Affiliation:
1. Faculty of Management, University of Lodz , Lodz , Poland
Abstract
Abstract
The aim of the paper is drawing attention to selected challenges and prospects for the development of subdisciplinarity in the management sciences. The discussion focuses on the impact of the specific characteristics of the management sciences on the diversity of the classification of research specializations and highlights certain determinants related to the environment of the discipline in the process of subdisciplinarity development. The prospects for the development of selected new, emerging subdisciplines in the management sciences were also assessed. Based on a literature review, three research questions were formulated. The realization of the aim of the study was devoted to empirical research conducted among representatives of the scientific community in Poland and China. The results indicate that subdisciplinary diversity is shaped primarily by the dynamics and methodological diversity of the management sciences. According to the respondents, the delineation of research subdisciplines should take into account first and foremost the needs and development perspectives of business practice, be based on researchers’ preferences and scientific requirements, focus on prospective directions of scientific development, and take into account international and global trends in the development of the management sciences. Of the subdisciplines considered, informatics in management was considered the most promising. Important development prospects also open up for technology management, tourism management, and visual management studies.
Reference87 articles.
1. Academy of Management (n.d.). DIG AoM: Divisions & interest groups of the Academy of Management. Retrieved March 8, 2024 from https://aom.org/network/divisions-interest-groups-(digs)
2. Alieva, J., & Powell, D. J. (2022). The significance of employee behaviours and soft management practices to avoid digital waste during a digital transformation. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 14(1), 1–32.
3. American Economic Association. (2022). JEL Classification System /EconLit Subject Descriptors. https://www.aeaweb.org/econlit/jelCodes.php
4. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2020). ANZSRC: Australian and New Zealand standard research classification. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/classifications/australian-and-new-zealand-standard-research-classification-anzsrc/2020
5. Arts Management Network. (2024). About us. https://www.artsmanagement.net