Reflections on scientific misconduct in management: Unfortunate incidents or a normative crisis?

Benson Honig, Joseph Lampel, Joel Baum, Mary Ann Glynn, Runtian Jing, Mike Lounsbury, Elke Schüßler, David Sirmon, Anne Tsui, James Walsh, Arjen van Witteloostuijn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Taking as our starting point Merton's (1942) defense of science facing pressures from totalitarian regimes, we argue that today's challenge to the integrity of management scholarship does not come from external demands for ideological conformity, rather from escalating competition for publication space in leading journals that is changing the internal dynamics of our community. We invited ten scholars from different countries and with different backgrounds and career trajectories to provide their brief views of this argument. Following an introduction that summarizes the argument, we present their different reactions by dividing and introducing the work into those who took a broad field level perspective, those with a more macro view, and those that suggested possible remedies to our dilemmas. In conclusion, we note that questionable research practices, retractions, and highly publicized cases of academic misconduct may irreparably damage the legitimacy of our scholarship unless the management research community airs these issues and takes steps to address this challenge.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)412-442
Number of pages30
JournalAcademy of Management Perspectives
Volume32
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fields of science

  • 502 Economics
  • 502014 Innovation research
  • 502026 Human resource management
  • 502030 Project management
  • 502015 Innovation management
  • 502029 Product management
  • 502036 Risk management
  • 502043 Business consultancy
  • 502044 Business management
  • 506009 Organisation theory

JKU Focus areas

  • Management and Innovation
  • Gender Studies
  • Social and Economic Sciences (in general)

Cite this