IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jomorg/v5y1999i02p1-16_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Debating the Ambiguous Enterprise of Management

Author

Listed:
  • Hardy, Cynthia
  • Palmer, Gill

Abstract

There are significant ambiguities surrounding the academic discipline of management, which can be analysed in terms of three major debates. First the professional status of management brings with it questions about restriction or access to management education, the control of curricular and the relative importance of basic, applied and consultancy-driven research. Second, there are debates about the changing nature of management research, which require the accomodation of increasing diversity within management theory. Finally, the ambiguities associated with these debates can be seen to have impacted on the development of management education, its accessibility and diversity. The ambiguities associated with these debates must be carefully managed if the discipline is to prosper. New organisational forms are needed to embed management teaching and research within the complex collaborative relationships of the many stakeholders involved.

Suggested Citation

  • Hardy, Cynthia & Palmer, Gill, 1999. "Debating the Ambiguous Enterprise of Management," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 1-16, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jomorg:v:5:y:1999:i:02:p:1-16_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1833367200005526/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:cup:jomorg:v:5:y:1999:i:02:p:1-16_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jmo .

    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.