Faces of Methodological Pluralism in Management Science - an Institutional Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18559/SOEP.2016.1.4Keywords:
Management, Management paradigmsAbstract
The aim of this article is to show that the choice and adherence to a particular methodological paradigm (together with the use of certain research methods) is shaped not only by scientific choice, but results from environmental pressure. Th e article begins with a short presentation of the methodology and institutions' traits, that provides the grounds to collate methodology with a set of procedural rules in science. Such an understanding allows the analysis of the creation, choice and paradigmatic adherence from the point of view of environmental pressure and legitimacy. The last part of the paper is an initial conceptual framework that describes relationships between an environmental variability/ turbulence and isomorphic and pro-active, rule breaking behaviour of scientists and academicians , concerning the choice and usage of certain research methods.
Downloads
References
Bazeley, P., 2008, Mixed Methods in Management Research, The SAGE Dictionary of Qualitative Management Research, s. 133-136.
View in Google Scholar
Covaleski, M.A., Dirsmith, M. 1988, An Institutional Perspective on the Rise, Social Transformation, and Fall of a University Budget Category, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 33, s. 562-587.
View in Google Scholar
Ciesielski, M., 2011, Model rozprawy habilitacyjnej w naukach o zarządzaniu , Przegląd Organizacji, nr 10.
View in Google Scholar
Creswell, J.W., 2003, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, Sage.
View in Google Scholar
Czakon, W. (red.), 2013, Podstawy metodologii badań w naukach o zarządzaniu, Oficyna Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa.
View in Google Scholar
Djelic, M.L., Quark, S., 2003, Theoretical Building Blocks for a Research Agenda Lin- king Globalization and Institutions, w: Djelic, M.L., Quark, S. (eds.), Globalization and Institutions, Redefining the Rules of the Economic Game, Edward Elgar, Northampton MA.
View in Google Scholar
Fontana, M., 2014. Pluralism(s) in Economics: Lessons from Complexity and Innovation, a Review Paper, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, no. 24(1), s. 189-204.
View in Google Scholar
George, E., Chattopadhyay, P., 2006, Cognitive Underpinnings of Institutional Persistence and Change.A Framing Perspective, Academy of Management Review, no. 31 (2), s. 347-365.
View in Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., 1979, Prospect Theory: an Analysis of Decisions under Risk, Econometrica, no. 47, s. 262-291.
View in Google Scholar
Landreth, H., Colander, D.C., 2012, Historia myśli ekonomicznej, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
View in Google Scholar
Lehaney, B., 1995, A Framework for Research Evaluation in Management Science, International Journal of Educational Management, no. 9(4), s. 14-18.
View in Google Scholar
Mackenzie, N., Knipe, S., 2006, Research Dilemmas: Paradigms, Methods and Methodology, Issues in Educational Research, no. 16(2).
View in Google Scholar
March, J., Simon, H., 1958, Organizations, Wiley, New York.
View in Google Scholar
March, J., 1989, Decisions and Organizations, Blackwell, Cambridge.
View in Google Scholar
Mertens, D.M., 2005,Research Methods in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, Sage.
View in Google Scholar
North, D., 1991, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge - New York.
View in Google Scholar
North, D., 1986, The New Institutional Economics, Journal of Institutional and Theo-retical Economics, no. 142.
View in Google Scholar
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Leech, N.L., Collins, K., 2011, Toward a New Era for Conducting Mixed Analyses: the Role of Quantitative Dominant and Qualitative Dominant Crossover Mixed Analyses, The Sage Handbook of Innovation in Social Research methods, s. 353-384.
View in Google Scholar
Powell, W.W., DiMaggio, P.J. (eds.), 1991, The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
View in Google Scholar
Scandura, T., Williams, E., 2000, Research Methodology in Management: Current Practices, Trends, and Implications for Future Research, Academy of Management Journal, no. 43(6), s. 1248-1264.
View in Google Scholar
Shepsle, K., 1989, Studying Institutions, Some Lessons from the Rational Choice Approach, Journal of Theoretical Politics, vol. 1, s. 131-147.
View in Google Scholar
Staw, B., Sandelans, L., Dutton, J., 1981, Threat - Ridigity Effects in Organizational Behavior: a Multi-level Analysis, Administrative Science Quarterly, no. 26, s. 501-524 .
View in Google Scholar
Strauss, A., Corbin, J., 1998, Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
View in Google Scholar
