IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/and/journl/v12y2012i2p1-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organizational and Management Research as Social Science: How to Resolve Problems of Scientific Legitimacy?

Author

Listed:
  • A. Selami Sargut

    (Baskent University)

Abstract

A social scientific field’s growth and progress is incumbent upon its necessity, productivity, and scientific legitimacy. However, the ever-increasing influence of postmodernist perspectives has been instrumental in raising doubts as to the legitimacy of organizational and management (OM) research as a field. The damage that can be attributed to the postmodernist turn is especially evident from ontological and epistemological perspectives. The adoption of scientific realism can be beneficial in overcoming problems of ontology and epistemology. By presenting a consistent philosophy of science paradigm, scientific realism can help in overcoming the indefensible postmodernist arguments that have been prominent in the ‘science wars’, as well as solving the ontological and epistemological problems in OM research. Such a perspective can also form the basis of a new guideline for the development of new research programs in OM.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Selami Sargut, 2012. "Organizational and Management Research as Social Science: How to Resolve Problems of Scientific Legitimacy?," Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, Anadolu University, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:and:journl:v:12:y:2012:i:2:p:1-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.anadolu.edu.tr/arastirma/hakemli_dergiler/sosyal_bilimler/pdf/2012_2/2012-02-01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Scientific realism; ontology; epistemology; dualism; determinism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:and:journl:v:12:y:2012:i:2:p:1-16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Social Sciences Institute (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iianatr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.