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. …

Upper echelons theory revisited: The need for a change from causal description to casual explanation

Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers

Hambrick and Mason’s “Upper Echelons Theory”: evolution and open avenues

The Relationship Between Ethical Leadership and Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior: Linear or Curvilinear Effects?

The impact of CEO attributes on corporate decision-making and outcomes: a review and an agenda for future research

Self- and Other-Orientation in High Rank: A Cultural Psychological Approach to Social Hierarchy

Application of upper echelon theory for corporate social responsibility dimensions: Evidence from the restaurant industry

Do CEOs Matter to Firm Strategic Actions and Firm Performance? A Meta-Analytic Investigation Based on Upper Echelons Theory

Putting the “Management” Back in Human Resource Management: A Review and Agenda for Future Research

The Contextualization and Multilevel Issues in Research of Organizational Psychology

A Research on the Relationships among Top Manager's Demographic Characteristics,Social Capital and Corporation Strategy

Enough is enough! The impact of core self-evaluation on the relationship between despotic leadership and individual outcomes

Can an Agency Role-Reversal Lead to an Organizational Collapse?; A Study Proposal

An examination of Maslow's need hierarchy in an organizational setting

Leadership as a determinant of need fulfillment: implications for meta-theory, methods, and practice

The Power of Unrequited Love: The Parasocial Relationship, Trust, and Organizational Identification Between Middle-Level Managers and CEOs

A theoretical framework of organizational change

Conceptual Review of Underrepresentation of Women in Senior Leadership Positions From a Perspective of Gendered Social Status in the Workplace

A Critical Assessment of Charismatic—Transformational Leadership Research: Back to the Drawing Board?

The Emergence of Value-Based Leadership Behavior at the Frontline of Management: A Role Theory Perspective and Future Research Agenda

The Legitimacy and Efficacy of Current Organizational Theory: An Analysis