Management as science versus management as practice in postgraduate business education

Business Strategy Review

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 7-12

  Bailey, James ^a   Ford, Cameron ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 15544377517     PISSN: 09556419     EISSN: 14678616     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8616.1996.tb00136.x     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Argyris, C. (1982) Reasoning, learning, and action, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
2. Behrman, J.N. & R.I. Levin (1984) Are business schools doing their job? Harvard Business Review, 62.
3. Bowman, E.H. and D. Hurry (1993) Strategy through the option lens: an integrated view of resource investments and the incremental-choice process, Academy of Management Review, 18.
4. Dougherty, D. and T. Heller (1994) The illegitimacy of successful product innovations in established firms, Organization Science, 5.
5. Eastman, W.N. and J.R. Bailey (1994a), Examining the origins of management theory: value divisions in the positivist program, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 30.
6. Ford, C.M. (1996), A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains, Academy of Management Review, 21.
7. Gordon, R. and J. Howell (1959), Higher education for business, Columbia University Press, New York.
8. Linder, J.C, and H.J. Smith (1992), The complex case of management education, Harvard Business Review, 70.
9. Pfeffer, J. (1981), Management as symbolic action: the creation and maintenance of organizational paradigms, in L.L. Cummings & B.M. Staw, (Eds): Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol 3), JAI, Greenwich, CT.
10. Pierson, R.C. (1959), The education of American businessmen, McGraw-Hill, New York.
11. Porter, L.W. and L.E. McKibbin (1988) Management education and development: drift or thrust into the 21st Century? McGraw-Hill, New York.