The future of chinese management research: Rigour and relevance redux

Mary Ann Von Glinow, Mary Teagarden

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We use the parable of the blind men and the elephant to suggest that Barney and Zhang (2009) and Whetten (2009) analogously touch on only a part of the Chinese management research puzzle. Their analyses remind us of many attempts at anchoring the research purpose - etic versus emic approaches, exploration versus exploitation approaches, rigor versus relevance scenarios - touched on by the many commentators in this issue. We suggest researchers first answer the 'purpose' questions before embarking on the research design. The research design should fit the purpose of the knowledge, which is either to improve the performance of Chinese organizations (meeting the relevance criterion) or to replicate, extend or refine a theory developed in the US (meeting the rigour criterion). We believe the strength of applied management research allows us to create knowledge that can meet the criteria of both rigour and relevance. We support the use of academic international research teams and dialectic debate as tools to move the field of Chinese management research forward.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalManagement and Organization Review
Volume5
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Chinese management
Management research
Research design
Dialectics
Exploitation
Scenarios
International research
Anchoring

Keywords

  • Context
  • Polycontextuality
  • Relevance
  • Research team
  • Rigour

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business and International Management
  • Strategy and Management

Cite this

The future of chinese management research : Rigour and relevance redux. / Von Glinow, Mary Ann; Teagarden, Mary.

In: Management and Organization Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, 03.2009.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{0ced1a7bdd7640b0bf664a9955a56d64,
title = "The future of chinese management research: Rigour and relevance redux",
abstract = "We use the parable of the blind men and the elephant to suggest that Barney and Zhang (2009) and Whetten (2009) analogously touch on only a part of the Chinese management research puzzle. Their analyses remind us of many attempts at anchoring the research purpose - etic versus emic approaches, exploration versus exploitation approaches, rigor versus relevance scenarios - touched on by the many commentators in this issue. We suggest researchers first answer the 'purpose' questions before embarking on the research design. The research design should fit the purpose of the knowledge, which is either to improve the performance of Chinese organizations (meeting the relevance criterion) or to replicate, extend or refine a theory developed in the US (meeting the rigour criterion). We believe the strength of applied management research allows us to create knowledge that can meet the criteria of both rigour and relevance. We support the use of academic international research teams and dialectic debate as tools to move the field of Chinese management research forward.",
keywords = "Context, Polycontextuality, Relevance, Research team, Rigour",
author = "{Von Glinow}, {Mary Ann} and Mary Teagarden",
year = "2009",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1111/j.1740-8784.2008.00137.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "5",
journal = "Management and Organization Review",
issn = "1740-8776",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The future of chinese management research

T2 - Rigour and relevance redux

AU - Von Glinow, Mary Ann

AU - Teagarden, Mary

PY - 2009/3

Y1 - 2009/3

N2 - We use the parable of the blind men and the elephant to suggest that Barney and Zhang (2009) and Whetten (2009) analogously touch on only a part of the Chinese management research puzzle. Their analyses remind us of many attempts at anchoring the research purpose - etic versus emic approaches, exploration versus exploitation approaches, rigor versus relevance scenarios - touched on by the many commentators in this issue. We suggest researchers first answer the 'purpose' questions before embarking on the research design. The research design should fit the purpose of the knowledge, which is either to improve the performance of Chinese organizations (meeting the relevance criterion) or to replicate, extend or refine a theory developed in the US (meeting the rigour criterion). We believe the strength of applied management research allows us to create knowledge that can meet the criteria of both rigour and relevance. We support the use of academic international research teams and dialectic debate as tools to move the field of Chinese management research forward.

AB - We use the parable of the blind men and the elephant to suggest that Barney and Zhang (2009) and Whetten (2009) analogously touch on only a part of the Chinese management research puzzle. Their analyses remind us of many attempts at anchoring the research purpose - etic versus emic approaches, exploration versus exploitation approaches, rigor versus relevance scenarios - touched on by the many commentators in this issue. We suggest researchers first answer the 'purpose' questions before embarking on the research design. The research design should fit the purpose of the knowledge, which is either to improve the performance of Chinese organizations (meeting the relevance criterion) or to replicate, extend or refine a theory developed in the US (meeting the rigour criterion). We believe the strength of applied management research allows us to create knowledge that can meet the criteria of both rigour and relevance. We support the use of academic international research teams and dialectic debate as tools to move the field of Chinese management research forward.

KW - Context

KW - Polycontextuality

KW - Relevance

KW - Research team

KW - Rigour

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70350304215&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70350304215&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1740-8784.2008.00137.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1740-8784.2008.00137.x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:70350304215

VL - 5

JO - Management and Organization Review

JF - Management and Organization Review

SN - 1740-8776

IS - 1

ER -