Can business schools use practical reasoning to help them with social impact?

Kawalek, John Paul

doi:10.13169/prometheus.37.4.0340

ScienceOpen: research and publishing network

For Publishers

For Researchers

Blog
About

Search
Advanced search

308

views

recommends

If you have found this article useful and you think it is important that researchers across the world have access, please consider donating, to ensure that this valuable collection remains Open Access.

Prometheus is published by Pluto Journals, an Open Access publisher. This means that everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles from our international collection of social science journals. Furthermore Pluto Journals authors don’t pay article processing charges (APCs).

scite_

Prometheus

Volume 37, Issue 4

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Can business schools use practical reasoning to help them with social impact?

Published

research-article

Author(s): John Paul Kawalek ¹ ^, ^* ^,

Publication date Pub: 28 March 2022

Journal: Prometheus

Publisher: Pluto Journals

Bookmark

Abstract

This paper concerns the challenges that face university-based business schools. These challenges are concerned with their ability to maintain expectations in educational and research terms, whilst at the same time making impact in social contexts. This paper outlines how impact might be informed by a heightened awareness of the difference between pure and practical reasoning. This was a key concern of Immanuel Kant, who laid the foundation of a philosophical genre which, in this paper, is termed ‘practical reasoning’. The paper contrasts some of the most fundamental ideas of practical reasoning with other forms used to underpin the activities of contemporary business schools. The paper presents an argument about how the methodological, epistemological and philosophical insights drawn from this genre may have relevance to the contemporary requirement for social impact in university-based business schools.

Content

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (doi): 10.13169/prometheus.37.4.0340

Title: Prometheus

Abbreviated Title: PROM

Publisher: Pluto Journals

ISSN (Electronic): 1470-1030

Publication date Pub: 28 March 2022

Publication date Collection: 2022

Volume: 37

Issue: 4

Pages: 340-352

Affiliations

[1 ]CrowditBuildit Ltd, Sheffield, UK

Author notes

[* ] Correspondence: John Paul Kawalek ( jpkawalek@ 123456gmail.com )

Accepting editor: Stuart Macdonald

Article

DOI: 10.13169/prometheus.37.4.0340

SO-VID: 4f9caff6-7de4-4a4a-922f-c473d6386c22

License:

All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

History

Page count

Pages: 13

References

E. Abrahamson and M. Eisenman (2001) ‘Why management scholars must intervene strategically in the management knowledge market’, Human Relations, 54, 1, pp.67–76.
D. Baldridge, S. Floyd and L. Markoczy (2004) ‘Are managers from Mars and academicians from Venus? Toward an understanding of the relationship between academic quality and practical relevance’, Strategic Management Journal, 25, pp.1063–74.
I. Benbasat and R. Zmud (1999) ‘Empirical research in information systems: the practice of relevance’, MIS Quarterly, 32, 1, pp.3–16.
M. Bolton and G. Stolcis (2003) ‘Ties that do not blind: musings on the specious relevance of academic research’, Public Administration Review, 63, 5, pp.626–30.
C. Churchman (1968) Challenge to Reason, McGraw-Hill, New York.
C. Churchman (1971) The Design of Inquiring Systems, Basic Concepts of Systems and Organization, Basic Books, New York.
C. Churchman (1979) The Design of Inquiring Systems and its Enemies, Basic Books, New York.
T. Davenport and M. Markus (1999) ‘Rigour vs. relevance revisited: response to Benbasat and Zmud’, MIS Quarterly, 23, 1, pp.19–23.
D. Elmuti (2004) ‘Can management be taught?’, Management Decision, 42, pp.439–53.
H. Etzkowitz and L. Leydesdorff (2000) ‘The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations’, Research Policy, 29, 2, pp.109–23.
M. Feldman and W. Orlikowski (2011) ‘Theorizing practice and practicing theory’, Organization Science, 22, 5, pp.1240–53.
M. Gibbons (2000) ‘Mode 2 society and the emergence of context sensitive science’, Science and Public Policy, 27, 3, pp.159–63.
M. Gibbons, L. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartman, P. Scott and M. Trow (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, Sage, London.
G. Goldkuhl (2012) ‘Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research’, European Journal of Information Systems, 21, 2, pp.135–46.
C. Gopinath and R. Hoffman (1995) ‘The relevance of strategy research: practitioner and academic viewpoints’, Journal of Management Studies, 32, 5, pp.575–94.
S. Goshal (2005) ‘Bad management theories are destroying good management practices’, Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4, 1, pp.75–91.
J. Gosling and H. Mintzberg (2006) ‘Management education as if both matter’, Management Learning, 37, pp.419–28.
J. Habermas (1971) Toward a Rational Society: Student Protest, Science and Politics, Heinemann Educational, London.
D. Hambrick (1994) ‘1993 presidential address: what if the academy actually mattered?’, Academy of Management Review, 19, pp.11–16.
S. Hannah, J. Sumanth, P. Lester and F. Cavarretta (2014) ‘Debunking the false dichotomy of leadership idealism and pragmatism: critical evaluation and support of newer genre leadership theories’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, pp.598–621.
G. Hodgkinson (ed.) (2001) ‘Facing the future: the nature and purpose of management research re-assessed’, British Journal of Management, 12, pp.S1–S80.
G. Hodgkinson, P. Herriot and N. Anderson (2001) ‘Re-aligning the stakeholders in management research: lessons from industrial, work and organizational psychology’, British Journal of Management, 12, pp.S41–S48.
A. Huff (2000) ‘Citigroup’s John Reed and Stanford’s James March on management research and practice, Academy of Management Executive, 14, 1, pp.52–64.
A. Huff and J. Huff (2001) ‘Re-focusing the business school agenda’, British Journal of Management, 12, pp.S49–S54.
C. Ivory, P. Miskell, H. Shipton, A. White, K. Moeslein and A. Neely (2006) UK Business Schools: Historical Contexts and Future Scenarios: Summary Report from an EBK/AIM Management Research Forum, Advanced Institute of Management Research, available at http://www.aimresearch.org/uploads/File/Publications/Academic%20Publications%202/Uk_Business_Schools.pdf (accessed August 2015 ).
I. Kant (1787) The Critique of Pure Reason (tr. N. Smith, 1965), St Martin’s Press, New York.
I. Kant (1788) Critique of Practical Reason (tr. L. Beck, 1993), Macmillan, New York.
I. Kant (1790) Critique of Judgement (tr. J. Meredeth, 1952), Clarendon Press, Oxford.
A. Keiser and L. Leiner (2009) ‘Why the rigour–relevance gap in management is unbridgeable’, Journal of Management Studies, 46, pp.516–33.
L. Leydesdorff and H. Etzkowitz (1996) ‘Emergence of a triple helix of university-industry-government relations’, Science and Public Policy, 23, 5, pp.279–86.
K. Lyytinen (1999) ‘Empirical research in information systems: on the relevance of practice in thinking of IS research’, MIS Quarterly, 23, 1, pp.25–8.
D. McLean and R. MacIntosh (2002) ‘One process, two audiences: on the challenges of management research’, European Management Journal, 20, 4, pp.383–92.
S. Masrani, A. Williams and P. McKiernan (2011) ‘Management education in the UK: the roles of the British Academy of Management and the Association of Business Schools’, British Journal of Management, 22, pp.382–400.
I. Mitroff, C. Alpaslan and E. O’Connor (2015) ‘Reflections: what’s wrong with business schools and why they need to change’, Journal of Change Management, 15, 2, pp.85–91.
K. Monks and J. Walsh (2001) ‘The role of postgraduate education in management development’, Journal of European Industrial Training, 25, pp.148–56.
O. O’Neil (2013) Acting on Principle: An Essay on Kantian Ethics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
A. Raschel and D. Gilbert (2015) ‘Decoupling responsible management education: why business schools may not walk their talk’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 24, 3, pp.239–52.
E. Singer (1948) In Search of a Way of Life, Columbia University Press, New York.
E. Singer (1959) Experience and Reflection, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
J. Spender (2005) ‘Speaking about management education: some history of the search for academic legitimacy and the ownership and control of management knowledge’, Management Decision, 43, 10, pp.1282–92.
K. Starkey, A. Hatchuel and S. Tempest (2009) ‘Management research and the new logics of discovery and engagement’, Journal of Management Studies, 46, pp.547–58.
H. Thomas and A. Wilson (2011) ‘“Physics envy”, cognitive legitimacy or practical relevance: dilemmas in the evolution of management research in the UK’, British Journal of Management, 22, pp.443–56.
P. Tucker and A. Lowe (2014) ‘Practitioners are from Mars; academics are from Venus? An investigation of the research–practice gap in management accounting’, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 27, 3, pp.394–425.
W. Ulrich (1983) Critical Heuristics of Social Planning: A New Approach to Practical Philosophy, Haupt, Berne.
W. Ulrich (2007) ‘Philosophy for professionals: towards critical pragmatism’, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58, 8, pp.1109–13.
W. Ulrich (2012a) ‘Operational research and critical systems thinking – an integrated perspective. Part 1: OR as applied systems thinking’, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 63, pp.1228–47.
W. Ulrich (2012b) ‘Operational research and critical systems thinking – an integrated perspective. Part 2: OR as argumentative practice’, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 63, pp.1307–22.
F. Vermeulen (2005) ‘On rigour and relevance: fostering dialectic progress in management research’, Academy of Management Journal, 48, pp.978–82.
H. Watson, K. Taylor, G. Higgins, C. Kadlec and M. Meeks (1999) ‘Leaders assess the current state of the IS academic discipline’, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 2, 2, pp.2–27.
J. Whitford and F. Zirpoli (2014) ‘Pragmatism, practice, and the boundaries of organization’, Organization Science, 25, 6, pp.1823–39.

Comments

Comment on this article

[1] E. Abrahamson and M. Eisenman (2001) ‘Why management scholars must intervene strategically in the management knowledge market’, Human Relations, 54, 1, pp.67–76.

[2] D. Baldridge, S. Floyd and L. Markoczy (2004) ‘Are managers from Mars and academicians from Venus? Toward an understanding of the relationship between academic quality and practical relevance’, Strategic Management Journal, 25, pp.1063–74.

[3] I. Benbasat and R. Zmud (1999) ‘Empirical research in information systems: the practice of relevance’, MIS Quarterly, 32, 1, pp.3–16.

[4] M. Bolton and G. Stolcis (2003) ‘Ties that do not blind: musings on the specious relevance of academic research’, Public Administration Review, 63, 5, pp.626–30.

[5] C. Churchman (1968) Challenge to Reason, McGraw-Hill, New York.

[6] C. Churchman (1971) The Design of Inquiring Systems, Basic Concepts of Systems and Organization, Basic Books, New York.

[7] C. Churchman (1979) The Design of Inquiring Systems and its Enemies, Basic Books, New York.

[8] T. Davenport and M. Markus (1999) ‘Rigour vs. relevance revisited: response to Benbasat and Zmud’, MIS Quarterly, 23, 1, pp.19–23.

[9] D. Elmuti (2004) ‘Can management be taught?’, Management Decision, 42, pp.439–53.

[10] H. Etzkowitz and L. Leydesdorff (2000) ‘The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations’, Research Policy, 29, 2, pp.109–23.

[11] M. Feldman and W. Orlikowski (2011) ‘Theorizing practice and practicing theory’, Organization Science, 22, 5, pp.1240–53.

[12] M. Gibbons (2000) ‘Mode 2 society and the emergence of context sensitive science’, Science and Public Policy, 27, 3, pp.159–63.

[13] M. Gibbons, L. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartman, P. Scott and M. Trow (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, Sage, London.

[14] G. Goldkuhl (2012) ‘Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research’, European Journal of Information Systems, 21, 2, pp.135–46.

[15] C. Gopinath and R. Hoffman (1995) ‘The relevance of strategy research: practitioner and academic viewpoints’, Journal of Management Studies, 32, 5, pp.575–94.

[16] S. Goshal (2005) ‘Bad management theories are destroying good management practices’, Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4, 1, pp.75–91.

[17] J. Gosling and H. Mintzberg (2006) ‘Management education as if both matter’, Management Learning, 37, pp.419–28.

[18] J. Habermas (1971) Toward a Rational Society: Student Protest, Science and Politics, Heinemann Educational, London.

[19] D. Hambrick (1994) ‘1993 presidential address: what if the academy actually mattered?’, Academy of Management Review, 19, pp.11–16.

[20] S. Hannah, J. Sumanth, P. Lester and F. Cavarretta (2014) ‘Debunking the false dichotomy of leadership idealism and pragmatism: critical evaluation and support of newer genre leadership theories’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, pp.598–621.

[21] G. Hodgkinson (ed.) (2001) ‘Facing the future: the nature and purpose of management research re-assessed’, British Journal of Management, 12, pp.S1–S80.

[22] G. Hodgkinson, P. Herriot and N. Anderson (2001) ‘Re-aligning the stakeholders in management research: lessons from industrial, work and organizational psychology’, British Journal of Management, 12, pp.S41–S48.

[23] A. Huff (2000) ‘Citigroup’s John Reed and Stanford’s James March on management research and practice, Academy of Management Executive, 14, 1, pp.52–64.

[24] A. Huff and J. Huff (2001) ‘Re-focusing the business school agenda’, British Journal of Management, 12, pp.S49–S54.

[25] C. Ivory, P. Miskell, H. Shipton, A. White, K. Moeslein and A. Neely (2006) UK Business Schools: Historical Contexts and Future Scenarios: Summary Report from an EBK/AIM Management Research Forum, Advanced Institute of Management Research, available at http://www.aimresearch.org/uploads/File/Publications/Academic%20Publications%202/Uk_Business_Schools.pdf (accessed August 2015 ).

[26] I. Kant (1787) The Critique of Pure Reason (tr. N. Smith, 1965), St Martin’s Press, New York.

[27] I. Kant (1788) Critique of Practical Reason (tr. L. Beck, 1993), Macmillan, New York.

[28] I. Kant (1790) Critique of Judgement (tr. J. Meredeth, 1952), Clarendon Press, Oxford.

[29] A. Keiser and L. Leiner (2009) ‘Why the rigour–relevance gap in management is unbridgeable’, Journal of Management Studies, 46, pp.516–33.

[30] L. Leydesdorff and H. Etzkowitz (1996) ‘Emergence of a triple helix of university-industry-government relations’, Science and Public Policy, 23, 5, pp.279–86.

[31] K. Lyytinen (1999) ‘Empirical research in information systems: on the relevance of practice in thinking of IS research’, MIS Quarterly, 23, 1, pp.25–8.

[32] D. McLean and R. MacIntosh (2002) ‘One process, two audiences: on the challenges of management research’, European Management Journal, 20, 4, pp.383–92.

[33] S. Masrani, A. Williams and P. McKiernan (2011) ‘Management education in the UK: the roles of the British Academy of Management and the Association of Business Schools’, British Journal of Management, 22, pp.382–400.

[34] I. Mitroff, C. Alpaslan and E. O’Connor (2015) ‘Reflections: what’s wrong with business schools and why they need to change’, Journal of Change Management, 15, 2, pp.85–91.

[35] K. Monks and J. Walsh (2001) ‘The role of postgraduate education in management development’, Journal of European Industrial Training, 25, pp.148–56.

[36] O. O’Neil (2013) Acting on Principle: An Essay on Kantian Ethics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

[37] A. Raschel and D. Gilbert (2015) ‘Decoupling responsible management education: why business schools may not walk their talk’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 24, 3, pp.239–52.

[38] E. Singer (1948) In Search of a Way of Life, Columbia University Press, New York.

[39] E. Singer (1959) Experience and Reflection, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

[40] J. Spender (2005) ‘Speaking about management education: some history of the search for academic legitimacy and the ownership and control of management knowledge’, Management Decision, 43, 10, pp.1282–92.

[41] K. Starkey, A. Hatchuel and S. Tempest (2009) ‘Management research and the new logics of discovery and engagement’, Journal of Management Studies, 46, pp.547–58.

[42] H. Thomas and A. Wilson (2011) ‘“Physics envy”, cognitive legitimacy or practical relevance: dilemmas in the evolution of management research in the UK’, British Journal of Management, 22, pp.443–56.

[43] P. Tucker and A. Lowe (2014) ‘Practitioners are from Mars; academics are from Venus? An investigation of the research–practice gap in management accounting’, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 27, 3, pp.394–425.

[44] W. Ulrich (1983) Critical Heuristics of Social Planning: A New Approach to Practical Philosophy, Haupt, Berne.

[45] W. Ulrich (2007) ‘Philosophy for professionals: towards critical pragmatism’, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58, 8, pp.1109–13.

[46] W. Ulrich (2012a) ‘Operational research and critical systems thinking – an integrated perspective. Part 1: OR as applied systems thinking’, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 63, pp.1228–47.

[47] W. Ulrich (2012b) ‘Operational research and critical systems thinking – an integrated perspective. Part 2: OR as argumentative practice’, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 63, pp.1307–22.

[48] F. Vermeulen (2005) ‘On rigour and relevance: fostering dialectic progress in management research’, Academy of Management Journal, 48, pp.978–82.

[49] H. Watson, K. Taylor, G. Higgins, C. Kadlec and M. Meeks (1999) ‘Leaders assess the current state of the IS academic discipline’, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 2, 2, pp.2–27.

[50] J. Whitford and F. Zirpoli (2014) ‘Pragmatism, practice, and the boundaries of organization’, Organization Science, 25, 6, pp.1823–39.

Prometheus

Can business schools use practical reasoning to help them with social impact?

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Page count

Categories

Comment on this article