Habitat and Habitus: Boxed-in versus Box-Breaking Research

Organization Studies

Volumn 35, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 967-987

  Alvesson, Mats ^a   Sandberg, Jörgen ^b  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

box research; box breaking research specialization; boxed in; knowledge production; social organization of science; theory development

Indexed keywords

EID: 84902988197     PISSN: 01708406     EISSN: 17413044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0170840614530916     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Alvesson M.Do we have something to say? From re-search to roi-search and back again.Organization. 2013a;20:79-90.
2. Alvesson M.The triumph of emptiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013b:.
3. Alvesson M.,Deetz S.Doing critical management research. London: SAGE Publications; 2000:.
4. Alvesson M.,Gabriel Y.Beyond formulaic research.Academy of Management Education and Learning. 2013;12:245-263.
5. Alvesson M.,Sandberg J.Constructing research questions: Doing interesting research. London: SAGE Publications; 2013a:.
6. Alvesson M.,Sandberg J.Has management studies lost its way? Ideas for more imaginative and innovative research.Journal of Management Studies. 2013b;50:128-152.
7. Alvesson M.,Sköldberg K.Reflexive methodology. 2009). Reflexive methodology, 2nd edition.London: SAGE Publications.London: SAGE Publications; 2009:.
8. Alvesson M.,Spicer A.A stupidity based theory of the organization.Journal of Management Studies. 2012;49:1194-1220.
9. Bartunek J. M.,Rynes S. L.,Ireland D. R.What makes management research interesting, and why does it matter?.Academy of Management Journal. 2006;49:9-15.
10. Battilana J.,Anteby M.,Sengul M.The circulation of ideas across academic communities: When locals re-import exported ideas.Organization Studies. 2010;31:695-713.
11. Becher T.Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press; 1989:.
12. Blau P. J.The organization of academic work. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction; 1994:.
13. Bourdieu P.Homo academicus. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1988:.
14. Boxenbaum E.,Rouleau L.New knowledge products as bricolage: Metaphors and scripts in organizational theory.Academy of Management Review. 2011;36:272-296.
15. Brown R. H.Social theory as metaphor.Theory and Society. 1976;3:169-197.
16. The Sage handbook of leadership. Bryman A.Collinson D.Grint K.Jackson B.Uhl-Bien M., ed. London: SAGE Publications; 2011:.
17. Burrell G.,Morgan G.Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. London: Heinemann; 1979:.
18. Burt R.Structural holes and good ideas.American Journal of Sociology. 2004;110:349-399.
19. Calhoun C.Postmodernism and social theory. Seidman S.Wagner D., ed. Cambridge, MA/Oxford: Blackwell; 1992:.
20. Clark T.,Wright M.So farewell then reflections on editing the Journal of Management Studies.Journal of Management Studies. 2009;46:1-9.
21. Clegg S. R.Framework of power. London: SAGE Publications; 1989:.
22. Clegg S. R.,Hardy C.,Nord W. R.Handbook of organization studies. London: SAGE Publications; 1996:.
23. Clegg S. R.,da Cunha J. V.,e Cunha M. P.Management paradoxes: A relational view.Human Relations. 2002;55:483-505.
24. Corley K. G.,Gioia D. A.Building theory about theory building. What constitutes a theoretical contribution?.Academy of Management Review. 2011;36:12-32.
25. Courpasson D.On the erosion of 'passionate scholarship'.Organization Studies. 2013;34:1243-1249.
26. Daft R. L.,Lewin A. Y.Rigor and relevance in organization studies: Idea migration and academic journal evolution.Organization Science. 2008;19:177-183.
27. Dane E.Reconsidering the trade-off between expertise and flexibility: A cognitive entranchment perspective.Academy of Management Review. 2010;36:579-603.
28. Management education in historical perspective. Engwall L.Zagagni V., ed. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press; 1998:.
29. Fabian F. H.Keeping the tension: Pressures to keep the controversy in the management discipline.Academy of Management Review. 2000;25:350-371.
30. Foucault M.Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Pantheon Books; 1977:.
31. Gabriel Y.Organization studies: A space for ideas, identities and agonies.Organization Studies. 2010;31:757-775.
32. Grey C.Organizing studies: Publications, politics and polemics.Organization Studies. 2010;31:677-694.
33. Hackett E. J.Essential tensions: Identity, control, and risk in research.Social Studies of Science. 2005;35:787-826.
34. Hammersley M.Research, art or politics?.International Review of Qualitative Research. 2010;3:5-9.
35. Hardy C.,Grant D.Readers beware: Provocation, problematization and problems.Human Relations. 2012;65:547-566.
36. Haslam S. A.Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach. 2004). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2004:.
37. Jackall R.Moral mazes. New York: Oxford University Press; 1988:.
38. Knorr-Cetina K.The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. New York: Pergamon Press; 1981:.
39. Knudsen C.The evolution of scientific knowledge. Jensen H. S.Richter L. M.Vendelø M. T., ed. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar; 2003:.
40. Kuhn T. S.The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press; 1970:.
41. Lawrence T.,Suddaby R.The Sage handbook of organization studies. Clegg S.Hardy C.Lawrence T.Nord W. R., ed. London: SAGE Publications; 2006:.
42. Leahey E.Gender difference in productivity: Research specialization a missing link.Gender & Society. 2006;20:754-780.
43. Leahey E.Not by productivity alone: How visibility and specialization contribute to academic earnings.American Sociological Review. 2007;72:553-561.
44. March J. G.Parochialism in the evolution of a research community: The case of organization studies.Management and Organization Review. 2005;1:5-22.
45. McGrath R. G.No longer a stepchild: How the management field can come into its own.Academy of Management Journal. 2007;50:1365-1378.
46. Mingers J.,Willmott H.Taylorizing business school research: On the 'one best way' performative effects of journal ranking list.Human Relations. 2013;61:1051-1063.
47. Morgan G.Paradigms, metaphors and puzzle-solving in organization theory.Administrative Science Quarterly. 1980;25:601-607.
48. Morgan G.Images of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 1986:.
49. Nicolini D.Practice theory, work & organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013:.
50. Oswick C.,Fleming P.,Hanlon G.From borrowing to blending: Rethinking the processes of.Academy of Management Review. 2011;36:318-337.
51. Pfeffer J.A modest proposal: How we might change the process and product of management research.Academy of Management Review. 2007;50:1334-1345.
52. Rafols I.,Leydesdorff L.,O'Hare A.,Nightingale P.,Stirling A.How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinarity: The case of innovation studies in business and management.Research Policy. 2012;41:1262-1282.
53. Rorty R.Contingency, irony and solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989:.
54. Rynes S. L.Academy of Management Journal Editor's forum on rich research: Editor's forward.Academy of Management Journal. 2007;50:13.
55. Sandberg J.,Tsoukas H.Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations and further development.Journal of Organizational Behavior. forthcoming;:.
56. Scherer A. G.Pluralism and incommensurability in strategic management and organization theory: A problem in search of a solution.Organization. 1998;5:147-168.
57. Schofer Evan.Cross-national differences in the expansion of science, 1970-1990.Social Forces. 2004;83:215-248.
58. Sennett R.The corrosion of character: The personal consequences of work in the new capitalism. New York: Norton; 1998:.
59. Shepherd D.,Sutcliffe K.Inductive top-down theorizing: A source of new theories of organizations.Academy of Management Review. 2011;36:360-380.
60. Starbuck W. H.Turning lemons into lemonade: Where is the value in peer reviews?.Journal of Management Inquiry. 2003;12:344-351.
61. Starbuck W. H.The production of knowledge: The challenge of social science research. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006:.
62. Starbuck W.The constant causes of never-ending faddishness in the behavioral and social sciences.Scandinavian Journal of Management. 2009;25:108-116.
63. The Oxford handbook of organization theory. Tsoukas H.Knudsen C., ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004:.
64. Turner S. P.,Turner J. H.The impossible science: An institutional analysis of American sociology. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications; 1990:.
65. Vogel R.The visible colleges of management and organization studies: A bibliometric analysis of academic journals.Organization Studies. 2012;33:1015-1043.
66. Weedon C.Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory. Oxford: Blackwell; 1987:.
67. Weick K. E.The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1969:.
68. Whitley R.The fragmented state of management studies: Reasons and consequences.Journal of Management Studies. 1984a;21:331-348.
69. Whitley R.The development of management studies as a fragmented adhocracy.Social Science Information. 1984b;23:125-146.
70. Willmott H.Breaking the paradigm mentality.Organization Studies. 1993;14:681-719.
71. Willmott H.Journal list fetishism and the perversion of scholarship: Reactivity and the ABS list.Organization. 2011a;18:429-442.
72. Willmott H.Listing perilously.Organization. 2011b;18:447-448.