IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jomstd/v59y2022i6p1604-1627.html

Understanding Scientific Freedom and Scientific Responsibility in Business and Management Research

Author

Listed:
  • Anne S. Tsui
  • Peter McKiernan

Abstract

To illuminate the nature of contemporary business and management research and to reinforce the principles of responsible research proposed by the social movement Responsible Research in Business and Management (RRBM), this article explores two critical elements of the scientific process: scientific freedom and scientific responsibility. We observe that in recent times, context and practice have weakened both of them. Path‐dependent processes in a closed research ecosystem have restricted scientific freedom. A ‘publish or perish’ culture has clouded scientific responsibility. We examine the definition of scientific freedom and assess how much freedom scientists can expect in current social conditions. We apply Schulz’s (1972) responsibility categories of (a) Who is responsible? (b) For what are they responsible? and (c) To whom are they responsible? to develop an expanded definition of scientific responsibility. Aligning high and low levels of freedom and responsibility, we identify four types of research, one of which fits RRBM’s definition of responsible research. We suggest a set of light and heavy actions in a humble attempt to shift the research ecosystem further towards responsible research, focusing on benefits to society. We conclude with a set of scientific norms to guide researchers who aspire to make their research more responsible and impactful.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne S. Tsui & Peter McKiernan, 2022. "Understanding Scientific Freedom and Scientific Responsibility in Business and Management Research," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1604-1627, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:59:y:2022:i:6:p:1604-1627
    DOI: 10.1111/joms.12816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12816
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/joms.12816?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Enderle,Georges, 2021. "Corporate Responsibility for Wealth Creation and Human Rights," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108830805, Enero-Abr.
    2. Richard L. Daft & Arie Y. Lewin, 1990. "Can Organization Studies Begin to Break Out of the Normal Science Straitjacket? An Editorial Essay," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(1), pages 1-9, February.
    3. Richard A. Bettis & Constance E. Helfat & J. Myles Shaver & Sendil K. Ethiraj & Alfonso Gambardella & Constance E. Helfat, 2016. "Replication in strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(11), pages 2191-2192, November.
    4. James J. Heckman & Sidharth Moktan, 2020. "Publishing and Promotion in Economics: The Tyranny of the Top Five," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(2), pages 419-470, June.
    5. Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Brent Goldfarb & Andrew A. King, 2016. "Scientific apophenia in strategic management research: Significance tests & mistaken inference," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 167-176, January.
    6. Rakesh Khurana, 2007. "Introduction to From Higher Aims to Hired Hands The Social Transformation of American Business Schools and the Unfulfilled Promise of Management as a Profession," Introductory Chapters, in: From Higher Aims to Hired Hands The Social Transformation of American Business Schools and the Unfulfilled Promise of Management as a Profession, Princeton University Press.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mark P. Healey & Hannes Leroy & Corinne Post & Kristina Potočnik, 2023. "Changing the Scholarly Conversation: What it Means, Why it Matters, and How to Approach it in Micro Research," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(6), pages 1633-1656, September.
    2. Dirk Lindebaum & Christine Moser & Gazi Islam, 2024. "Big Data, Proxies, Algorithmic Decision‐Making and the Future of Management Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(6), pages 2724-2747, September.
    3. Peng Sun, 2022. "A Review of the Phenomenon and Formation Mechanism of Cultural Differences between the United States and China," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 15(1), pages 135-141.
    4. Gideon D. Markman, 2022. "Will your Study Make the World A Better Place?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1597-1603, September.
    5. Herman Aguinis & Donald Bergh & José F. Molina-Azorin, 2023. "Methodological challenges and insights for future international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(2), pages 219-232, March.
    6. Neng Shen & Jing Zhang & Yang Chun Cao & Lin Zhang & Guoping Zhang, 2025. "Clear the fog: Can public–private collaborative supervision promote the construction of a high‐quality public health system?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 46(1), pages 52-66, January.
    7. Herman Aguinis & Estelle E. Archibold & Darryl B. Rice, 2022. "Let’s Fix our Own Problem: Quelling the Irresponsible Research Perfect Storm," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1628-1642, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hensel, Przemysław G., 2021. "Reproducibility and replicability crisis: How management compares to psychology and economics – A systematic review of literature," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 577-594.
    2. Constantinos Alexiou & George Saridakis, 2025. "A Review of the Performance Metrics and Entrepreneurial Practices of Economics and Business Departments in UK Universities: A ‘Gresham’s Law’ Threat?," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 11(2), pages 281-308, July.
    3. Brent Goldfarb & Anastasiya Zavyalova & Sandeep Pillai, 2018. "Did victories in certification contests affect the survival of organizations in the American automobile industry during 1895–1912? A replication study," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(8), pages 2335-2361, August.
    4. Deakin, S. & Koukiadaki, A., 2011. "Capability Theory, Employee Voice and Corporate Restructuring: Evidence from UK Case Studies," Working Papers wp429, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    5. Michelle Harbour & Jacques-Bernard Gauthier, 2020. "Complex polysemy and reflexivity in organizational research," Working Papers hal-01543416, HAL.
    6. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    7. Thomas Delcey, 2025. "Holbrook Working and the Early Financial Economics," Post-Print hal-05056404, HAL.
    8. Claus Dierksmeier, 2011. "The Freedom–Responsibility Nexus in Management Philosophy and Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(2), pages 263-283, June.
    9. Stremersch, S. & Winer, R.S., 2018. "Academic Research in Marketing and Business School Health," ERIM Report Series Research in Management 116485, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    10. Camelia Ilie & Gaston Fornes & Guillermo Cardoza & Juan Carlos Mondragón Quintana, 2020. "Development of Business Schools in Emerging Markets: Learning through Adoption and Adaptation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-28, October.
    11. Mario Fernandes & Andreas Walter, 2023. "The times they are a-changin’: profiling newly tenured business economics professors in Germany over the past thirty years," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(5), pages 929-971, July.
    12. Ulrich Hommel & Ben Woods, 2021. "Squeezing the Middle: the Consequences of Quality Oversight in Management Education," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(1), pages 96-114, March.
    13. Wesley Mendes-da-Silva, 2021. "The Journal of Contemporary Administration (RAC)’s 2018 - 2021 Managerial Report and a Farewell," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 25(6), pages 210100-2101.
    14. Evan Starr & Brent Goldfarb, 2020. "Binned scatterplots: A simple tool to make research easier and better," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2261-2274, December.
    15. Pat Pataranutaporn & Nattavudh Powdthavee & Chayapatr Achiwaranguprok & Pattie Maes, 2025. "Can AI Solve the Peer Review Crisis? A Large Scale Cross Model Experiment of LLMs' Performance and Biases in Evaluating over 1000 Economics Papers," Papers 2502.00070, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2025.
    16. Martina Cioni & Giovanni Federico & Michelangelo Vasta, 2020. "The two Revolutions in Economic History," Working Papers 0192, European Historical Economics Society (EHES).
    17. J. Ignacio Conde-Ruiz & Miguel Díaz Salazar & Juan José Ganuza, 2026. "Designing gender-balanced evaluation committees with AI," Economics Working Papers 1937, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    18. Sergey V. Popov, 2023. "Arithmetics of research specialization," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(4), pages 1013-1021, October.
    19. Önder, Ali Sina & Schweitzer, Sascha & Yilmazkuday, Hakan, 2021. "Specialization, field distance, and quality in economists’ collaborations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    20. Gambardella, Alfonso & Camuffo, Arnaldo & Spina, Chiara, 2020. "Small Changes with Big Impact: Experimental Evidence of a Scientific Approach to the Decision-Making of Entrepreneurial Firms," CEPR Discussion Papers 14909, Centre for Economic Policy Research.

    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:bla:jomstd:v:59:y:2022:i:6:p:1604-1627. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-2380 .

    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.