Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Purpose This paper aims to map how the debate concerning the relevance of management research historically evolved to (a) determine if B-schools and management researchers have been uninterested bystanders, as critics posit, or if they have had a relevant role, and (b) discover if a pathway for management research becoming socially relevant has been established by such debate. Design/methodology/approach This study performed a citation network analysis of the scientific literature concerning the relevance of management research. The network had a total of 1,186 research papers published between 1876 and 2018. Findings The results show that from a minimal to peripheral role at the beginning and middle stages, management researchers have rather taken over this debate since the 1990s; the key components of the citation network reveal a strong convergence on what needs to be done, but no convergence on how to do it; and the debate has failed to generate actual change. Originality/value This study maps the debate concerning the relevance of management research since its historical inception using a method underused in management history research. It reveals the main path of the debate and the journals that echoed such debate.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Thomaz Wood
Renato Souza
Miguel Caldas
Journal of Management History
The University of Texas at Tyler
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Wood et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1d434128423f2ce504ee8f — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/jmh-10-2021-0056
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: