Abstract
Mainstream management scholarship has for the last half century largely legitimated its scholarship and production of knowledge on the grounds that its research is objective, neutral, scientific and uninfluenced either by its researchers or by data distorted by subjectivist human factors (Locke & Spender 2011). However, over the decades there have been serious and sustained criticisms of aspects of this scholarship not least from within the field by mainstream scholars, eg Otley (Accounting, Organizations and Society 5: 413-428, 1980, 1995, 2007) and Panozzo (Accounting, Organizations and Society 22: 447-480, 1997) on grounds of the inadequacy of synchronic studies that were found to be non-replicable; of the limitations of surveys/questionnaires, so frequently used to acquire data; of abstract idealisations unrelated to the real world and on an ‘obsessive preoccupation with numbers’ (Locke & Spender 2011:xiii). Serious criticisms have been made of this type of scholarship more generally in the social sciences on the grounds of political bias (see eg Bourdieu 1990). Claims to the scientific nature and therefore legitimacy of this type of research have also been contested. On the other hand examples of alternate scholarship, advocating and using mixed method and multi-paradigmatic approaches, have been published in the same high-ranking journals as has research using the mainstream approaches mentioned above (see eg Chenhall & Euske 2007, Brown & Brignall 2007). These showed a richness in the data, generally unobtainable in solely objectivist approaches. Yet despite these factors, mainstream scholarship has in the main continued to produce objectivist, empiricist, quantitative-focussed research and knowledge (Green 2013). Reasons for this have been suggested, at the local level, the academy, including its administration, heads of department and journal editors driven by the criteria set by high-ranking journals (Green 2012b). At a wider level, the US government’s fright at the successful launch of the Soviet Sputnik led to demands for ‘hard’ science also in the management field (Green 2012b). Managerialism, a dominant ideology (and not only in the West), has been an influence on researchers’ approaches, giving managers the prerogative of having the necessary knowledge and also the power and capability successfully to implement strategies independently of their subordinates (Green 2012b, 2013). Although these explanations may have some mileage in explaining the persistence of this type of scholarship, and its resistance to the multitude of criticism against it and to compelling examples of more inclusive research, further explanations have been sought. It is argued in this paper that deeper explanations may lie in the power of neoliberal ideas, principles and policies which have spread beyond economics, permeating and seriously affecting other aspects of life including education and scholarship.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In future 1961 will cover all the editions of Burns and Stalker’s book, apart from information in the additional prefaces in the 1966 and 1994 editions.
References
Baker S The fad for extensions is cooling Times Higher Education 28 May 2015
Barley, S.R., and G. Kunda. 1992. Design and devolution: Surges of rational and normative ideologies of control in managerial discourse. Administrative Science Quarterly 37(3): 363–399.
Bourdieu, P. 1990a. In other words: Essays towards a reflexive sociology Trans M. Adamson. Cambridge: Cambridge Polity Press.
Bourdieu, P. 1990b. The logic of practice. Trans. R. Nice. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Bourdieu, P., J-C. Chamboredon, and J-C. Passeron. 1991. The Craft of Sociology: Epistemological Preliminaries. Engl.ed. B. Krais. Trans R. Nice. New York: de Gruyter.
Brown, W. 2005. Neoliberalism and the End of liberal democracy in W Brown Edgework: Critical essays on knowledge and politics, 37–59. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Brown, R., and S. Brignall. 2007. Reflections on the use of a dual-methodology research design to evaluate accounting and management practice in UK university central administrative services. Management Accounting Research 18: 32–48.
Burns, T. 1966. Preface to the second edition in Burns T & Stalker GM The management of innovation, 2nd ed. London: Tavistock Publications.
Burns, T. 1994. Preface to the third edition in Burns T & Stalker GM The management of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burns, T., and G.M. Stalker. 1961. The management of innovation. London: Tavistock Publications.
Burns, T., and G.M. Stalker. 1966. The management of innovation, 2nd ed. Tavistock Publications: London.
Burns, T., and G.M. Stalker. 1994. The management of innovation, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chenhall, R.H., and K.J. Euske. 2007. The role of management control systems in planned organizational change: An analysis of two organizations. Accounting, Organizations and Society 32: 601–637.
Chia, R. 1996. Organizational analysis as deconstructive practice. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Clegg, S.R. 2002. Lives in the balance”: A comment on hinings and Greenwood’s “disconnects and consequences in organization theory? Administrative Science Quarterly 47(3): 428–441.
Daft, R.L. 2001. Organization theory and design. Ohio: Cincinnati Ohio South-Western College Publishing.
Enteman, W.R. 1993. Managerialism: the Emergence of a New ideology. Madison: Wisconsin The University of Wisconsin Press.
Ferraro, F., J. Pfeffer, and R.I. Sutton. 2005. Economics language and assumptions: how theories Can become self-fulfilling. Academy of Management Review 30(1): 8–24.
Feyerabend, P. 1993. Against Method, 3rd ed. London: Verso.
Form, W.H. 1963. Book Review of The Management of Innovation 1962 [sic] Administrative Science Quarterly 8 (2) pp 271–272.
Fournier, V. and C. Grey. 2000. At the critical moment: Conditions and prospects for critical management studies Human Relations 53 (1) pp 7–32.
Gentleman, A. 2014. ‘No one should die penniless and alone’: the victims of Britains’s harsh welfare sanctions The Guardian @ameliagentleman 3 August 2014 18.00 BST
Gerdin, J., and J. Greve. 2008. The appropriateness of statistical methods for testing contingency hypotheses in management accounting research. Accounting, Organizations and Society 33: 995–1009.
Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. The Academy of Management Learning and Education 4(1): 75–91.
Green, M. 2005. Are texts produced by authors or by readers? representations of a contingency theory in the organisation and management studies literature. Philosophy of Management formerly Reason in Practice 5(1): 85–96.
Green, M. 2009a. Analysis of a text and its representations: univocal truth or a situation of undecidability? Philosophy of Management formerly Reason in Practice 7(3): 27–42.
Green, M. 2009b. The embedding of knowledge in the academy: ‘tolerance’, irresponsibility or other imperatives. Social Responsibility Journal 5(2): 165–177.
Green, M. 2012a. Deconstructing paradigm boundaries as a way of deconstructing a text? Philosophy of Management formerly Reason in Practice 11(2): 85–113.
Green, M. 2012b. Objectivism in management knowledge: an example of Bourdieu’s ‘mutilation’? Social Responsibility Journal 8(4): 495–510.
Green, M. 2016. Can we learn anything from African traditional systems in terms of governance? In Organisational Governance and the global crises: Financial, environmental, sustainability, and corporate social responsibility crises in the aftermath of the subprime mortgage crisis 2007, ed. D. Crowther and L.M. Lauesen, 75-100. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholarly Publishing.
Green, M. 2013. What counts as knowledge? Parameters of validity for the meaning and representation of a contingency theory in the organisation, management and management accounting literature Unpublished thesis De Montfort University.
Habermas, J. 1972. Knowledge and human interests. Trans J.J. Shapiro. London: Heinemann.
Hanson, N.R. 1972. Patterns of discovery: an inquiry into the conceptual foundations of science. Cambridge: Cambridge At The University Press.
Harvey, D.A. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hogler, R., and M.A. Gross. 2009. Journal rankings and academic research management communication quarterly 20 (10). Management Communication Quarterly. doi:10.1177/089335419.
Hyde, D. 2011. City Wire Money The £1.3 trillion pound question: what should we do about the banks Jan 28, 2011 at 13:28 http://citywire.co.uk/money/the-1-3-trillion-pound-question-what-should-we-do-about-the-banks/a466979.
Kalagnanam, S.S., and R.M. Lindsay. 1999. The use of organic models of control in JIT firms: Generalising Woodward’s findings to modern manufacturing practices. Accounting, Organizations and Society 24(1): 1–30.
Kuhn, T.S. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd ed. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Langfield-Smith, K.A. 2007. Review of quantitative research in management control systems and strategy. In Handbook of management accounting research chapter 12 vol 2, ed. C.S. Chapman, A.G. Hopwood, and M.D. Shields, 753–783. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Lilley, S., and D. Papadopoulos. 2014. Material returns: Cultures of valuation, biofinancisalisation and the autonomy of politics. Sociology 48(5): 972–988.
Locke, R.R., and J.C. Spender. 2011. Confronting Managerialism: How the business elite and their schools threw Our lives Out of balance. London: London Zed Books.
Lythe, R. and C. Duffin. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2945079/Old-people-auctioned-care-homes-internet-Anger-cattle-markets-grannies-councils-accept-lowest-bids-save-cash.html#ixzz3RXMa9xFp.
Maher, M.W. 2001. The evolution of management accounting research in the United States. The British Accounting Review 33: 293–305.
Mannheim, K. 1952. Essays on the sociology of knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.
Markus, M.L., and J. Pfeffer. 1983. Power and the design and implementation of accounting and control systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society 8(2/3): 205–218.
Marsden, R. 2005. The politics of organizational analysis. In Critical management studies: A reader, ed. C. Grey and H. Willmott. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Merchant, K.A., and D.T. Otley. 2007. A review of the literature on control and accountability. In Handbook of management accounting research vol 2, ed. C.S. Chapman, A.G. Hopwood, and M.D. Shields, 785–802. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Miller, P., and T. O’Leary. 1987. Accounting and the construction of the governable person. Accounting, Organizations and Society 12(3): 235–265.
Mouffe, C. 2005. The democratic paradox. London: Verso.
Mullins, L.J. 2005. Management and Organisational behaviour, 7th ed. Upper Saddle River: Harlow: Prentice Hall.
Otley, D. 1980. The contingency theory of management accounting: Achievement and prognosis. Accounting, Organizations and Society 5(4): 413–428.
Otley, D. 1995. Management Control, organisational design and accounting information systems. In Issues in management accounting, 2nd ed, ed. D. Ashton, T. Hopper, and R.W. Scapens. London: Prentice Hall.
Palmer, D. 2006. Taking Stock of the criteria We use to evaluate One Another’s work: ASQ 50 years Out. Administrative Science Quarterly 51(4): 535–559.
Panozzo, F. 1997. The making of the good academic accountant. Accounting, Organizations and Society 22(5): 447–480.
Preston, A. 1986. Interactions and arrangements in the process of informing. Accounting, Organizations and Society 11(6): 521–540.
Pugh, D.S., D.J. Hickson, and C.R. Hinings. 1964. Writers on organizations: An introduction. London: Hutchinson.
Read, J.A. 2009. Genealogy of Homo-Economicus: Neoliberalism and the Production of Subjectivity Foucault Studies (6) pp 25–36.
Reiter, S.A., and P.F. Williams. 2002. The structure and progressivity of accounting research: the crisis in the academy revisited. Accounting, Organizations and Society 27(6): 575–607.
Robbins, S.P. 2003. Organisational behavior, 10th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Sandelands, L.E., and V. Srivatsan. 1993. The problem of experience in the study of organizations. Organization Studies 14(1): 1–22.
Simons, R. 1987. Accounting control systems and business strategy: an empirical analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society 12(4): 357–374.
Smith M.K. (2012) ‘What is pedagogy?’ the encyclopaedia of informal education. [http://infed.org/mobi/what-is-pedagogy/. Retrieved 21.2.2015].
Stern, R.N., and S.R. Barley. 1996. Organizations and social systems: organization theory’s neglected mandate. Administrative Science Quarterly 41(1): 146–162.
Turner, J.H. 2001. The origins of positivism. In The contributions of Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer in handbook of social theory, ed. G. Ritzer and B. Smart, 30–42. London: Sage.
Van der Stede, W.A., S.M. Young, and C.X. Chen. 2005. Assessing the quality of evidence in empirical management accounting research: the case of survey studies. Accounting, Organizations and Society 30(7–8): 655–684.
Willmott, H. 2011. Journal list fetishism and the perversion of scholarship: reactivity and the ABS list. Organization 18(4): 429–442.
Acknowledgment
My sincere thanks to Paul Griseri and to the anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments and suggestions of further sources
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Green, M. Neoliberalism and Management Scholarship: Educational Implications. Philosophy of Management 15, 183–201 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-016-0042-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-016-0042-x