Royston Greenwood was named the 2014 Distinguished Scholar by the Organization and Management Theory Division of the Academy of Management. He gave this presentation on the occasion of his award, August 4, 2014, in Philadelphia, PA.
Royston is the Telus Professor of Strategic Management at the University of Alberta School of Business.
Since 1980, the Organization and Management Theory Division has been presenting the Distinguished Scholar Award to scholars whose contributions have been central to the intellectual development of the field of organization studies.
The Distinguished Scholar Award and Breakfast was sponsored in part by the Boston College Carroll School of Management and Oxford University Press.
http://omtweb.org/omt-blog/53-main/568-2014-distinguished-scholar-announced
Uneak White's Personal Brand Exploration Presentation
Â
2014 Royston Greenwood Distinguished Scholar Talk
1. The place to be!
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
2. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
John Stewart
3. 1970 - 79
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
John Stewart
Kieron Walsh
Margaret
Lomer
Sir Rodney
Brooke
Stewart
Ranson
Adrian Smith
Bob
Hinings
4. 1980 - 89
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Bill Jenkins
George
Jones
Bob Hinings
Stewart
Ranson
Kieron Walsh
John
Stewart
5. 1990 - 99
J.L. Brown
Danny Miller
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Kay Devine
Ran
Lachman
Peter
Roberts
Bob
Hinings
David
Cooper
Lloyd
Steier
Roy
Suddaby
Theresa
Rose
6. 2000 - 09
Danny Miller
Christine
Oliver
Laura
Empson
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Kerstin
Sahlin
David
Cooper
Gerry
Johnson
Steve
Salterio
Dev
Jennings
Trish Reay Celeste
Wilderom
Renate
Meyer
Stan Li
Tom
Lawrence
Jennifer
Jennings
Rajshree
Prakash
David
Deephouse
Patrick
Vermeulen
R. BĂźch
Megan
McDougald
Amy Pablo
Karen
Golden-
Biddle
Ann
Casebeer
Bob
Hinings
Lloyd
Steier
Roy
Suddaby
Theresa
Rose
7. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
A.D. Brown
2010 -
Bob Hinings
Danny Miller
Christine
Oliver
Tyler Wry
Mike
Lounsbury
Tim Morris
Samantha
Fairclough
Ignasi Marti P Monin
Peter
Walgenbach
Chris
Marquis
Kim
Elsbach
Tamar Zilber
Amalia
Magan Diaz
Stan Li
Mehdi
Boussebaa
Michael
Smets Mia Raynard
Farah
Pietro Kodeih
Mazzola
Mario Minoja
Megan
McDougald Claudia
Gabbioneta
Bernard Forgues
Susanne
Boch
Waldorff
Roy Suddaby
Evelyn
Micelotta
Rajshree
Prakash
David
Wilson
Renate
Meyer
Gerry
Johnson
Dev
Jennings
Kerstin
Sahlin
Don Palmer
8. âThe past is another country:
they do things differently
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
there.â
L.P. Hartley
9. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AGENDA
THEN NOW: THE MATURING FIELD
A. Infrastructure/governance
B. Growth
C. Internationalization
-----------------------
D. Salami slicing
E. Horizons, âboxesâ âmuseumsâ
10. A. THEN AND NOW: INFRASTRUCTURE:
ASSOCIATIONS CONFERENCES
1971 Academy of Management
1985 ANZAM
1986 British Academy of Management
1989 Federation of Scholarly Associations of
Management
1974/1998 EGOS
2001 EURAM
2002 International Association for Chinese Research
2008 Indian Academy of Management
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
11. A. THEN NOW: INFRASTRUCTURE -
MONITORING RANKING AGENCIES
1916: 1997 AACSB
1967 AMBA
1998 EQUIS
1986 BUSINESS WEEK - Ranking of US schools
1999 FINANCIAL TIMES - Global ranking of MBAs
1999 FORBES - MBA
2001 WALL STREET JOURNAL
2002 THE ECONOMIST - âWhich MBA?â
1992 âResearch Assessment Exerciseâ (UK)
1998 âQUALISâ (BRAZIL)
2010 âExcellence in Researchâ (AUSTRALIA)
2012 âVQRâ
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
12. B. THEN AND NOW: GROWTH - ALL ACADEMY
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
13. B. THEN NOW: GROWTH - EGOS
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
14. B. THEN NOW: GROWTH - BAM
2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
15. B. THEN NOW: HOW ARE WE DOING?
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
16. C: THEN AND NOW: INTERNATIONALIZATION
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
All Academy
International
17. C. THEN NOW: INTERNATIONALIZATION
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
- EGOS
0
Total
International
18. C. THEN NOW: HOW ARE WE DOING?
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(2013)
BPS
OB
OMT
Entrep
%
47%
41%
52%
46%
Countries
94
83
69
72
19. CHALLENGE #1
âThese members have different views on the issues that we
should study and how we should study them, and we must find
a way of meeting their needsâŚâ
âWe need toâŚincrease the diversity of backgrounds of
individuals on our editorial boards so that our journals will
be more welcoming to other types of researchâŚ(and) bring
more non-North Americans into the leadership of the
Academyâ
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Angelo DeNisi, Presidential Address (2010)
20. âWho cares about Canadian accounting firmsâŚâ
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(VERY) B l ind reviewer, AMJ
21. HOW ARE WE DOING?
COMPOSITION OF THE OMT EXECUTIVE
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Nelson
Phillips
Michael
Lounsbury
Candace
Jones
Mark Ebers
Anne
Langley
Christine
Beckman
Forrest
Briscoe
Peer Fiss
Martine
Haas
Braydon
King
Chris
Marquis
Anne Claire
Pache
Pat
Thornton
Bill
McEvily
Marc-David
Seidel
Eva
Boxenbaum
Renate
Meyer
22. HOW ARE WE DOING?
COMPOSITION OF THE OMT EXECUTIVE
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Nelson
Phillips
Michael
Lounsbury
Candace
Jones
Mark Ebers
Anne
Langley
Christine
Beckman
Forrest
Briscoe
Peer Fiss
Martine
Haas
Braydon
King
Chris
Marquis
Anne Claire
Pache
Pat
Thornton
Bill
McEvily
Marc-David
Seidel
Eva
Boxenbaum
Renate
Meyer
23. HOW ARE WE DOING?
COMPOSITION OF THE OMT
RESEARCH COMMITTEE
non-US 40%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
24. HOW ARE WE DOING?
SHORT LISTS FOR OMT AWARDS (2014)
Best Paper
3 US, 1 non-US
Lou Pondy Award
1 US, 1 non-US
Best Student Paper
3 US, 0 non-US
Best Empirical Paper
2 US, 3 non-US
Best Symposium
4 US, 2 non-US
Best International
0 US, 4 non-US
TOTAL
11 US, 13 non-US
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
25. HOW IS THE AOM DOING?
INTERNATIONAL COMPOSITION - AMJ
EDITORIAL BOARD
1984
non-US
5%
US
95%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
US
66%
2014
non-US
34%
26. INTERNATIONAL COMPOSITION - ASQ
EDITORIAL BOARD
1984
non-US
10%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
2014
US
77%
non-US
23%
US
90%
27. INTERNATIONAL COMPOSITION - JMS
EDITORIAL BOARD
US
33%
1984
non-US
67%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
US
39%
2014
non-US
61%
28. INTERNATIONAL COMPOSITION - ORG
STUDIES EDITORIAL BOARD
1984
US
10%
non-US
90%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
2014
US
14%
non-US
86%
29. % OF PAPERS IN AMJ AND ASQ
WRITTEN BY âNON-USâ AUTHORS
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
1973
1983
1993
2003
2013
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AMJ
ASQ
30. AUTHORS OF âBEST PAPERSâ BY
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
COUNTRY
US
Non-US
Mixed
AMJ
11
4
7
22
AMR
13
3
5
21
31. HOW ARE WE DOING?
âBEST PAPERSâ WITH AT LEAST ONE
AUTHOR WHO IS A MEMBER OF:
BPS
OB
OMT
ENT
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AMJ
12
11
5
AMR
10
8
4
32. HOW ARE WE DOING?
âBEST PAPERSâ WITH AT LEAST ONE
AUTHOR WHO IS A MEMBER OF:
BPS
OB
OMT
ENT
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AMJ
12
11
16
5
AMR
10
8
14
4
33. HOW ARE WE DOING?
TERRY BOOK AWARD WINNERS WITH AT
LEAST ONE AUTHOR WHO IS A
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
MEMBER OF:
OMT
BPS
OB
ENT
46%
25%
21%
13%
34. D. THEN AND NOW: SALAMI SLICING
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
35. THEN NOW: NEW JOURNALS BY DECADE
11
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
9
26
11
12
Pre 1970
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000 onwards
36. THEN NOW:âBUSINESS MANAGEMENTâ OPEN
ACCESS JOURNALS FOUNDED ANNUALLY
60
50
40
30
20
10
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(FORGUES LIARTE, 2013)
0
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
37. D. THEN AND NOW: SALAMI SLICING
ââŚthe baleful influence of research assessment exercises has led to
salami slicing of researchâŚâ
âWhere once an academic might have produced a considered
monograph over a period of five or even ten years, the research
assessment process demands instant gratificationâ
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(Tom Wilkie, 2014, Research Information)
ââŚthe rise of evaluation and ranking systems has led to a stronger
differentiation between journals and even greater US dominationâ
(Hinings, 2010)
38. SALAMI SLICING - DOES THE SHIFT TO
ARTICLES MATTER?
⢠Incoherence and/or silos?
⢠Format conformity
⢠âBoxed-in researchâ?
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
41. âBOXED-INâ SILOS?
⢠âsilo identitiesâ
⢠âsilo mentalitiesâ
⢠âsafe intellectual habitatâ
âacademic journal techniciansâŚâ
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
42. WHICH LEADS TOâŚ
ââŚincremental rather than
frame-bending researchâŚ
âŚand facilitates career advancement
rather than innovative and
influential researchâŚâ
(Alvesson Sandberg, 2014)
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
44. âA tiny research questionâŚ
âŚfollowed by a compendious literature
reviewâŚa discussion of methodologyâŚsome
findingsâŚthen some suggestions for further
workâŚan acknowledgement of limitationâŚ
and a modest conclusion given.â
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
45. âThe elite US journals and those European
journals that seek (with inevitable failure) to
join that elite have become increasingly
formulaic and dull.â
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(Grey, 2010)
46. A PERNICIOUS CATEGORICAL
IMPERATIVE?
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
⢠Overly formulaic
⢠âBoxed-inâ themes
⢠Dull
International
competition across
business schools
Journal rankings
e.g. FT
Tenure
Promotion
47. âOur journals are dominated by North
American scholars who share a specific model
of how research should be conducted and
reported.â
âFor all others we have insistedâŚwe will
accept you if you adopt our model of how to
do research.â
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(DeNisi, 2010)
48. WHERE ARE WE? (A PERSONAL VIEW)
1. Salami emphasis? (Guilty â more research monographs
please
2. Incoherence? (see the Annals, Reviews in journals,
Handbooks, etc.) BUTâŚ
3. Silos? â we need more ânomadsâ
4. Formulaic? Yes, but:
- rigour is much higher
- some old biases have been (almost) overcome
- more essays please!
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
49. E. THEN AND NOW â
âMUSEUMSâ OR EXCITING HORIZONS?
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
50. IN ONE CORNERâŚ
ââŚorganizational research can sometimes appear
like a museum of the 1970sâ
ââŚour theoretical debates are largely stuck where
they were two decades agoâ
ââŚparadigms in organization theory appear to be
encased in amberâ
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
51. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AND IN THE
OTHER CORNER
âIf organization theory is a museum âŚNew pieces are
being added to the collection, and many of these are
potential anchors for new rooms of the museum.â
Organization theory is ââŚa tremendously vibrant and
generative field.â
52. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Institutional Prescriptions
(Logics)
Mechanisms
of Diffusion
Convergence
⢠interlocks
⢠proximity
⢠exemplars
⢠âcarriersâ
Mechanisms
of Divergence
⢠translation
⢠intra-organizational
dynamics
⢠visibility/status
⢠location (core-periphery)
Mechanisms of
Reflexivity
Change
⢠shocks
⢠social movements
⢠contradictions
⢠âtheorizationâ
⢠practice
improvisation
Mechanisms
of Legitimacy
Management
⢠impression
management
⢠âstrategic
responsesâ
⢠reputation
ârepairâ
Mechanisms
of
Maintenance
âRepairâ
⢠FCEs
⢠practices
⢠categorical
imperative
⢠professional
associations
53. TO WHICH THE FIRST CORNER
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
RESPONDSâŚ
ââŚif progress is judged by answering important
questions about the world, then some skepticism is
warrantedâ
âA major challenge for organization theorists is
that we need good taste in problemsâŚâ
54. PROBLEM #1
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
55. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
PROBLEM #2
57. âIt is surprising to discover that
empirical research on greed is rare.â
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(Wang Murnighan, 2011)
58. PROBLEM #3
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
59. PROBLEM #3: CORPORATE CORRUPTION
â ⌠a worldwide problem that cuts
across ideological and cultural
divides.â (Zahra et al., 2005)
âCanada now dominates the World
Bank corruption list, thanks to SNC-Lavalin.â
(National Post, 2013)
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
61. WHERE ARE WE?
⢠OMT - PDWs Symposia
- Submissions e.g. social responsibility
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
e.g. hybrid organizations
⢠EGOS
⢠OMT - âBest Paper on Environmental and
Social Practicesâ
62. âSCHOLARLY CONTRIBUTIONS TO
MANAGEMENTâ AWARD WINNERS - BY
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
DIVISION
BPS
OB
OMT
ENT
%
23%
27%
45%
5%