Why is Academia Sometimes Detached from Firms’ Problems? The Unattractiveness of Research on Organizational Decline

Q3 Business, Management and Accounting BAR - Brazilian Administration Review Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1807-7692BAR2020200005
F. Serra, M. Ferreira, I. Scafuto
{"title":"Why is Academia Sometimes Detached from Firms’ Problems? The Unattractiveness of Research on Organizational Decline","authors":"F. Serra, M. Ferreira, I. Scafuto","doi":"10.1590/1807-7692BAR2020200005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examined how scholars decide what they study, scrutinizing researchers’ problem choice. We qualitatively analyzed a survey conducted by e-mail with 40 top management scholars on organizational decline in top-ranked journals. This topic appears to be neglected despite the real life evidence that the performance of firms is declining at an increasingly rapid pace. We conducted a content analysis of motivation to undertake, remain with, or abandon research. We found explanations for what researchers’ study specifically related to concerns over tenure and promotion, difficulty in conducting research, and the general unattractiveness of ‘negative’ themes that lead scholars to avoid a research topic. We contribute to studies on problem choice in management research by explaining why relevant economic and societal research agendas are under-researched. Our findings indicate that motivation not to undertake is related to extrinsic factors. Motivations to remain are usually intrinsic. However, motivations to abandon may be intrinsic, in order to move on to another research project, or extrinsic, depending on the situation. It also serves as a warning that scholars may be paying excessive attention to mainstream theoretical approaches and topics, inhibiting the emergence of new ideas and detracting attention from phenomena that are important for teaching.","PeriodicalId":53636,"journal":{"name":"BAR - Brazilian Administration Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BAR - Brazilian Administration Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-7692BAR2020200005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We examined how scholars decide what they study, scrutinizing researchers’ problem choice. We qualitatively analyzed a survey conducted by e-mail with 40 top management scholars on organizational decline in top-ranked journals. This topic appears to be neglected despite the real life evidence that the performance of firms is declining at an increasingly rapid pace. We conducted a content analysis of motivation to undertake, remain with, or abandon research. We found explanations for what researchers’ study specifically related to concerns over tenure and promotion, difficulty in conducting research, and the general unattractiveness of ‘negative’ themes that lead scholars to avoid a research topic. We contribute to studies on problem choice in management research by explaining why relevant economic and societal research agendas are under-researched. Our findings indicate that motivation not to undertake is related to extrinsic factors. Motivations to remain are usually intrinsic. However, motivations to abandon may be intrinsic, in order to move on to another research project, or extrinsic, depending on the situation. It also serves as a warning that scholars may be paying excessive attention to mainstream theoretical approaches and topics, inhibiting the emergence of new ideas and detracting attention from phenomena that are important for teaching.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为什么学术界有时会脱离企业问题?组织衰落研究的缺乏吸引力
我们考察了学者们如何决定他们的研究内容,仔细考察了研究人员的问题选择。我们通过电子邮件对40位顶级管理学学者进行了一项关于顶级期刊组织衰退的调查,并对其进行了定性分析。这个话题似乎被忽视了,尽管现实生活中有证据表明,公司的业绩正在以越来越快的速度下降。我们对从事、继续或放弃研究的动机进行了内容分析。我们找到了研究人员研究的具体解释,包括对任期和晋升的担忧,进行研究的困难,以及导致学者回避研究主题的“负面”主题的普遍缺乏吸引力。我们通过解释为什么相关的经济和社会研究议程研究不足,为管理研究中的问题选择研究做出贡献。我们的研究结果表明,不承担的动机与外在因素有关。留下的动机通常是内在的。然而,放弃的动机可能是内在的,为了转移到另一个研究项目,也可能是外在的,这取决于情况。这也提醒我们,学者们可能过于关注主流的理论方法和主题,抑制了新思想的出现,分散了对教学重要现象的关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BAR - Brazilian Administration Review
BAR - Brazilian Administration Review Business, Management and Accounting-Strategy and Management
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Launched in 2004, BAR has an international scope in terms of topics of interest, target audience, and editorial boards. It is an A2-journal according to the Brazilian classification Qualis/Capes, which is thus a strong signal about the quality of published works and about the transparency of the editorial process. BAR follows the editorial principles available in document Best Practices of Scientific Publication, an initiative championed by the Brazilian Academy of Management (ANPAD) that seeks to assist journals to achieve high scholarly standards and enhance their impact as sources for theoretical and applied research. Furthermore, since 2013, BAR is a member of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), what is another signal of efforts made towards adhering to the most rigorous ethical principles in academic publication.
期刊最新文献
The Future of the Professoriate Strategic Issues: A Systematic Review of the Literature Social Innovation, Experimentalism, and Public Governance: An Ethnographical Approach to Study Public Arenas in the City Competitiveness and R&D Subsidies: The Case of the Industry 4.0 Program in Portugal Inclusion and Diversity in Companies: Premises to Maximize Quality of Life and Profitability
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1