What’s up with our obsession with the theoretical contribution: A means to an end or an end in and of itself?

Author:

Prasad Ajnesh12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Royal Roads University, Canada

2. Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico

Abstract

Knowledge production in the discipline of management and organization studies (MOS) is in a labyrinth of its own making. Over the last 30 years, scholars in the discipline have exhibited an intransigent obsession with the theoretical contribution. At this juncture, with Organization about to commence its fourth decade in publication, I would like to take the opportunity to pause as well as to reflect on some of the implications and the consequences that emanate from this obsession. Drawing on specific examples from MOS, I focus my analysis on three mechanisms through which the discipline’s obsession with the theoretical contribution poses unintended but detrimental outcomes on knowledge production: (1) unnecessary proliferation of theoretical constructs, (2) building theory upon theory rather than empirical validation, and (3) making theory for theory’s sake.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Management of Technology and Innovation,Strategy and Management,General Business, Management and Accounting

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3