Management without theory for the twenty-first century

Abstract

Purpose This paper analyses the origin, conceptual underpinnings and consequences of the idea of management theory. It argues that despite claims to incommensurability and except for critical studies authors, management researchers come together in their quest for performativity. The search for theory has condemned management scholars to espouse structural-functional-positivist assumptions. As such, mainstream management theorists assume and promote psychological determinism. Equivocations, ambiguities, tautologies and imprecise language obscure this implication, however, hollowing out management theory of its performative quality. A century after its inception, the quest for management theory has failed. Another avenue for management scholarship exists, one in which management history is a major contributor. Design/methodology/approach This paper offers a historical and conceptual analysis, relying on relevant philosophy of science scholarship. The object of study is the concept of management theory. Findings Most commentators on management theory rely on a widespread view (of postmodern lineage) according to which incommensurable management research paradigms exist. Allowance made for critical management studies, this paper argues otherwise, namely, that current management research paradigms are merely variations on a positivist theme. It further contends that mainstream management research has failed in its quest to identify theory, even if the language used to report research findings obfuscates this fact. Research limitations/implications A notable implication of this paper is that management academics should reconsider what they do and in particular abandon their quest for theory in favour of management history. Originality/value This paper builds on arguments that philosophers of science and scholars specialising in sociological analysis have long recognised to offer a new thesis on management theory in particular and management academia in general.

A choice and inevitability framework in strategic management: empirical evidence of its real-life existence

“…The strategic choice and determinism framework also supports the existence of the four "paradigms" or clusters of assumptions of functionalist, interpretivist, radical structuralist and radical humanist, identified by Burrell and Morgan (1979, pp.21-25) and Joullié (2018), that frame management and organizational research. Each of these clusters is characterized by a different level of strategic choice that managers use and determinism that they rely on, thus creating theories and planning tools which are performative (allow prediction of future events) within the functionalist and radical structuralist clusters, and are difficult to identify or are undetermined in the postmodern interpretivist and radical humanist clusters.…”

“…The contrasting features of these research environments and the limited or uncertain validity of the management theories applicable to each of them brings Joullié (2018) to conclude that the elusiveness of a single and comprehensive theory of management is related to human individuals being free and not abiding by psychological determinism, on which deterministic theories rely, and that the quest for a theory of management should be abandoned in favour of management history, which should serve as a reference for future managers. However, the awareness of the existence of the strategic choice determinism framework provides strength and validity to the theories and planning tools which are valid within each non-exclusive perspective of the framework.…”

“…If we consider organizational management, we quickly realize that, although there are many theories that attempt to explain how management's choices can affect organizational performance, the quest for a comprehensive theory of management (Bourgeois 1984;De Rond and Thietart 2007;Joullié 2018), which began in the first decades of the 20 th century, is far from over.…”

James March: a postmodern perspective on organization without management theory

“…He has little confidence in rational-looking discourses. In this respect, his work is in line with the mistrust of the construction of a theory of rationality (Cristofaro, 2017) or, more generally, with the utopian objective of building a theory of management (Joullié, 2018). By emphasizing interpretation and experimentation at the heart of organizational learning, March proposes to see managerial action as a representation rather than an objective fact (Bowden, 2020).…”

High performance teams: an investigation of the effect on self-management towards performance

“…Autonomous teams, however, presented a differentiation factor: the minimization of the hierarchical role figure, stimulating teams for high performance. The sociotechnical model was discovered, and subsequently, studied by Tavistock Institute researchers after observing the productivity's optimization in the English coal mines through self-management in 1949 (Joullié, 2018;Moreira & Marx, 2008;Marx, 1997;Salerno, 1994). Lee & Edmondson (2017) recently investigated current trends and expected benefits that motivate the development of self-managing organizations.…”