IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/scaman/v11y1995i3p225-235.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Management research: A fragmented adhocracy?

Author

Listed:
  • Engwall, Lars

Abstract

This paper addresses the question of integration in the field of management research. Its point of departure is an analysis of the social and intellectual organization of the sciences undertaken by the British sociologist Richard Whitley. By focusing on the uncertainty involved in the research tasks and the mutual dependence between scientists in scientific fields, Whitley identifies nine possible ideal types, one of which -- management -- is said to exhibit a low level of integration and therefore to deserve the label "fragmented adhocracy". The purpose of the present paper is to try to discover how far this holds true by looking at all the references occurring in the first eight volumes of the Scandinavian Journal of Management and the most important references in Swedish doctoral dissertations in business administration publicly defended prior to the end of 1985. The analysis provides evidence, in full accord with Whitley's claim, that management studies are less integrated than disciplines such as mathematics, chemistry, the history of science and economics. However, there is also evidence that the degree of integration is increasing. In addition the analysis shows that works in organization theory, particularly those originating in the United States, constitute a common knowledge base for Scandinavian management researchers and Swedish doctors of business administration.

Suggested Citation

  • Engwall, Lars, 1995. "Management research: A fragmented adhocracy?," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 225-235, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:scaman:v:11:y:1995:i:3:p:225-235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/095652219500022N
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Davies, Andrew & Manning, Stephan & Söderlund, Jonas, 2018. "When neighboring disciplines fail to learn from each other: The case of innovation and project management research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 965-979.
    2. Peter Dobers & Lars Strannegård & Rolf Wolff, 2000. "Union‐Jacking the research agenda. A study of the frontstage and backstage of Business Strategy and the Environment 1992–1998," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 49-61, January.
    3. Engwall, Lars & Pahlberg, Cecilia & Persson, Olle, 2018. "The development of IB as a scientific field," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 1080-1088.
    4. Salvador Carmona & Isabel Gutierrez & Macario Camara, 1999. "A profile of European accounting research: evidence from leading research journals," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 463-480.

    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:eee:scaman:v:11:y:1995:i:3:p:225-235. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/872/description#description .

    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.