This article comments on a paper by Sumantra Ghoshal published in this issue of Academy of Management Learning & Education which argues that academic research related to the conduct of business and management has had some very significant and negative influences on the practice of management. In indicting management scholars and their institutions for peddling bad theories, Ghoshal's article deals with the supply side. The author's questions, however, have to do with the demand side. The author notes that the theories reviewed by Ghoshal have been pushed by certain academics, but they have hardly been foisted on innocent capitalists. The author thinks Ghoshal gives too much power to MBA programs and management professors in explaining why certain ideas have triumphed in the marketplace. The sociology of knowledge shows the importance of reflexivity--that intellectuals and audiences interact and influence one another. Ghoshal rightly points to self-fulfilling prophecies and the ways that theories become true because theorists persuade managers to use them. But he focuses almost exclusively on knowledge producers rather than knowledge consumers. The major unaddressed question, therefore, is why has there been such a receptive audience?
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rosabeth Moss Kanter (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: