Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T18:04:47.844Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chinese Management Research at a Crossroads: Some Philosophical Considerations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Eric W. K. Tsang
Eric W. K. Tsang*
Affiliation:
University of Texas at Dallas, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this commentary, I discuss some philosophical issues related to contextualizing Chinese management research. First, it should be noted that contextualization can be interpreted in different ways by different philosophical perspectives. Second, the Duhem-Quine thesis implies that replications, in the form of empirical generalization, are an appropriate means of testing Western theories in a Chinese context. Third, owing to the difficulty of conclusively falsifying management theories, attempts to create theories that explain unique Chinese management phenomena may lead to theory proliferation and the perpetuation of weak, or even false, theories. Finally, I propose the study of empirical regularities as an alternative to the theory application and theory creation approaches.

Keywords

contextualizationDuhem-Quine thesisempirical regularityreplicationtheory proliferation情境化重复检验迪昂-奎因 (Duhem-Quine) 论题理论的过度增生经验规律
Type
Commentaries
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 2009 , pp. 131 - 143
Copyright
Copyright © International Association for Chinese Management Research 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arend, R. J. 2006. Tests of the resource-based view: Do the empirics have any clothes? Strategic Organization, 4(4): 409–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astley, W. G. 1985. Administrative science as socially constructed truth. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(4): 497–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Astley, W. G., & Zammuto, R. F. 1992. Organization science, managers, and language games. Organization Science, 3(4): 443–460.Google Scholar
Audi, R. 1998. Epistemology: A contemporary introduction to the theory of knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Audi, R. (Ed.). 1999. The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barney, J. B., & Zhang, S. 2009. The future of Chinese management research: A theory of Chinese management versus a Chinese theory of management. Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 15–28.Google Scholar
Bettman, J. R., & Weitz, B. A. 1983. Attributions in the board room: Causal reasoning in corporate annual reports. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(2): 165–183.Google Scholar
Bhaskar, R. 1978. A realist theory of science (2nd ed.) Hassocks: Harvester Press.Google Scholar
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. 1979. Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Choi, I., Nisbett, R. E., & Norenzayan, A. 1999. Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality. Psychological Bulletin, 125(1): 47–63.Google Scholar
Cross, R. 1982. The Duhem-Quine thesis, Lakatos and the appraisal of theories in macroeconomics. Economic Journal, 92(366): 320–340.Google Scholar
Davis, G. F., & Marquis, C. 2005. Prospects for organization theory in the early twenty-first century: Institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science, 16(4): 332–343.Google Scholar
Fay, B. 1996. Contemporary philosophy of social science: A multicultural approach. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Faye, J. 2006. Science and reality. In Andersen, H. B., Christiansen, F. V., Jørgensen, K. F., & Hendricks, V. F. (Eds.), The way through science and philosophy: Essays in honour of Stig Andur Pedersen: 1–33. London: College Publications.Google Scholar
Grünbaum, A. 1960. The Duhemian argument. Philosophy of Science, 27(1): 75–87.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. C. 2007. The field of management's devotion to theory: Too much of a good thing. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6): 1346–1352.Google Scholar
Hanson, N. R. 1958. Patterns of discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harré, R., & Second, P. F. 1972. The explanation of social behavior. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Helfat, C. E. 2007. Stylized facts, empirical research and theory development in management. Strategic Organization, 5(2): 185–192.Google Scholar
Hunt, S. D. 1994. A realistic theory of empirical testing: Resolving the theory-ladenness/objectivity debate. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 24(2): 133–158.Google Scholar
Keegan, M. 2008. Blues' bosses turn to feng shui. Manchester Evening News, July 17.Google Scholar
Khatri, N., Tsang, E. W. K., & Begley, T. M. 2006. Cronyism: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(1): 61–75.Google Scholar
Kilduff, M., & Mehra, A. 1997. Postmodernism and organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 22(2): 453–481.Google Scholar
Koontz, H. 1961. The management theory jungle. Journal of the Academy of Management, 4(3): 174–188.Google Scholar
Koontz, H. 1980. The management theory jungle revisited. Academy of Management Review, 5(2): 175–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kwan, K.-M., & Tsang, E. W. K. 2001. Realism and constructivism in strategy research: A critical realist response to Mir and Watson. Strategic Management Journal, 22(12): 1163–1168.Google Scholar
Leung, K. 2007. The glory and tyranny of citation impact: An East Asian perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3): 510–513.Google Scholar
Losee, J. 2005. Theories on the scrap heap: Scientists and philosophers on the falsification, rejection, and replacement of theories. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Meehl, P. E. 1978. Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46(4): 806–834.Google Scholar
Meyer, K. E. 2006. Asian management research needs more self-confidence. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23(2): 119–137.Google Scholar
Michailova, S., & Hutchings, K. 2006. National cultural influences on knowledge sharing: A comparison of China and Russia. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3): 383–405.Google Scholar
Miller, D. 2007. Paradigm prison, or in praise of atheoretic research. Strategic Organization, 5(2): 117–184.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J. 1982. Organizations and organization theory. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18(4): 599–620.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1959. The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchison & Co.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M., & Fried, Y. 2001. Location, location, location: Contextualizing organizational research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(1): 1–13.Google Scholar
Sawyer, K. R., Beed, C., & Sankey, H. 1997. Underdetermination in economics. The Duhem-Quine thesis. Economics and Philosophy, 13(1): 1–23.Google Scholar
Sayer, A. 2000. Realism and social science. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2002. Self-serving attributions in corporate annual reports: A replicated study. Journal of Management Studies, 39(1): 51–65.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2004a. Toward a scientific inquiry into superstitious business decision-making. Organization Studies, 25(6): 923–946.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2004b. Superstition and decision-making: Contradiction or complement? Academy of Management Executive, 18(4): 92–104.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2006. Behavioral assumptions and theory development: The case of transaction cost economics. Strategic Management Journal, 27(11): 999–1011.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K., & Kwan, K.-M. 1999. Replication and theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(4): 759–780.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. S. 2006. Contextualization in Chinese management research. Management and Organization Review, 2(1): 1–13.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. S. 2007. From homogenization to pluralism: International management research in the academy and beyond. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6): 1353–1364.Google Scholar
Whetten, D. A. 2009. An examination of the interface between context and theory applied to the study of Chinese organizations. Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 29–55.Google Scholar