Research in Management
|
D. P. Dash Xavier Institute of Management, Xavier Square, Bhubaneswar 751013, INDIA dpdash[AT]ximb.ac.in, professor_dash[AT]yahoo.co.uk |
Draft Version March 10, 2005 (Please do not quote) |
|
Background
The topic of promoting and strengthening research activities within management schools is a familiar one around the world today. Here I reflect on this topic and try to identify what needs to be done to indeed promote and strengthen research activities in management. At first, I would like to share my thoughts on the nature and scope of management studies, the changing expectations from management research, and the ever-growing number of puzzles before the management profession.
Nature and Scope of Management Studies
In an interview, once a candidate used the term management; when asked to define it, the candidate said, "Management is the art and science of preparing, organising, and executing human efforts so as to make the best utilisation of the available resources and achieve the organisational objectives." I think, the definition is a fine one as far as definitions can go. However, there can still be other facets of management not sufficiently represented in that definition: For example, the need to identify and make available new forms of resources (such as co-operative networks within or across industrial sectors), the need to devise organisational systems and practices to facilitate a collaborative spirit among a culturally (and otherwise) diverse set of individuals, the need to evaluate and reform the existing organisations so as to make them more responsive to the new demands on them, the need to initiate new forms of interaction (among all stakeholders) that reduce transaction costs and create value for all participants, etc. Besides, there are the issues of leadership, organisational culture, skill upgradation, process innovation, future-orientation, organisational renewal, risk management, selection and recruitment, virtual workplaces, relationship with customers, group decision support, changing environment of organisations, social responsibility of organisations, emerging global order guiding the evolution of technology, finance, and trade, and so forth. Expectation From Management Research
It is difficult to capture all the facets of management in a definition-like statement. Consequently, it is difficult to say what management research is or ought to be. From time to time, management scholars are warned not to make their research too narrow or too broad. They are also advised to keep in mind the context of use of their results. Sometimes, management research is criticised for focusing too much on explaining phenomena (i.e., producing "because of" knowledge) and not paying sufficient attention to how some desired phenomena might be produced (i.e., by applying "in order to" knowledge). If managers want goal-based "in order to" knowledge while academics produce empirical "because of" knowledge, then application of the latter will seldom provide managers with what they desire (Lundberg, Golembiewski, & Rahim, 1998, p. 389). Puzzles Before Management A reflection on the history of development of management thinking shows that the subject has always faced a multitude of puzzles; new ones emerging even before the old ones could be adequately resolved: What motivates people to work? What affects the productivity of work? Which work systems promote efficiency? Which promote debate and shared understanding? Which organisational structures promote or prohibit innovation? How to measure organisational effectiveness? How to direct organisational conflicts in a positive direction? How to tap the rich knowledge of the field force and the other line functionaries? How to attract and retain individuals with appropriate skills? How to improve decision-making under uncertain circumstances? How to set long-term objectives? How to achieve sustainable superior performance over a long period of time? The puzzles seem to have grown in number, scope, and complexity over the years. However, one expects that the accumulation of research experience should have led to a general rise in the competence in recognising and resolving the puzzles. Such issues concerning the nature and scope of management studies, changing expectations from management research, and the ever-growing number of puzzles before the management are relevant within all areas of management. This provides a context for reflecting on the following questions: Which contemporary concerns impinge on management research? Can we make a distinctive contribution through our research efforts? What do we need in terms of institutional support and our own efforts to promote and strengthen research activities? 2. Emerging Obligations on Management Research Since management became recognised as an area of study (whether or not already a discipline) it is becoming clear that the subject is likely to involve multiple research paradigms. This is perhaps because no unique way has been found that could sufficiently characterise the complex reality associated with the activity (or phenomenon) called management and the role of research with respect to that reality. At one level, there is the concrete external reality of material, money, or manufacturing that could be objectively described. Observations on these could be compared and patterns could be identified, for example, the degree of operational flexibility associated with alternative manufacturing systems or the relationship between financial risk and return. At another level, there is the internal reality of human thought, emotion, behaviour, mental models, or the so-called "defense mechanisms." This aspect of managerial reality poses unique challenge to the research approaches that depend solely on objective data, i.e., those obtained through classical observations. Researchers have made use of alternative forms of observation, e.g., participant observation (sometimes using "observing participants"), unobtrusive observation, etc. Some others have relied on reports (including self-reports) instead of observations. However, there are difficult methodological questions pertaining to the truthfulness and validity of such reports. At yet another level, there is the intermediate reality of social and organisational structures that simultaneously shape and are shaped by human behaviour. The methodological issues in studying such intermediate reality are still a major topic of academic debate in management. Although the above paragraph does not fully clarify what the key difficulties in management research are, I hope it supports the position that management research is likely to be multi-paradigmatic in nature. Therefore, the most fundamental obligation for management research is to allow the healthy flourishing of multiple research paradigms retaining the possibility of a constructive interaction among them. Management researchers, in their zeal to make a useful contribution, sometimes arrogate to themselves the responsibility of improving practical situations through planned interventions. In certain circumstances this might constitute a type of colonisation of others’ work environment and their life-worlds. Those who do not want to be intervened upon in this manner are increasingly resisting such colonisation in our times. It is an obligation of management research to respect the intentions and interests of those who are supposed to benefit from such research. Many research studies in management often conclude with a set of recommendations. However, researchers are not the only ones producing recommendations. There are other actors who produce recommendation as well, for example, politicians, spiritual leaders, public officials, family heads, and so forth. Of course a researcher might argue that research-based recommendations are superior to other recommendations because of the supporting data and theory. This leaves little space for the other actors to defend their recommendations. In a way, it silences them. This is being viewed as a "violence" in contemporary thought (e.g., Lyotard’s notion of Différend). The violence is particularly serious when the data, theory, and analyses of management research are known to be methodologically deficient in many ways. There is an obligation for management research to ensure that others’ voices are not silenced in a violent manner.
I would like to end this section by referring to the much-berated management fads. Now popular management ideas such as TQM and BPR certainly have their merit but their propounders and advocates fall short of clarifying some of the basic things one needs to know in order to adopt or apply these in a self-conscious and critically-reflective manner. These include the background challenges, questions, problems, and thoughts that gave rise to these ideas. Besides, the literature referring to these ideas does not clarify how a critical reader might compare these with the other ideas in management. For example, there is no systematic comparison between TQM and cybernetics or BPR and soft-systems thinking or either of these with the idea of interactive management. Therefore, a serious reader (or student) might accept or reject these ideas without being able to explain the rationale behind that decision. What is more significant, a practitioner would not be able to interpret and learn from the experience of deploying these ideas. As a result of these (i.e., uncritical acceptance or rejection, inability to learn from the use of these ideas, etc.) the ideas themselves are deprived of the necessary intellectual and empirical nourishment, which are nevertheless required to systematically enrich and improve them. It becomes an obligation of management research to provide this intellectual and empirical nourishment. Making a Distinctive Contribution
By distinctive contribution, I am referring to the possibility of shaping and presenting our individual research efforts in a manner that the overall effect of our work carries a unique import in some branches of management literature. At first it might appear as a daydream. However, if it is worth achieving, it is also worth dreaming! There are many examples of such achievement at research institutes in various areas of study; we can cite examples of the following:
I am sure the reader can add further examples of such institutes and centre which have made a distinctive contribution in their respective areas of study. Every academic institution needs an academically inspiring goal to work for. Here I am proposing that the goal of making some distinctive contribution in the sense described above might be considered as a candidate for this purpose.
What Do We Need
Without highlighting too much the current deficiencies at academic institutions, I would like to stress upon two basic requirements: (a) managerial foresight and (b) an academic culture.
. Managerial Foresight
The following issues need to be addressed in managing the future of any institution of higher learning, especially those engaged in management education, research, and service. I have based my ideas on the understanding that the present environment of higher education is characterised by the following trends:
(a) Lack of clarity about the goals of higher education in general: The advocates of post-modernism might suggest that the whole idea of liberal education might merely be a meta-narrative that should be deconstructed to reveal its cultural and philosophical blinkers. I am not arguing for that position here. However, I would argue that the notion of education is historically constructed and undergoes evolutionary as well as epochal revisions from time to time. The advent of the 21st century has perhaps fuelled the need for a major revision in the goals and methods of higher education. This might be synchronous with the historical process sometimes referred to as the second industrial revolution (Donovan, 1997) or sometimes the third (e.g., by the Harvard Professor, Michael Jensen).
(b) Emergence of several alternative organisational arrangements for the provision of educational and research services: Examples of such alternatives include corporate universities http://www.corpu.com, course accrediting universities (e.g., the Wipro University programme in India), Web-based virtual universities http://vu.wu-wien.ac.at/english/, global universities http://www.worlduniversity.org/, knowledge ecologies http://www.knowledgeecology.com, learning communities, etc. Many of these alternatives have emerged in the recent past after the Internet has made physical distances less important and educational interactions much faster and easier.
(c) Increasingly new and more complex challenges before the management profession: Those who study the sociology of professions recognise that the management profession is experiencing some kind of a structural readjustment. Two major social tendencies can be recognised immediately: the contraction (or downsizing) of the state apparatus in many societies and the simultaneous expansion of the range of activities of the corporate organisations. Both of these pose an ever-growing list of new challenges before the management profession. There is a strange expectation among the educated elite in our country that somehow management will provide the answers to the most vexing and the most intractable social and organisational questions of our times.
(d) Process of disintermediation occurring even in higher education: This point is related to point (c) above. Many of the new models of education emerging now have one feature in common: They tend to provide a direct link between those playing the roles of learner and teacher. This implies that the professional role of the academic is undergoing a transformation.
(e) Increasing scarcity of the appropriate mix of skills in higher education and research: As a corollary to the above, a new range of skills are becoming necessary for the professional academic. For example: the skills of designing Web-based educational resources, developing educational software, supporting the learner with information management, crafting new educational goals more relevant to the current reality, specialising on methodologies that build competence in client organisations, reducing the time required to convert useful data to research output, etc.
These and such other trends that impinge on higher education and research in management must be studied by the educational managers in today’s management schools. Without a continuous study of such trends and mechanisms for strategic renewal of the educational and research process, management schools of today risk losing their relevance in the emerging future.
. Academic Culture
Academic institutions can run into decadence in the absence of an academic culture. They become affected by the turmoil in the wider society instead of providing a meaningful direction and an inspiring leadership to it. Various non-academic criteria begin to dominate their operation. Several academic institutions in the region and in the whole country have fallen victim to such a process of impairment. I feel academic institutions can improve by paying attention to building academic culture.
Inclusiveness: One of the key difficulties in building an academic culture is that one does not know who might be in a position to contribute to it. Therefore, there is an advantage in maintaining an atmosphere of inclusiveness. This means that it should be welcoming to anyone interested in participating in it, irrespective of one’s history. However, contemporary institutional designs might require that the person should have demonstrated an interest and a capability to participate in an academic environment. This is difficult to judge. Therefore, we should provide various alternative ways and means through which one can still participate irrespective of one’s history of achievements.
Critical thinking: An academic culture is inconceivable without an ambience of critical thinking. An academic institution interested in developing such an ambience has to invent practices and forms of interaction, which promote critical thinking. A spirit of experimentation, an attitude of tolerance, a desire for responsiveness, and recognition of authenticity are necessary to develop such an ambience.
Reflective practice: Any practice, academic practice included, requires an effort towards continuous improvement. The notion of reflective practice refers to a process by which people, engaged in some creative field of action, pay attention to their practice in a collective and self-reflective manner. In doing this, they study their own actions and their own thinking jointly and explore alternatives for the future. Such a process must be facilitated by an institution.
Support: Contemporary academic activity requires various kinds of support. Several academic institutions tend to assume erroneously that they already know what forms of support might be required. Given the continuously changing nature of academic work in the contemporary world, there is a need to consider new forms of support and provide these as and when these become necessary.
Recognition: Like every practitioner, an academic also needs recognition for his or her contributions. Not only does it satisfy and inspire the individual academic, it also strengthens an environment in which mutual respect and appreciation is fostered. The process of giving credit for someone’s contribution also builds trust in a social environment.
. Summary and Proposals
I wanted to share with you my thoughts on what needs to be done to strengthen research within management schools. I thought it was necessary to describe the context within which the topic assumes its contemporary relevance for all management schools, as well as all other institutions of higher education and research. I started describing the context by first focusing on the nature and scope of management studies, the changing expectations from management research, and the ever-growing number of puzzles before the management profession (and before management thinking in general).
Management research is sometimes criticised for focusing too much on explaining phenomena (i.e., producing "because of" knowledge) and not paying sufficient attention to how some desired phenomena might be produced (i.e., by applying "in order to" knowledge). The concept of production of desired phenomena as a goal for research is quite crucial to the study of management. This I consider to be a very fundamental feature of management as a discipline. In striving for this goal, management research continues to face an ever-growing body of puzzles, which seem to have grown in number, scope, and complexity over the years. However, one expects that the accumulation of research experience should lead to a general rise in the competence in recognising and resolving these puzzles. Such issues concerning the nature and scope of management studies, changing expectations from management research, and an ever-growing number of puzzles before the management profession (and before management thinking in general) are relevant within all functions and areas of management we deal with.
I have then moved on to reflect on the following questions: Which contemporary concerns impinge on management research? Can we make a distinctive contribution through our research efforts? What do we need in terms of institutional support and our own efforts to promote and strengthen research activities
I have identified four obligations for management research: (a) The most fundamental obligation for management research is to allow the healthy flourishing of multiple research paradigms retaining the possibility of a constructive interaction among them, (b) it is an obligation for management research to respect the intentions and interests of those who are supposed to benefit from such research, (c) there is also an obligation to ensure that others’ voices are not silenced in a violent manner, and finally (d) it is an obligation for management research to provide the necessary intellectual and empirical nourishment to the new ideas and models arising in the popular literature of management.
I have argued that we should aim at making a distinctive contribution through our research. I have visualised the possibility of shaping and presenting our individual research efforts in a manner that the overall effect of our work carries a unique import in some branches of management literature. There are many examples of such achievement at research institutes in various areas of study; we only need to study them and learn from them.
I have focused on what we need to do in order to build up a research culture. I have stressed upon two basic requirements: (a) managerial foresight and (b) an academic culture.
I have outlined five major trends relevant to the management of higher education; I believe these are also relevant for management schools. The leaders and managers of today’s management schools must study these trends. They have to be foresighted in evolving suitable mechanisms for strategic renewal of the educational and research process.
At the end, I have highlighted the importance of nurturing an academic culture. Academic institutions can run into decadence in the absence of an academic culture. They become affected by the turmoil in the wider society instead of providing a meaningful direction and an inspiring leadership to it. Various non-academic criteria begin to dominate their operations. Academic institutions must pay attention to building the right academic culture. I have identified five areas of focus for working on this: (a) creating an atmosphere of inclusiveness, (b) fostering an ambience of critical thinking, (c) facilitating a process of reflective practice, (d) providing new forms of support to the academic professionals, and (e) institutionalising a process of giving credit for someone’s contribution.
References
Donovan, J. J. (1997). The second industrial revolution. Prentice Hall. Jackson, M. C. (1995). Beyond the fads: Systems thinking for managers. Systems Research, 12(1), 25-42. Lundberg, C. C., Golembiewski, R. T., & Rahim, M. A. (1998). Management research: New directions. In M. A. Rahim, R. T. Golembiewski, & C. C. Lundberg (Eds), Current topics in management (Vol. 3) (pp. 385-390). Stamford, Connecticut: JAI Press.
7. Web Addresses Used
http://www.tavinstitute.org/ The Tavistock Institute http://www.santafe.edu/ Santa Fe Institute http://www.ifs.uni-frankfurt.de/ Institut für Sozialforschung (Institute for Social Research) http://www.sei.cmu.edu/ Software Engineering Institute http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/ Institute of Development Studies http://www.hudson.org/ Hudson Institute http://www.ntl.org/ NTL Institute for Applied Behavioral Science http://www.sric-bi.com/about.shtml Stanford Research Institute (SRI Consulting Business Intelligence) http://www.corpu.com/ Corporate University Exchange http://vu.wu-wien.ac.at/english/ Virtual Universities http://www.worlduniversity.org/ Global Universities http://www.knowledgeecology.com Knowledge Ecologies http://www.phptr.com/ptrbooks/ptr_0137456212.html The Second Industrial Revolution
| |