Avolio; U. of Washington
In the Tribe of Sisyphus: Rethinking Management Education from an “Entrepreneurial” Perspective

Daniel Hjorth

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562903257938

2003-12-01

Journal of Management Education

Abstract:In this article, Camus’s reading of the myth of Sisyphus provides an “entrepreneurial” perspective on management education. Traditionally management has been constrained by the conceptually limiting horizon of management knowledge and practice, with an emphasis on control and efficiency. As such, learning processes have come to reproduce a manipulable homo oeconomicus. Sisyphus’s desire to create, the “absurdity” of his dignified revolt, in short, his “entrepreneurship,” exemplify a transformative and playful force central to learning processes. Embracing the opening toward a metaphorical style, this article introduces Sisyphean “entrepreneurship” as a novel way of thinking about and organizing learning processes in management education.
Research Misconduct in Business and Management Studies: Causes, Consequences, and Possible Remedies

Dennis Tourish,Russell Craig

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492618792621

2018-09-05

Journal of Management Inquiry

Abstract:This article analyses 131 articles that have been retracted from peer-reviewed journals in business and management studies. We also draw from six in-depth interviews: three with journal editors involved in retractions, two with coauthors of papers retracted because a fellow author committed research fraud, and one with a former academic found guilty of research fraud. Our aim is to promote debate about the causes and consequences of research misconduct and to suggest possible remedies. Drawing on corruption theory, we suggest that a range of institutional, environmental, and behavioral factors interacts to provide incentives that sustain research misconduct. We explore the research practices that have prompted retractions. We contend that some widely used, but questionable research practices, should be challenged so as to promote stronger commitment to research integrity and to deter misconduct. To this end, we propose eleven recommendations for action by authors, editors, publishers, and the broader scientific community.

management
MANAGEMENT FADS AND ORGANIZATIONAL ARCHITECTURE

James A. Brickley,Clifford W. Smith,Jerold L. Zimmerman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.1997.tb00134.x

1997-06-01

Journal of Applied Corporate Finance

Abstract:This article applies and extends the three‐part organizational framework used in the preceding article to a broad range of management innovations. After furnishing some interesting evidence of the rise and fall of management techniques such as TQM, Reengineering, Just‐in‐Time Production, and Activity‐Based Costing, the authors raise and then attempt to answer a number of questions: What explains the popularity of these management innovations? Why do they often fail to produce the expected benefits? How can managers tell if a particular technique is right for them? What can managers do to increase the likelihood that an adopted technique will be successful? The persistent, and at times seemingly insatiable, corporate demand for management innovations is viewed by the authors as a “rational” economic response by senior managers to major changes in the external business environment—changes that in turn dictate changes in business strategy. For example, when confronted with external changes such as deregulation or heightened global competition, companies often find it necessary to refocus their efforts on improving product quality and operating efficiency. And such changes in business strategy tend to require a revamping of the three critical components of organizational architecture: (1) assignment of decision rights, (2) performance evaluation systems, and (3) compensation systems. As the authors argue, innovations such as TQM, outsourcing, Re‐engineering, and JIT typically involve major changes in just one or two of these critical elements of the organization, but not all three. The failure to coordinate organizational changes in such a way that these three elements are mutually consistent and reinforcing is one important reason why management innovations can fail to meet expectations. The framework described in this article is designed to help managers considering one potentially valuable set of organizational changes to identify other facets of the organization that also require attention and perhaps complementary adjustments.
Public Management, TQM, and Quality Improvement: Toward a Contingency Strategy

Robert F. Durant,Laura A. Wilson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/027507409302300303

1993-09-01

The American Review of Public Administration

Abstract:The spectrum of opinions on TQM applications in government agencies presently stretches from exaggerated claims regarding its universal applicability and potency to more "agnostic" reservations related to its unspecified or undeveloped theoretical linkages to outright dismissals spawned by its alleged naivete in the face of organizational realpolitik. Marshalling evidence culled from TQM, organizational-behavior, bureaucratic-politics, and public-policy literatures, the purposes of this heuristic essay are threefold: to identify those factors most likely to foster successful applications of TQM in government agencies; to suggest what proponents must yet clarify, refine, or amend in their thinking before TQM can be consistently and confidently applied within this context; and to offer a propositional inventory suitable for advancing a contingency theory of TQM applications in government organizations. Framing the analysis is Frederickson's (1971) typology of basic organizational processes.

public administration
Big Tech, Competition Policy, and Strategic Management: An Alternative Perspective to Teece

Richard J. Arend

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13110243

2023-11-09

Administrative Sciences

Abstract:Teece asserts that competition policy is so outdated that it now significantly degrades the ability of Big Tech firms to bring socially beneficial innovations to market. He suggests that strategic management research is essential in the struggle to update such policies. We counter that none of these assertions are accurate, let alone backed by evidence. While the larger goal of improving laws and policies through scientific research is a worthy one, the specific focus on doing so to aid a set of powerful firms that have allegedly caused—directly or indirectly—great societal damage is quite unappealing. To balance his pro-Big Tech perspective, we provide logical and theory-based arguments and evidence that indicates Big Tech has often been bad for innovation and society while their regulation has been good, and that more oversight—specifically tailored to digital platforms—would be better. We then offer three alternative paths for us, as management scholars, to take that leverage our distinctive skills and that fulfill our ethical and professional mandates, in the pursuit of improving the strategic decisions and actions that policymakers and firms take.
Organizations as Algorithms: A New Metaphor for Advancing Management Theory

Vern L. Glaser,Jennifer Sloan,Joel Gehman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13033

IF: 10.5

2024-01-19

Journal of Management Studies

Abstract:According to the 'Point' essay, management research's reliance on corporate data threatens to replace objective theory with profit‐biased 'corporate empiricism', undermining the scientific and ethical integrity of the field. In this 'Counterpoint' essay, we offer a more expansive understanding of big data and algorithmic processing and, by extension, see promising applications to management theory. Specifically, we propose a novel management metaphor: organizations as algorithms. This metaphor offers three insights for developing innovative, relevant, and grounded organization theory. First, agency is distributed in assemblages rather than being solely attributed to individuals, algorithms, or data. Second, machine‐readability serves as the immutable and mobile base for organizing and decision‐making. Third, prompting and programming transform the role of professional expertise and organizational relationships with technologies. Contrary to the 'Point' essay, we see no theoretical 'end' in sight; the organization as algorithm metaphor enables scholars to build innovative theories that account for the intricacies of algorithmic decision‐making.

management,business
Statistics against irritations: a response to Dickens's apologists

M.V. Simkin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1306.0061

2013-06-01

Abstract:In a recent article (<a class="link-https" data-arxiv-id="0909.2479" href="https://arxiv.org/abs/0909.2479">arXiv:0909.2479</a>) I reported the results of the test, where the takers had to tell the prose of Charles Dickens from the prose of Edward Bulwer-Lytton. The former is a required reading in school, and the latter has a bad writing contest named after him. Nevertheless, the test-takers performed on the level of random guessing. This research has met much criticism, which I refute the in the present article.

Physics and Society
A rejoinder on managerial discretion: Andersen (2017) vs Haj Youssef and Teng (2019)

Jon Aarum Andersen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/cg-09-2019-0276

2019-11-14

Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society

Abstract:Purpose This paper aims to demonstrate the efforts of Hay Youssef and Tang (2019) to reaffirm the importance of managerial discretion is unsuccessful. Design/methodology/approach Theoretical frameworks from traditional and recent literature on the concept of managerial discretion are related to corporate governance scholarship. Findings There are in fact no studies on managerial discretion based on explicit theoretical and empirical definitions and thus no studies published which have measured the degrees of managers’ discretion. The conclusion is that the inability to define the notion of managerial discretion is tantamount to the inability to research it. Practical implications Research on managerial discretion does not provide any advice to owners and directors of boards on granting top executives a high or a low degree of discretion. Originality/value This paper reaffirms the conclusion of Andersen (2017) that corporate governance scholarship will improve if it abandons the concept of managerial discretion.
The Role of Theory in Behavior Analysis: A Response to Unfinished Business, Travis Thompson's Review of Staddon's New Behaviorism (2nd edition)

J E R Staddon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-020-00409-y

Abstract:Travis Thompson's lengthy review of Staddon's The New Behaviorism requires several corrections and extensions. This response discusses Staddon's analysis of Herrnstein's matching law and concludes that Thompson misinterprets a gentle critique as a paean. The response goes on to defend the utility of models and "internal states" (i.e., postulated processes that are not directly measurable) as "formal representation[s] of the data reduced to a minimal number of terms," a position similar to one of B. F. Skinner's statements. The response ends with a defense of Skinner's empirical brilliance, but a critique of his sweeping societal prescriptions.
Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices

P. Drucker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2230551

Abstract:Management is tasks. Management is a discipline. Peter Drucker's classic text on the subject reminds us that management is also people. Every achievement of management is the achievement of a manager. Every failure is a failure of a manager. People manage, not "forces" or "facts." The vision, dedication, and integrity of managers determine whether there is management or mismanagement. Management is work, and as such it has its own skills, its own tools, its own techniques. For management is the life-giving, acting, dynamic organ of the institution it manages. Without the institution, e.g., the business enterprise, there would be no management. But without management there would also be only a mob rather than an institution. The institution, in turn, is itself an organ of society and exists only to contribute a needed result to society, the economy, and the individual. What every manager needs to know has been included in Drucker's book. That which not every manager needs to know, however important or interesting, has been excluded, or at least given only cursory treatment. A good deal of space has been devoted to top management and to the relationships between structure and strategy - topics that are not commonly considered in a book on management. While management is a discipline - that is, an organized body of knowledge and as such applicable everywhere - it is also "culture." It is not value-free science, management is a social function and embedded in a culture - a society - a tradition of values, customs, and beliefs, and in governmental and political systems. Management is - and should be - culture conditioned; but, in turn, management and managers shape culture and society.

Sociology,Business
Maslow: man interrupted: reading management theory in context

Kelly Dye,Albert J. Mills,Terrance Weatherbee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740510634921

IF: 5.589

2005-12-01

Management Decision

Abstract:Purpose This paper aims to build on recent work in the field of management and historiography that argues that management theorizing needs to be understood in its historical context. Design/methodology/approach First, the paper attempts to show how a steady filtering of management theory and of the selection and work of management theorists lends itself to a narrowly focused, managerialist, and functionalist perspective. Second, the paper attempts to show how not only left‐wing ideas, but also even the rich complexity of mainstream ideas, have been “written out” of management accounts. The paper explores these points through an examination of the treatment of Abraham Maslow in management texts over time. Findings The paper's conclusion is a simple one: management theory – whether mainstream or critical – does a disservice to the potential of the field when it oversimplifies to a point where a given theory or theorist is misread because sufficient context, history, and reflection are missing from the presentation/dissemination. Originality/value This paper highlights the importance of reading the original texts, rather than second or third person accounts, and the importance of reading management theory in the context in which it was/is derived.

management,business

Response to Dennis Tourish’s “The Triumph of Nonsense in Management Studies”

The Enduring Interest Trap in Debating the State of a Field

Musings on management. Ten ideas designed to rile everyone who cares about management

Management education and the theatre of the absurd

Herd mentality and Autopoiesis in B-Schools’ Research: Here to Stay?"

Restoring a Taste for Science: Enhancing Strategic Management Knowledge by Changing the Governance of Academic Journals

Between Sweet Harmony and a Clash of Cultures: Does a Joint Academic–Practitioner Review Reconcile Rigor and Relevance?

Theory, explanation, and understanding in management research

The Static and Dynamic Mechanics of Competition: A Comment on Hunt and Morgan's Comparative Advantage Theory

Citizenship Behavior: Different Theoretical Perspectives to Understand the Predictors and Outcomes

In the Tribe of Sisyphus: Rethinking Management Education from an “Entrepreneurial” Perspective

Research Misconduct in Business and Management Studies: Causes, Consequences, and Possible Remedies

MANAGEMENT FADS AND ORGANIZATIONAL ARCHITECTURE

Public Management, TQM, and Quality Improvement: Toward a Contingency Strategy

Big Tech, Competition Policy, and Strategic Management: An Alternative Perspective to Teece

Organizations as Algorithms: A New Metaphor for Advancing Management Theory

Statistics against irritations: a response to Dickens's apologists

A rejoinder on managerial discretion: Andersen (2017) vs Haj Youssef and Teng (2019)

The Role of Theory in Behavior Analysis: A Response to Unfinished Business, Travis Thompson's Review of Staddon's New Behaviorism (2nd edition)

Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices

Maslow: man interrupted: reading management theory in context