Killing the Goose That Laid the Golden Egg?
In each issues of Management Inquiry, there is a section called Provocations & Provocateurs. In 2012, Michael A. Hitt and Charles R. Greer published a paper in this section where they discuss the value of management research and its role in the evaluation of business schools. The paper is called, The Value of Research and Its Evaluation in Business Schools: Killing the Goose That Laid the Golden Egg?
Even if I personally do not agree with all the arguments, I think that the paper could spur a nice discussion. The reason? It is 1) meant to be ‘provocative’, 2) it connects to some of the previous discussions we have had on management research, and 3) it could be related to the ongoing AACSB accreditation.
Worth noting is that the paper was one of the most well read articles in Management Inquiry since the beginning of March, this year.
Some of the questions posed in the article are;
Does the research we have done and are currently doing have little value? Should we only be doing research that can receive external funding or that has commercial value? Should we eliminate PhD programs and focus our teaching efforts, with much higher teaching loads, on undergraduate programs and “lucrative” master’s programs?
The paper can be downloaded here.
Here you also have the Abstract.
Critics have characterized academic research as being of little practical or commercial value. Such criticism of scholarly research, as opposed to applied research, resonates with detractors who do not appreciate the evolving role of business schools in providing foundational research. The authors contend that scholarly research helps develop knowledge in fields such as strategic management, enhances the value of later applied research, and provides content for courses. Not all research is of high quality, however, so the evaluation of research is critical. The authors examine several considerations for evaluation, such as journal rankings, interdisciplinary evaluation, and breadth of approach.