Chapter 1 The Nature of Research
Published: September 2015
Component type: chapter
Published in: Research Methods for Business and Management 2nd edn
Parent DOI: 10.23912/978-1-910158-51-7-2735
Whilst it is true that we have been organizing and managing in social groups since our earliest days as hunter-gatherers, the formal study of management only emerged at the start of the last century. This chapter examines the nature of management research, contrasting the view that the purpose of management research is to influence the practice of managers with the view that management is simply an interesting social phenomenon. These views are connected to two views of knowledge production, known as mode 1 and mode 2 research. The paper then concludes with advice on how to assess the quality of management research.
- Robert MacIntosh, Heriot-Watt University (Author) http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6775-1840
- Nigel Caldwell, Heriot-Watt University (Author)
For the source title:
- Kevin D O'Gorman, Heriot-Watt University (Editor) http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6239-6619
- Robert MacIntosh, Heriot-Watt University (Editor) http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7333-0201
MacIntosh & Caldwell, 2015
MacIntosh, R. & Caldwell, N. (2015) "Chapter 1 The Nature of Research" In: O'Gorman, K.D. & MacIntosh, R. (ed) . Oxford: Goodfellow Publishers http://dx.doi.org/10.23912/978-1-910158-51-7-2770
Baumeister, R.F. (1996) quoted in Bedian, AG (1996). Thoughts on making and remaking of the management discipline. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12, 311-318
Day, N.E. (2011). The silent majority: Manuscript rejection and its impact on scholars, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10 (4), 704u2013718
Extejt, M.M., Smith, J.E. (1990). The behavioral sciences and management: An evaluation of relevant journals. Journal of Management. 16(3), 539-551
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, Sage, London
Hambrick, D.C., Abrahamson, E. (1995). What if the Academy actually mattered? Academy of Management Journal 38(5), 1427-1441.
Kelemen, M., Bansal, P. (2002). The conventions of management research and their relevance to management practice. British Journal of Management. 13(2), 97-109.
Lockett, A., Moon, J., & Visser, W. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in management research: focus, nature, salience and sources of influence. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 115-136
MacLean, D., MacIntosh, R., & Grant, S. (2002). Mode 2 management research. British Journal of Management. 13(3), 189-207.
Mintzberg, H. (2004) Managers not MBAs: a hard look at the soft practice of managing and management development. Berrett-Koehler: San Francisco.
Oaksford, M. & Chater, N. (1998). Rationality in an Uncertain World. Psychology Press: Hove, England.
Peteraf, M., Di Stefano, G. and Verona, G. (2013) The elephant in the room of dynamic capabilities: Bringing two diverging conversations together, Strategic Management Journal, 34(12): 1389-1410.
Pfeffer, J. (1993). Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. The Academy of Management Review, 18(4), 599-620
Roehrich, Lewis, & George (2014, p. 111) Sharplin, A.D., & Mabry, R.H. (1985). The relative importance of journals used in management research. Human Relations, 38(2), 139-149
Smith, R.D., & Robey, D. (1973). Research and applications in operations management: Discussion of a paradox. Academy of Management Journal. 16(4), 647-657.
Susman, G.I., & Evered, R.D. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly. 23(4), 582-603
Tranfield, D., & Starkey, K. (1998). The nature, social organization and promotion of management research: towards policy. British Journal of Management, 9, 341-353