Editor's comments: Why theory?

Academy of Management Review

Volumn 39, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 407-411

  Suddaby, Roy ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84907554512     PISSN: 03637425     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5465/amr.2014.0252     Document Type: Editorial

References (38)

1. Abbott, A. A. 1988. The system of professions: An essay on the expert division of labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Abrahamson, E. 1991. Managerial fads and fashions: The diffusion and rejection of innovations. Academy of Management Review, 16: 586-612.
3. Abrahamson, E. 1996. Management fashion. Academy of Management Review, 21: 254-285.
4. Adams, R. 1975. Where do our ideas come from? Descartes vs Locke. Reprinted in S. Stitch (Ed.), Innate ideas: 71-87. Berkeley: University of California Press.
5. Aune, B. 1970. Rationalism, empiricism and pragmatism: An introduction. New York: Random House.
6. Bacharach, S. B. 1989. Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14: 496-515.
7. Birkenshaw, J., Healy, M., Suddaby, R., & Weber, K. 2014. Debating the future of management research. Journal of Management Studies, 51: 38-55.
8. Cameron, K., Dutton, J., Quinn, R., & Bernstein, S. 2003. Positive organizational scholarship: Meet the movement. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12: 266-271.
9. Coase, R. 1988. The firm, the market, and the law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10. Courpasson, D. 2014. On the erosion of "passionate scholarship." Organization Studies, 34: 1243-1249.
11. Davis, G. F. 2010. Do theories of organization progress? Organizational Research Methods, 13: 690-709.
12. Davis, G. F., & Marquis, C. 2005. Prospects for organization theory in the early twenty-first century: Institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science, 16: 332-343.
13. Feyerabend, P. 1975. Against method. New York: New Left Books.
14. Freeman, R. E. 2010. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Hambrick, D. 2007. The field of management's devotion to theory: Too much of a good thing? Academy of Management Journal, 50: 1346-1352.
16. Hassard, J., Cox, J. W., & Rowlinson, M. 2013. Where are the old theories of organization: Prospects for retrospection in organization theory. Academy of Management Review, 38: 309-313.
17. Hirsch, P., & Levin, D. 1999. Umbrella constructs versus validity police: A life cycle model. Organization Science, 10: 199-212.
18. Kuhn, T. S. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19. Landy, F. J. 1997. Early influences on the development of industrial-organizational psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82: 467-477.
20. Latham, G. 2012. Work motivation: History, theory and practice (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
21. Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. 2003. Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 268-305.
22. McKenzie, D. 2006. An engine, not a camera. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Nisbet, R. A. 1962. The quest for community. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18: 599-620.
25. Pfeffer, J. 2014. The management theory morass: Some modest proposals. In J. Miles (Ed.), New directions in management and organization theory: 447-456. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.
26. Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. 1999. Hard facts, dangerous half-truths and total nonsense: Profiting from evidence-based management. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
27. Pinder, C. C., & Moore, L. F. 1980. The inevitability of multiple paradigms and the resultant need for middle range analysis in organization theory. In C. C. Pinder & L. F. Moore (Eds.), Middle range theory and the study of organizations: 87-100. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.
28. Pralahad, C. K. 2006. The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
29. Quine, W. V. O. 1951. The Philosophical Review, 60: 20-43.
30. Rousseau, D. 2006. Presidential address: Is there such a thing as "evidence-based management"? Academy of Management Review, 31: 256-269.
31. Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R., & Camerer, C. 1998. Not so different after all: A cross-disciplinary view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23: 1-12.
32. Rynes, S., Bartunek, J. M., & Daft, R. L. 2001. Across the Great Divide: Knowledge creation and transfer between practitioners and academics. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 340-356.
33. Suddaby, R. 2014. Indigenous management theory: Why management theory is under attack (and what we can do to fix it). In J. Miles (Ed.), New directions in management and organization theory: 457-468. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.
34. Suddaby, R., Hardy, C., & Huy, Q. 2011. Where are the new theories of organization? Academy of Management Review, 36: 236-246.
35. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 371-384.
36. Van de Ven, A. H. 2007. Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational and social research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Van Maanen, J. 1995. Style as theory. Organization Science, 6: 133-143.
38. Weick, K. 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.