Becoming vanilla pudding: How we undermine our passion for research

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Society invests billions of dollars every year in helping management scholars help organizations. However, many scholars become contented with cranking out endless variations on tired themes. They become vanilla pudding: a bland comfort food with empty calories. To be sure, it is difficult under the best of circumstances to do research that makes a difference. But the profession has constructed artificial barriers to bold theorizing and empiricism, including discipline-specific training, journals, and funding; a bias against qualitative research; various pitfalls of the journal review process; and the defensiveness encouraged by the Great Wall of Academia - tenure. These barriers can be reduced by replacing tenure with regular performance reviews, by recognizing that not all A publications are equal, by judging scholarly books and chapters on their own merits, and by encouraging editors to empower authors. A few such judicious changes would help liberate rather than squelch the passion of management scholars.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)400-403
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Management Inquiry
Volume14
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2005

Fingerprint

Tenure
Passion
Funding
Review process
Empiricism
Qualitative research
Food
Theorizing

Keywords

  • Research
  • Tenure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Management of Technology and Innovation
  • Strategy and Management
  • Business, Management and Accounting(all)

Cite this

Becoming vanilla pudding : How we undermine our passion for research. / Ashforth, Blake.

In: Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol. 14, No. 4, 12.2005, p. 400-403.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{228ba95a3d424471ba3a71658f7dd605,
title = "Becoming vanilla pudding: How we undermine our passion for research",
abstract = "Society invests billions of dollars every year in helping management scholars help organizations. However, many scholars become contented with cranking out endless variations on tired themes. They become vanilla pudding: a bland comfort food with empty calories. To be sure, it is difficult under the best of circumstances to do research that makes a difference. But the profession has constructed artificial barriers to bold theorizing and empiricism, including discipline-specific training, journals, and funding; a bias against qualitative research; various pitfalls of the journal review process; and the defensiveness encouraged by the Great Wall of Academia - tenure. These barriers can be reduced by replacing tenure with regular performance reviews, by recognizing that not all A publications are equal, by judging scholarly books and chapters on their own merits, and by encouraging editors to empower authors. A few such judicious changes would help liberate rather than squelch the passion of management scholars.",
keywords = "Research, Tenure",
author = "Blake Ashforth",
year = "2005",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1177/1056492605280783",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "400--403",
journal = "Journal of Management Inquiry",
issn = "1056-4926",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Becoming vanilla pudding

T2 - How we undermine our passion for research

AU - Ashforth, Blake

PY - 2005/12

Y1 - 2005/12

N2 - Society invests billions of dollars every year in helping management scholars help organizations. However, many scholars become contented with cranking out endless variations on tired themes. They become vanilla pudding: a bland comfort food with empty calories. To be sure, it is difficult under the best of circumstances to do research that makes a difference. But the profession has constructed artificial barriers to bold theorizing and empiricism, including discipline-specific training, journals, and funding; a bias against qualitative research; various pitfalls of the journal review process; and the defensiveness encouraged by the Great Wall of Academia - tenure. These barriers can be reduced by replacing tenure with regular performance reviews, by recognizing that not all A publications are equal, by judging scholarly books and chapters on their own merits, and by encouraging editors to empower authors. A few such judicious changes would help liberate rather than squelch the passion of management scholars.

AB - Society invests billions of dollars every year in helping management scholars help organizations. However, many scholars become contented with cranking out endless variations on tired themes. They become vanilla pudding: a bland comfort food with empty calories. To be sure, it is difficult under the best of circumstances to do research that makes a difference. But the profession has constructed artificial barriers to bold theorizing and empiricism, including discipline-specific training, journals, and funding; a bias against qualitative research; various pitfalls of the journal review process; and the defensiveness encouraged by the Great Wall of Academia - tenure. These barriers can be reduced by replacing tenure with regular performance reviews, by recognizing that not all A publications are equal, by judging scholarly books and chapters on their own merits, and by encouraging editors to empower authors. A few such judicious changes would help liberate rather than squelch the passion of management scholars.

KW - Research

KW - Tenure

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=29144468946&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=29144468946&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1056492605280783

DO - 10.1177/1056492605280783

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:29144468946

VL - 14

SP - 400

EP - 403

JO - Journal of Management Inquiry

JF - Journal of Management Inquiry

SN - 1056-4926

IS - 4

ER -