The Promise of Collaborative Management Research - Corwin

25 Pages·2007·0.18 MB·English

01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 9:17 PM Page 7
1
CHAPTER
The Promise of Collaborative
Management Research
W A. P
ILLIAM ASMORE
B S
ENGT TYMNE
A. B. (R ) S
AMI HANI
S A M
USAN LBERS OHRMAN
N A
ICLAS DLER
A
s editors of the Handbook of was how much we would learn about col-
Collaborative Management Research, laborative management research from each
we began this project with a firm other and from our colleagues who have
belief based on our experience that broader contributed chapters to this volume. As we
and deeper collaboration between managers began work on the editorial statement and
of organizations and academic researchers guidelines for the book, we quickly realized
could yield significant benefits for both that we held different ideas of what collabo-
parties. Managers would learn much more rative management research entailed.
about how organizations function and new As we tried to define what we meant
approaches to managing complex systems, by management and collaboration, we dis-
thereby improving their individual and orga- agreed on some basic points. Did manage-
nizational performance. Researchers would ment include both profit and nonprofit
have access to organizations to discover and organizations? Did it include the “manage-
test new theories and hypotheses, thereby ment” of systems that weren’t even formal
advancing knowledge and using it to enhance organizations, such as regional economies?
undergraduate, graduate, and executive Did it address issues that “managers” as dis-
education. What we didn’t realize at the time crete individual actors could influence, or did
7
01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 8
8 PART I: FRAMING THE ISSUES
it address “management” issues that groups we won’t go into more detail about it at the
of people shared some collective responsibil- moment. The point is simply that the pro-
ity for, even if they didn’t view themselves gram created a mindset for us about what
as managers? And what did we mean by collaborative management research is, and
“collaboration”? How intense, extended, set implicit standards against which we ini-
and personal did the relationship need to be tially assessed other efforts.
before it qualified as collaborative? Did the When we began receiving manuscripts
sharing of decisions about research objec- from our contributing authors covering the
tives, methods, and conclusions need to be theory and practice of collaborative manage-
determined equally by both parties, or was ment research, we were confronted by a much
it enough for organizations to simply open broader view of what collaborative manage-
their doors to academics? What exactly ment research currently entails. We were forced
differentiated an in-depth case study from to question our narrow view and opened our-
something that we would consider legitimate selves up to the possibility that the project
collaborative management research? would be much more informative and chal-
We were all involved in some way with an lenging than we first imagined. We also recal-
ongoing program between universities and ibrated our assessment of progress in the
organizations in Sweden (the FENIX Centre) field. Despite the best efforts of many of the
in which major corporations sent individuals contributors to this volume and their man-
to be trained as organizational researchers agerial collaborators, the practice of collabo-
as they worked with faculty to undertake rative management research is neither well
research projects in their own organizations. defined nor widely practiced. We see this
The projects were conducted within the as natural for an emergent and promising
context of a long Scandinavian tradition of research approach. There are intriguing pos-
boundary-spanning collaboration between sibilities for the development of future modes
management researchers and companies. The of collaboration as we build upon the knowl-
logic behind the program is that by training edge accumulated to date. The challenge
managers to be researchers while undertak- involved is to continue to develop the research
ing different forms of collaborative research approach, its epistemological foundation, its
projects, the gap between academia and research methods, and its institutional anchor-
organizations can be bridged. Certainly, the ing in scientific journals and textbooks. That a
founders of the program believed that man- study is “collaborative research” is not a
agerial researchers would choose topics justification for its claims to scientific and
of great relevance to their companies and practical relevance if it is poorly conducted.
that companies in turn would find the results Poorly conducted studies may further erode
of their research compelling. Recently, in a the trust and confidence that managers have
book titled Collaborative Research in in academics to contribute relevant and
Organizations: Foundations for Learning, timely insights in return for the support that
Change, and Theoretical Development, the managers provide for research.
FENIX community captured the learning There are important issues here. We are
from its first five years of leading and partic- of the firm belief that more collaborative
ipating in some very ambitious and innova- research can help to improve the relevance of
tive collaborative research endeavors (Adler, two fields that are the targets of much criti-
Shani, & Styhre, 2004). cism. Management and its practitioners are
The FENIX Centre will be represented in criticized in the public debate and in schol-
the work of several authors in this volume, so arly writings for acting irrationally based on
01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 9
The Promise of Collaborative Management Research 9
unfounded beliefs and imitation (Pfeffer & the wheel, misdirect or suboptimize the
Sutton, 2006). Management science and the application of organizational resources, and
researchers it engages are criticized for ultimately achieve slower progress. On the
producing knowledge of little or no relevance other hand, left to their own devices,
for management practice (Ghoshal, 2005; researchers could frame questions with no
Hoffman, 2004). We are convinced that practical significance, draw erroneous con-
there are ample opportunities for improve- clusions from data, or suggest remedies that
ment of this situation. Management, based are entirely impractical. In theory at least,
on better knowledge and appreciation of the bringing together managers with practical
specific contexts in which it acts, could experience and urgent needs with academics
contribute to socially more useful goods and who are in touch with accumulated wisdom
less waste of resources. Management and possess the capacity for research-driven
research, based on a better appreciation of innovation should be a win-win situation for
management practice and the challenges it both, as well as for society at large.
faces, could contribute to better-grounded This is not a new thought. In one of
actions and more relevant theories. the chapters in this volume (Chapter 3),
The argument for collaborative manage- Tenkasi and Hay draw upon Socrates for
ment research, at a basic level, is that by guidance that is extremely relevant to the
bringing management and researchers closer conduct of collaborative research today. As
together, the rate of progress in understand- several of our other authors note, efforts at
ing and addressing issues such as innovation, collaborative management research in the
growth, change, organizational effectiveness, early part of the 20th century produced inno-
and economic development will be faster vations ranging from time and motion stud-
than if either managers or researchers ies(Taylor, 1911) to high performance work
approach these topics separately. Managers systems (Trist & Bamforth, 1951) to human
are continuously acting out models of good relations at work (Roethlisberger & Dickson,
management but are not always aware of 1939). These efforts were not formulated
where the models came from, how they were with an explicit intention of undertaking col-
developed, whether they are robust, or laborative research; they were simply natural
whether they fit the current circumstances. evolutions of existing collaborative relation-
Management scientists are continuously ships that led to groundbreaking projects
building new models while keenly observing with benefits to both the organizations
what is going on in the world of business. If involved and the field of management more
the two groups join forces they will have the broadly. It is only now as we look back on
components necessary for faster and more these efforts that we can see in each how per-
relevant knowledge creation: model build- fectly the context for collaboration was cre-
ing, testing out models, observing conse- ated, even though it seemed so effortless that
quences, and analyses of cause and effect. it was given almost no attention at the time.
Closed groups and systems do not easily In the intervening decades, collaborative
change or innovate. Left on their own, man- management research has continued, as evi-
agers might continue to develop local solu- denced by many of the chapters in this vol-
tions to organizational issues that do not ume. At the same time, the academic field of
draw upon the vast shared knowledge that management research has grown and devel-
exists, in an uncoordinated fashion and oped, using a mix of research methodologies
without the benefit of the latest thinking on that are more or less collaborative. By sheer
the topic. The result would be to reinvent volume and influence within academic circles,
01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 10
10 PART I: FRAMING THE ISSUES
less-collaborative research has become the practice and management research. Manage-
dominant mode, leading to current concerns ment research has become more of a closed
that management research and thinking have system that is governed by relevance criteria
become too theoretical and of less interest developed internally based on idealized
to managers (Huff, 2000). It is as if a large images of the natural sciences. Demonstrated
part of the field has lost touch with its roots, practical usefulness is not required for
its audience, or perhaps both. Several of our research publication, and research aiming at
authors note that the criteria for success in the improving the effectiveness of a particular
fields of management and management organization may even be frowned upon by
research have diverged, with short-term prof- those who believe research should remain
itability issues dominating the minds of man- detached from those who are studied. In
agers, while publishing articles in the proper some of the contributions here, such as those
journals (whether or not they deal with issues of Roth (Chapter 17) and Knights, Alferoff,
important to managers) is the primary goal Starkey, and Tiratsoo (Chapter 19), the
for academics (e.g., Werr & Greiner, Chapter debate has been raised to an institutional
5; Roth, Chapter 17). As a result, it is the level as universities struggle with the tensions
exception rather than the rule today that raised by the acceptance of corporate-funded
conditions optimal for conducting collabora- research that threatens to hijack research
tive management research develop sponta- agendas. Incidentally, the natural sciences
neously. Instead, much is required on the part struggle with the same issues concerning cor-
of both parties to justify the expenditures porate funding, but the point is still the same:
involved, defend against critics who hold other Any type of relationship between those stud-
measures of performance to be more important, ied and the researchers involved raises the
and overcome the many forces that impede question of whether scientists can remain
or limit the dissemination of knowledge (see completely objective.
Pasmore, Woodman, & Simmons, Chapter 27, The value of objective research to the man-
and other chapters in this volume). agement science community is obvious. The
Management science and research have goal of management science is to explain how
undoubtedly made contributions that have managed systems function, which requires
had a profound impact on management sorting out popular myths or cultural beliefs
practice. Academics have been instrumental from actual underlying causes of events or
in developing accounting practices that form outcomes. The value of objective research to
the skeleton upon which the rest of the managers might not be as clear initially but is
economic system is constructed. Operations just as important in the end. Management
research has contributed to the organization practice has always been based on past expe-
of production and logistics, applied psychol- rience, trial and error, and what is “accept-
ogy to methods of marketing, and advanced able practice” inside an organization or
mathematical modeling has been instrumen- system. Management is often based on ideal-
tal for the emergence of an integrated global ized images of leadership, imitations of
financial system. However, as research in a others, and the adoption of management
certain area of management matures into a fads. If “accepted practice” is in fact based
scientific subdiscipline, the gap between prac- on incorrect assumptions or beliefs, this can
tice and research widens. The result today is create inefficiency, malfunctioning, or even
that astonishingly little cross-fertilization takes the demise of organizations over time. The
place between the universes of management result is waste in the larger economic system
01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 11
The Promise of Collaborative Management Research 11
and unnecessary human suffering in social achieve. The promise of collaborative man-
systems. Management action anchored in agement research is that it will produce more
more careful and realistic appreciation of the powerful and applicable solutions to some of
situation and context of the managed system our most pressing organizational and societal
can bring more success at less cost. Manage- issues. Whether or not we are capable of under-
ment research that fulfills the criterion of taking efforts of sufficient magnitude to fulfill
practical relevance will have greater possibil- the promise remains to be seen.
ities to make a difference for practice, that is, Despite the potential benefits of collabo-
will in fact contribute to better management ration, the contributions in this volume attest
and higher goal fulfillment of organizations to the difficulty associated with creating and
and other managed social and economic maintaining collaborative relationships that
systems. support significant, sustainable research
We are convinced that collaborative leading to transformations in organizational
research spanning management science and performance and meaningful additions to the
management practice can be beneficial to body of scholarly knowledge. The challenges
both parties. Management action can be of collaborative management research only
guided by tested models, systematic evalua- intensify as we increase the scope of concern
tion of present practices, and analyses of from understanding single organizations to
relevant information. Management research understanding complex networks of organi-
can discover, develop, and validate better zations and even societies. As more players
models based on careful observation of with vested interests enter the equation and
the consequences of management actions. the stakes become higher, achieving progress
Together, practicing managers and manage- becomes more difficult. Improving produc-
ment researchers can engage in joint reflec- tivity in a single organization is difficult, but
tion that clarifies the actual situation, the achieving better outcomes for a region, seg-
prior experience that might be applicable, the ment of society, or entire industry is a daunt-
indicators and dimensions that would be ing task.
relevant and useful to apply when evaluating A pessimist might argue that the most
progress, and the broader knowledge that important issues facing the world today are
could be applied to achieve greater success. the least amenable to collaborative resolu-
Preliminary studies and experiments could be tion. We take a view that is both more
designed and carried out to obtain more optimistic and pragmatic. Optimistically, we
information on key uncertainties before believe that, given time and continued effort,
decisions are made, resources committed, the field of collaborative management
and final approaches launched. Information research will overcome current obstacles in
about the consequences of actions can be order to make a greater contribution to man-
gathered and interpreted through joint efforts agement at the individual, organizational,
and give inspiration for new management and societal levels. Pragmatically, we would
strategies and scientific explanations. argue that many of our most vexing chal-
To advance our understanding of man- lenges can only be resolved by research that
agement, we need to conduct research that is truly collaborative, because collaboration
is more insightful, influential, and immedi- is required to both understand and change
ately applicable. For this, in turn, we need the dynamics underlying complex systems.
greater collaboration between management In this introductory chapter, we discuss the
and researchers, which is not always easy to importance of collaborative management
01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 12
12 PART I: FRAMING THE ISSUES
research, define the scope of our endeavor, of a certain issue or phenomenon by means
and preview some of the exciting ideas read- of knowledge regarding practice from man-
ers will find between the covers of this book. agers. If two parties don’t share a funda-
mental interest in learning, there can be no
collective inquiry and no collaborative
FRAMING THE ISSUES research. We should note here that the par-
ties may be motivated by different aspira-
The first section of the book helps us under- tions. Managers may desire quick fixes
stand the nature of collaborative management to pressing organizational problems while
research. From our perspective, we believe it researchers care more about generalizable
is important to understand what it is that we solutions to widespread issues. Still, if there is
are addressing here and, just as important, a coming together of interests to learn about
what we are not. The phrase “collaborative some phenomenon occurring in the organi-
management research” is not universally zation, collective inquiry may be not only
understood or applied in a uniform fashion possible but also the best means for achieving
by managers and academic researchers. If we the aspirations of both.
deconstruct the phrase, we gain insights into a Collaborative research goes beyond col-
field of endeavor that is only beginning to lective inquiry because inquiry itself does not
come into sharper focus. require collection and analysis of external
data in addition to data that the interlocutors
possess in their heads or close at hand. A
Collaborative
well-performed professional medical consul-
By collaborative we intend to signify tation is an illustration of what a collective
research efforts that include the active inquiry could be. The patient tells the M.D.
involvement of managers and researchers in how his ailment developed and his symptoms
the framing of the research agenda, the selec- and feelings, while the doctor gives a recom-
tion and pursuit of methods, and the devel- mendation to the patient based on what she
opment of implications for action. Our hears, based on her former experience and
definition of collaborative does not impose what she has read. The patient may walk
the requirement of an equal partnership in away from the meeting with new insights
each of these activities, although we under- into his troubles and how he could deal with
stand that a more equal partnership would them. The doctor may be left with not only
be ideal (see Lincoln & Guba, 1985, and payment but also an insight that could lead
Reason, 1988, for a discussion of the benefits to testing new insights about how to treat
of collaborative inquiry). At the heart of this other patients. A powerful example of collec-
endeavor is “collective inquiry,” which is tive inquiry in the context of management
the joint pursuit of answers to questions of is Chris Argyris’s method of engaging man-
mutual interest through dialogue, experi- agers in a conversation that helps them
mentation, the review of knowledge, or other understand how their single-loop reasoning
means. To be more precise, management chains them and how double-loop learning
engages in collective inquiry in order to get can permit them to find creative new ways of
a better understanding of a certain issue or acting (see Werr & Greiner, Chapter 5, and
phenomenon by means of input of scientif- Argyris & Schön, 1982).
ically valid knowledge from researchers. We think of collective inquiry as the core
Similarly, scientists engage in collective activity that takes place in the study of a sin-
inquiry in order to get a better understanding gle organization or system, as managers and
01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 13
The Promise of Collaborative Management Research 13
management researchers seek to understand we should at that point cease to describe the
the naturally occurring or intentionally effort as collaborative research. At the other
induced effects of different organizational extreme is collaborative research that seeks
arrangements on behavior and performance. not only to produce knowledge but also to
As scientists like Argyris and Freud have fundamentally transform a system via the
shown, the inquiry process can itself generate research process. In these efforts, collabora-
scientifically useful data that result in radical tion is a necessity and occurs broadly, deeply,
reorientations of practice, methodology, and and almost continuously over the course of
theory. The collective inquiry process may the project. In between these two extremes are
often be extended into a process of collabora- instances of selective collaboration, in which
tive research. There are two reasons for such only a few members of management are
an extension. One is to avoid the cognitive deeply engaged in collaborative inquiry activi-
traps of reflexivity and superstitious learning ties around a narrow topic, usually without
stemming from groupthink and the confusion there being a strong agenda to transform the
of causes and effects that easily take place in a entire organization in fundamental ways.
closed system. A second is to be able to benefit Collaborative management research is
from the experience of others and the greater therefore defined as an emergentand system-
variability of larger systems. Collaborative atic inquiry process,embedded in an agreed-
research concerns the dual and intermingled upon partnership between actors with an
processes that are going on as an organization interest in influencing a certain system of
is undergoing development by adopting new action and researchers interested in under-
structures and processes while researchers standing and explaining such systems. The
attempt to provide knowledge, which is not collaborative research process integrates sci-
readily accessible in the organization, from entific knowledge, methods, and values with
scientific sources or by gathering and analyz- practical knowledge, ways of working, and
ing observations. values. One aim for the new knowledge gen-
The scholarly knowledge can be about erated through the collaborative process is
the process through which organizations that it should be actionable for those who in
undergo inquiry and development or it can practice intend to influence the system.
be about content: the frameworks, solutions, Another aim is that the researchers should be
and features that lead to a system being more able to claim that it is scientifically relevant
effective in accomplishing its goals and and useful for the development of their field.
fulfilling the aspirations of its stakeholders— The collaborative research process is diffi-
and the boundary conditions, which are cult to master because values and aims of
requisite features of such approaches. More science and practice are often experienced
about this when we discuss what we mean by as antagonistic. A balance must nonetheless
“research.” be struck between dependence and indepen-
Different degrees of collaboration are pos- dence of the actors, between the quest for
sible, and we see examples of this through- generalizable patterns and the development
out this volume. At one extreme, collaboration of specific applications, between time-
may be limited to access to an organization for consuming analysis and quick fixes, between
data collection, with minimal interest on the conceptual reasoning and concrete problem
part of the manager in framing the questions, solving, and between the emphatic advocacy
methods, and conclusions of the research. of insiders and the disinterested inquiry of
Certainly, there is some threshold below outsiders. Collaborative research requires
which collaboration is no longer genuine, and the formation of a “community of inquiry”
01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 14
14 PART I: FRAMING THE ISSUES
through a partnership among individuals with Management can be carried out by an indi-
varying priorities and goals. vidual or a team, or even by groups of people
As ideas are tested and applied, collabora- who are not formally managers—for example,
tion doesn’t stop, but the parties involved by representatives of various stakeholder
may be augmented by others with an interest groups. An example is provided in the contri-
in the outcomes of the research. This is true bution by Apel, Heikensten, and Jansson,
not only in the economic and management Chapter 18 in this volume, which discusses
sciences but to a high degree in the engineer- how several central banks attempted to influ-
ing area, where research and practical appli- ence one country’s entire economy by man-
cations are often closely integrated. As is aging its monetary policy. Management
illustrated by Walshok and Stymne (Chapter therefore can be thought of as a noun: an
15), the ongoing dialogue between scientific individual or collective group of actors who
research, industry, and other interested aspire to influence the behavior or perfor-
parties increases the chances for significant mance of a system. Management (or manag-
breakthroughs. We share this view and hope ing)also can be a verb: the practice of those
that this volume adds additional voice to the actors. In this sense, management signifies
argument that research conducted with the an art or practice, that is, what managers
involvement if others, even if more difficult tacitly or explicitly know and believe about
to control in an experimental sense, holds how to go about managing an organization
tremendous potential for the advancement or complex system.
and application of knowledge. As evidenced by the contributions here,
collaborative management researchers are
not in strict alignment about the subjects
Management
of their inquiry. To some, like Boyatzis,
While one would think that the definition Howard, Rapisarda, and Taylor (Chapter
of managementis obvious, our most vocifer- 11), the focus is on improving the capabilities
ous debates have been about the legitimate of the individual manager. To others, like
scope of our work with regard to this term. Kolodny and Halpern (Chapter 13), the con-
Indeed, at least one invited author declined cern is with improving the performance of an
to participate because he associated the term organization; and for some, like Tandon and
managementin the title of the book with cap- Farrell (Chapter 14), the reference is to a
italism and all its ills, rather than holding a class of organizations and their influence on
broader interpretation of the term that could society as a whole.
include the management of not-for-profits Nor are we in complete alignment regard-
and even political or economic systems. ing the objects of our research. Stebbins and
Rather than settle the debate by narrowing Valenzuela (Chapter 23) discuss research in a
ourselves to a definition of management as single organizational setting, and Mohrman,
“what MBAs do,” or accepting a broad defi- Mohrman, Cohen, and Winby (Chapter 24)
nition of management as “any process that describe related studies in multiple organiza-
involves organizing a system,” we elected to tions. Coghlan and Coughlan (Chapter 21)
leave the issue open and allow our authors to and Huzzard and Gregory (Chapter 16) focus
help us define the field of inquiry through on organizational networks; Walshok and
their submissions. The result, as one might Stymne (Chapter 15) and Tandon and Farrell
expect, was that we were pulled toward a (Chapter 14) address regions; while Roth
somewhat broader definition of management (Chapter 17) and the ARC Research Team
than we had in mind at the outset. (Chapter 22) examine research networks.
01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 15
The Promise of Collaborative Management Research 15
We can easily imagine a two-dimensional the contributions here, understanding what is
matrix in which we study the actions of dif- really going on and what management actions
ferent types of managerial actors (individual, or systems of management processes are really
organizational, systemic) in different settings responsible for causing variations in perfor-
(a single organization, networks of organiza- mance is extremely difficult.
tions, systems, regions, or communities); but The promise of collaborative management
those two dimensions would be too simplis- research is that through multiple studies, the
tic to cover the diversity of research we see in accumulation of knowledge over time about
practice. We would need to add at least one different aspects of management and across
more dimension that addresses the aspect of different types of systems will help clarify
management studied: specific managerial when and how managerial actions can make
actions, systems of management processes a difference. Continued attempts to learn
affecting organizational culture or perfor- from experience, apply knowledge in the
mance, or coordinating mechanisms among form of new innovations, and thereby con-
networks of organizations. firm or disconfirm assumptions will result in
So, the question of what management is the gradual accumulation of wisdom that can
and how one should approach its study is be captured by scientists and applied by new
open to debate and experimentation. Even generations of managers. Although individual
when we try to simplify things by studying studies may not be appreciated or even come
management in a single organizational to the attention of more than a few managers,
system, we are confronted by the complexity the accumulation of knowledge over time can
of modern organizations. There are multiple produce changes in widely held paradigms
levels of managers in a system, and rarely are that are interesting and well-publicized, and
they aligned in their views or actions up and that may eventually influence how manage-
down the chain of command or across the ment is taught and practiced (Kuhn, 1962).
enterprise. There are formal and informal
leaders who vary in their level of participation
Research
and influence in shaping decisions depending
upon the issue under consideration. Individual This brings us to the last of the terms to be
leaders join and leave the organization, and defined. What is it that we mean by research?
even systems of management change over When does a casual conversation between a
time, sometimes gradually and occasionally in research scientist and a manager suddenly
dramatic ways. Interventions are not uni- become a moment of collective inquiry lead-
formly undertaken or adopted, nor are they ing to fascinating insights that challenge
carried out uniformly across the organization established management science and justify
as planned. Local adaptation to different cul- serious rethinking of corporate policies?
tures or customer groups can create varia- How rigorous do data collection methods
tions in management methods across units need to be to qualify as legitimate research,
and cause centrally initiated strategies to be as opposed to being biased reflections on a
rejected or adapted beyond recognition. Even momentary event by well-intended but un-
in a single unit close to headquarters, inter- sophisticated partners in a collaborative
views of a random sample of managers will research alliance? These are important ques-
reveal different philosophies and beliefs tions that, as editors, we found ourselves
about what effective management entails. unable to answer with precision.
Despite the application of highly collabora- For many centuries, the purpose of conduct-
tive research methods described in some of ing research has been to enable us to better
01-Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 16
16 PART I: FRAMING THE ISSUES
understand the world about us, and through variation in the previous condition of
that understanding, improve the quality and patients undergoing a particular treatment or
sustainability of our lives and endeavors. In operation can greatly influence the outcomes
the physical sciences, research has relentlessly observed from a given medical intervention.
pursued ways to expand our knowledge So may a variety of other factors, such as age,
about the characteristics and functioning of metabolism, genetics, race, gender, and sensi-
the tiniest processes and particles as well as tivity to dosage levels. The “error” intro-
of the universe as a whole. Long ago, we duced into research studies by these types of
abandoned the view of a classical Newtonian human variations is unavoidable. To mini-
ordered universe. New hypotheses are con- mize risks to patients, research methods in
stantly being suggested, methods for testing the medical sciences have evolved over the
them are being developed, and theories that years to include early studies done in other
experiments do not contradict are provision- species, followed by preliminary studies on
ally retained. small samples of carefully selected human
Management science and many of its patients, and finally larger clinical trials.
books on research methodology try to live up Despite these efforts, variations in treatments
to an image of physical science that even of specific individuals still produce a range of
physical science does not entertain. In reality, results, some of which are not predictable
the story of highly controlled experimental and can be quite serious. The benefits of
laboratory research is a lot messier than is medical advancement for the many outweigh
often portrayed. In order to carefully elimi- the risks to the few, but these risks are care-
nate the influence of other variables, experi- fully monitored by government bodies and
ments are conducted in ways that remove the professional groups who make certain that
influence of significant factors that operate researchers pay strict attention to accepted
in the real world. This can make transfer of research practices.
knowledge from the laboratory to the out- As we turn our attention to research in the
side world difficult. social sciences having to do with individual
As Kaplan (1964) has pointed out, human behavior, the behavior of groups, and
methodology books deal mainly with the ultimately the actions of organizations and
logic of verification that results when obser- systems, we find that the challenge of remain-
vations are collected in the correct manner. ing “rigorously scientific” becomes even more
The social sciences use reliability and validity difficult (Gergen, 1982). The ability to “con-
as the criteria for objectivity. However, trust- trol” extraneous factors affecting behavior in
worthy observation by itself does not really natural settings is limited, making it more
move science forward. The main mover is difficult to draw cause-effect conclusions
discovery. The logic of discovery builds on between specific variables of interest. The
intuition, serendipities, chance encounters, problems that interest us the most aren’t
and power games and depends on whom you amenable to laboratory experiments to begin
collaborate with. The logic of discovery is with; if we are concerned with the impact of
almost never described in methodology text- different work systems on productivity, for
books. It is time that management science example, we find it difficult or impossible to
take the logic of discovery seriously (see also bring an entire organization into the labora-
David & Hatchuel, Chapter 2). tory where we can control everything that
As we move into the human realm, takes place. Instead, we might design pilot
research conditions become more difficult plants that operate on different principles than
to control. In medical research, for example, traditional plants and assume the differences