The rigour-relevance balance for engaged scholarship: New frame and new agenda for trust research and beyond

Journal of Trust Research

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 1-21

  Li, Peter Ping ^a  

^a Department of International Economics and Management   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858836863     PISSN: 21515581     EISSN: 2151559X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2011.550718     Document Type: Editorial

References (89)

1. Agarwal, R., & Hoetker, G. (2007). A Faustian bargain? The growth of management and its relationship with related disciplines. Academy of Management Journal, 50, pp. 1304-1322.
2. Aldag, R.J. (1997). Moving sofas and exhuming woodchucks: On relevance, impact, and the following of fads. Journal of Management Inquiry, 6, pp. 8-16.
3. Bachmann, R., & Zaheer, A., (Eds.) (2006). Handbook of trust research. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
4. Baldridge, D.C., Floyd, S.W., & Markoczy, L. (2004). Are managers from Mars and academicians from Venus? Toward an understanding of the relationship between academic quality and practical relevance. Strategic Management Journal, 25, pp. 1063-1074.
5. Bennis, W.G., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83(5), pp. 96-105.
6. Birkenshaw, J., & Mol, M. (2008). Giant steps in management: Innovations that change the way we work. London: Pearson Education.
7. Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professorate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation.
8. Boyer, E.L. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1, pp. 11-20.
9. Buckley, P.J., & Lessard, D.R. (2005). Regaining the edge for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 36, pp. 595-599.
10. Cannella, A.A., & Paetzold, R.L. (1994). Pfeffer’s barriers to the advance of organizational science: A rejoinder. Academy of Management Review, 19, pp. 331-341.
11. Chen, M-J. (2008). Reconceptualizing the competitioncooperation relationship: A transparadox perspective. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17, pp. 288-304.
12. Cheng, J.L.C., Henisz, W., Roth, K., & Swaminathan, A. (2009). From the Editors: Advancing interdisciplinary research in the field of international business: Prospects, issues and challenges. Journal of International Business Studies, 40, pp. 1070-1074.
13. Cummings, T.G. (2007). 2006 Presidential address: Quest for an engaged academy. Academy of Management Review, 32, pp. 355-360.
14. Currall, S.C., & Inkpen, A.C. (2002). A multilevel approach to trust in joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 33, pp. 479-495.
15. Daft, R.L. (1980). The evolution of organization analysis in ASQ, 19591979. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, pp. 623-636.
16. Daft, R.L., & Lewin, A.Y. (1990). Can organizational studies begin to break out of the normal science straitjacket? An editorial essay. Organization Science, 1, pp. 1-9.
17. Daft, R.L., & Lewin, A.Y. (2008). Rigor and relevance in organization studies: Idea migration and academic journal evolution. Organization Science, 19, pp. 177-183.
18. Davenport, T.H., & Prusak, L. (2003). What’s the big idea? Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
19. Ghoshal, S., & Moran, P. (1996). Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 21, pp. 13-47
20. Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, pp. 75-91.
21. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
22. Gulati, R. (2007). Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigorrelevance debate in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50, pp. 775-782.
23. Hayek, F.A. (1952). The counter-revolution of science: Studies on the abuse of reason. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
24. Hayek, F.A. (1989). The pretence of knowledge. American Economic Review, 79, pp. 3-7.
25. Hinings, C.R., & Greenwood, R. (2002). Disconnects and consequences in organization theory? Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, pp. 411-421.
26. Hitt, M.A. (1998). 1997 Presidential address: Twenty-first-century organizations: Business firms, business schools, and the Academy. Academy of Management Review, 23, pp. 218-224.
27. Huff, A.S. (2000). Citigroup’s John Reed and Stanford’s James March on management research and practice. Academy of Management Executive, 14, pp. 52-64.
28. Jarzabkowski, P., & Whittington, R. (2008). Directions for a troubled discipline: Strategy research, teaching, and practice Introduction to the Dialog. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17, pp. 266-268.
29. Keynes, J.M. (1973). The collected writings of John Maynard Keynes (Vol. 14). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. Kieser, A., & Leiner, L. (2009). Why the rigorrelevance gap in management research is unbridgeable. Journal of Management Studies, 46, pp. 516-533.
31. Kieser, A., & Nicolai, A.T. (2005). Success factor research: Overcoming the trade-off between rigor and relevance? Journal of Management Inquiry, 14, pp. 275-279.
32. Kramer, R.M. (2006). Trust as situated cognition: An ecological perspective on trust decisions. In R. Bachmann & A. Zaheer (Eds.), Handbook of trust research (pp. 71-87). New York: Edward Elgar.
33. Kramer, R.M., & Lewicki, R.L. (2010). Repairing and enhancing trust: Approaches to reducing organizational trust deficits. Academy of Management Annals, 4, pp. 245-277.
34. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
35. Leisenring, J.J., & Johnson, J.L. (1994). Accounting research: On the relevance of research to practice. Accounting Horizons, 8, pp. 74-79.
36. Lewin, K. (1952). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. London: Tavistock.
37. Lewis, M.W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25, pp. 760-776.
38. Li, P.P. (1998). Toward a geocentric framework of organizational form: A holistic, dynamic and paradoxical approach. Organization Studies, 19, pp. 829-861.
39. Li, P.P. (2007a). Toward an interdisciplinary conceptualization of trust: A typological approach. Management and Organization Review, 3, pp. 421-445.
40. Li, P.P. (2007b). Toward an integrated theory of multinational evolution: The evidence of Chinese multinational enterprises as latecomers. Journal of International Management, 13, pp. 296-318.
41. Li, P.P. (2008). Toward a geocentric framework of trust: An application to organizational trust. Management and Organization Review, 4, pp. 413-439.
42. Li, P.P. (2010). Toward a learning-based view of internationalization: The accelerated trajectories of cross-border learning for latecomers. Journal of International Management, 16, pp. 43-59.
43. Li, P.P. (2011). Toward an integrative framework of indigenous research: The geocentric implications of YinYang Balance. Asia Pacific Journal of Management (forthcoming).
44. Lorsch, J.W. (2009). Regaining lost relevance. Journal of Management Inquiry, 18, pp. 108-117.
45. Luhmann, N. (2005). The concept of autopoiesis. In D. Seidl & K.H. Decker (Eds.), Niklas Luhmann and organization studies (pp. 54-63). Kristianstad: Liber and Copenhagen Business School Press.
46. March, J.G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, pp. 71-87.
47. March, J.G. (2005). Parochialism in the evolution of a research community: The case of organization studies. Management and Organization Review, 1, pp. 5-22.
48. March, J.G. (2007). The study of organizations and organizing since 1945. Organization Studies, 28, pp. 9-19.
49. March, J.G., & Sutton, R.I. (1997). Organizational performance as a dependent variable. Organization Science, 8, pp. 698-706.
50. Markides, C. (2007). In search of ambidextrous professors. Academy of Management Journal, 50, pp. 762-768.
51. Martin, J.A., & Eisenhardt, K.M. (2010). Rewiring: Cross-business-unit collaborations in multibusiness organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53, pp. 265-301.
52. Miner, J. (1984). The validity and usefulness of theories in an emerging organization science. Academy of Management Review, 9, pp. 296-306.
53. Mintzberg, H. (2004). Managers not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of management and management development. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
54. Mir, R., & Watson, A. (2000). Strategic management and the philosophy of science: The case for a constructivist methodology. Strategic Management Journal, 21, pp. 941-953.
55. Mo¨ llering, G. (2005). The trust/control duality: An integrative perspective on positive expectations of others. International Sociology, 20, pp. 283-305.
56. Oliver, C. (2010). The goals of scholarship. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19, pp. 26-32.
57. Palmer, D. (2006). Taking stock of the criteria we use to evaluate one another’s work: ASQ 50 years. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, pp. 535-559.
58. Palmer, D., Dick, B., & Freiburger, M. (2009). Rigor and relevance in organization studies. Journal of Management Inquiry, 18, pp. 265-272.
59. Peirce, C.S. (1997). Pragmatism as a principle and method of right thinking: The 1903 Harvard lectures on pragmatism. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
60. Pettigrew, A.M. (2001). Management research after modernism. British Journal of Management, 12 (special issue), pp. S61S70.
61. Pfeffer, J. (1993). Barriers to the advance of organization science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18, pp. 599-620.
62. Pfeffer, J. (2005).Why do bad management theories persist? A comment on Ghoshal. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, pp. 96-100.
63. Pfeffer, J. (2007). A modest proposal: How we might change the process and product of management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50, pp. 1334-1345.
64. Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C.T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1, pp. 78-95.
65. Poole, M.S., & Van de Ven, A.H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14, pp. 562-578.
66. Popper, K. (1959/1934). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books.
67. Rynes, S.L., Bartunek, J.M., & Daft, R.L. (2001). Across the great divide: Knowledge creation and transfer between practitioners and academics. Academy of Management Journal, 44, pp. 340-355.
68. Saunders, N.K., Skinner, D., Dietz, G., Gillespie, N., & Lewicki, R.J. (Eds.) (2010). Organizational trust: A cultural perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.
69. Schoorman, F.D., Mayer, R.C., & Davis, J.H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32, pp. 344-354.
70. Shah, S.K., & Corley, K.G. (2006). Building better theory by bridging the quantitative qualitative divide. Journal of Management Studies, 43, pp. 1821-1835.
71. Shapiro, D.L., Kirkman, R.L., & Courtney, H.G. (2007). From the editors: Perceived causes and solutions of the translation problem in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50, pp. 249-266.
72. Shrivastava, P. (1987). Rigor and practical usefulness of research in strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 8, pp. 77-92.
73. Shrivastava, P., & Mitroff, I.I. (1984). Enhancing organizational research utilization: The role of decision makers’ assumptions. Academy of Management Review, 9, pp. 18-26.
74. Simon, H.A. (1976). Administrative behavior (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
75. Skidelsky, R. (2010). The relevance of Keynes. Cambridge Journal of Economics (in press).
76. Starkey, K., & Madan, P. (2001). Bridging the relevance gap: Aligning stakeholders in the future of management research. British Journal of Management, 12 (special issue), pp. S3-S26.
77. Stokes, D.E. (1997). Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
78. Symon, G., Buehring, A., Johnson, P., & Cassell, C. (2008). Positioning qualitative research as resistance to the institutionalization of the academic labor process. Organization Studies, 29, pp. 1315-1336.
79. Tushman, M.L., O’Reilly, C.A., Fenollosa, A., Keinbaum, A.M., & McGrath, D. (2007). Relevance and rigor: Executive education as a lever in shaping practice and research. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6, pp. 345-362.
80. Van de Ven, A.H. (2002). 2001 Presidential address: Strategic directions for the Academy of Management: This Academy is for you! Academy of Management Review, 27, pp. 171-184.
81. Van de Ven, A.H., & Huber, G.P. (1990). Longitudinal field research methods for studying processes of organizational change. Organization Science, 1, pp. 213-219.
82. Van de Ven, A.H., & Johnson, P.E. (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31, pp. 802-821.
83. Van Heijenoort, J. (1963). Go¨del’s theorem. In P. Edwards (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Vol. 3, pp. 348-357). New York: Macmillan.
84. Vermeulen, F. (2005). On rigor and relevance: Fostering dialectic progress in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 48, pp. 978-982.
85. Vermeulen, F. (2007). ‘I shall not remain insignificant’: Adding a second loop to matter more. Academy of Management Journal, 50, pp. 754-761.
86. Weick, K.E. (2001). Gapping the relevance bridge: Fashions meet fundamentals in management. British Journal of Management, 12 (special issue), pp. S71-S75.
87. Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., & Perrone, V. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science, 9, pp. 141-159.
88. Zahra, S.A., & Newey, L.R. (2009). Maximizing the impact of organization science: Theorybuilding at the intersection of disciplines and/or fields. Journal of Management Studies, 46, pp. 1059-1075.
89. Zanotti, G.J. (2007). Intersubjectivity, subjectivism, social sciences, and the Austrian School of Economics. Journal of Markets & Morality, 10, pp. 115-141.