The Methodological War of the "Hardheads" versus the "Softheads"

Abstract

The methodological war between industrial-organizational (I/O) "hardheads" and organizational development (OD) "softheads " has persisted throughout the 20th century and shows no signs of abatement. This article proposes grounds for a truce in this war by (a) explaining the fundamental trade-offs between "hard-headed" and "soft-headed" research; and (b) showing how an empirical test for bias that has been used by hardheads to criticize the "quality" of OD research is itself flawed. Bias studies test the hypothesis of "positive findings" bias, which predicts that OD studies with "low quality" should have largerstudy outcomes than studies with "high quality. " Methods used by hardheads to test for bias, however, actually operate against finding support for the positive findings hypothesis.