IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/conmgt/v35y2017i7p385-391.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The prospects for a production management body of knowledge in business schools: response to Koskela (2017) “Why is management research irrelevant?”

Author

Listed:
  • Chris Ivory

Abstract

This article is a response to Lauri Koskela’s recent piece in Construction Management and Economics (“Why is management research irrelevant?” 35(1–2): 4–23) which reflects on the relationship between academic research and management practice in business schools. In particular, Koskela asks why production management research and teaching has disappeared from the business school agenda and why management research has failed to produce a consistent body of knowledge that is of use to management practice. In this article, I try to provide some alternative perspectives on the present and past contexts of management theory and production research. I argue that production research, if not teaching, is alive and well and the site of theory generation, problem-focused research and innovation. I also question the veracity and wisdom of a creating “body of knowledge” in relation to management research and practice-even if it were possible, which I believe it is not. My assessment of the state of research in business schools, at least in the U.K. and the U.S. and notwithstanding a lack of consensus over how to approach management research, is that it is eclectic and vibrant and of much more use to practicing managers in that state.

Suggested Citation

  • Chris Ivory, 2017. "The prospects for a production management body of knowledge in business schools: response to Koskela (2017) “Why is management research irrelevant?”," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(7), pages 385-391, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:conmgt:v:35:y:2017:i:7:p:385-391
    DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2017.1323111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01446193.2017.1323111
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01446193.2017.1323111?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
    ---><---

    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. Chris Ivory & Helen Shipton, 2020. "Latour and Woolgar’s ‘cycle of scientific credibility’ as a basis for conceptualizing business school strategy," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 379-391, April.

    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:taf:conmgt:v:35:y:2017:i:7:p:385-391. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RCME20 .

    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.