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

IF 3.3 3区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Ajnesh Prasad
{"title":"What’s up with our obsession with the theoretical contribution: A means to an end or an end in and of itself?","authors":"Ajnesh Prasad","doi":"10.1177/13505084231183079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":48238,"journal":{"name":"Organization","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organization","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13505084231183079","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

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.
我们对理论贡献的痴迷到底是怎么回事:是达到目的的手段,还是目的本身?
管理与组织研究(MOS)学科的知识生产是在自己制造的迷宫中。在过去的30年里,该学科的学者们对理论贡献表现出了一种顽固的痴迷。在本组织即将开始其出版的第四个十年之际,我想借此机会暂停一下,并对这种痴迷所产生的一些影响和后果进行反思。借鉴科学理论的具体例子,我将分析重点放在三种机制上,通过这些机制,该学科对理论贡献的痴迷对知识生产造成了意想不到的但有害的结果:(1)理论结构的不必要扩散,(2)在理论基础上建立理论,而不是经验验证,(3)为理论而理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Organization
Organization MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: The journal encompasses the full range of key theoretical, methodological and substantive debates and developments in organizational analysis, broadly conceived, identifying and assessing their impacts on organizational practices worldwide. Alongside more micro-processual analyses, it particularly encourages attention to the links between intellectual developments, changes in organizational forms and practices, and broader social, cultural and institutional transformations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信