经济不需要重置,管理理论也不需要重置

IF 2 4区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT Scandinavian Journal of Management Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.scaman.2022.101214
Nicolai J. Foss , Peter G. Klein , Samuele Murtinu
{"title":"经济不需要重置,管理理论也不需要重置","authors":"Nicolai J. Foss ,&nbsp;Peter G. Klein ,&nbsp;Samuele Murtinu","doi":"10.1016/j.scaman.2022.101214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Policymakers, commentators, and academics have called for a Great Reset, a deep-seated overhaul of the organization of the global economy. Some suggest that management theory needs a reset of its own. We argue that Great Reset proponents fail to appreciate the power of markets to bring about desirable social outcomes and are overly sanguine about what governments can do to alleviate alleged market failures. These views also drive the increasing enthusiasm for stakeholder governance, an increased government role in innovation, and the call for new metrics for assessing outcomes, all part of the Great Reset narrative. And yet, concentrating more decision power in the hands of governments, implementing diffuse metrics, and diluting effective ownership can hamper the functioning of markets, encourage crony capitalism, and reduce the resources that are available for dealing with grand challenges. Existing management theory provides powerful tools for understanding the benefits and costs of alternative institutional arrangements; abandoning these tools will push management theory to the sideline in policy debates.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47759,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956522122000215/pdfft?md5=192221fafb7613178333445679fd3317&pid=1-s2.0-S0956522122000215-main.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The economy doesn’t need a reset, and neither does management theory\",\"authors\":\"Nicolai J. Foss ,&nbsp;Peter G. Klein ,&nbsp;Samuele Murtinu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.scaman.2022.101214\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Policymakers, commentators, and academics have called for a Great Reset, a deep-seated overhaul of the organization of the global economy. Some suggest that management theory needs a reset of its own. We argue that Great Reset proponents fail to appreciate the power of markets to bring about desirable social outcomes and are overly sanguine about what governments can do to alleviate alleged market failures. These views also drive the increasing enthusiasm for stakeholder governance, an increased government role in innovation, and the call for new metrics for assessing outcomes, all part of the Great Reset narrative. And yet, concentrating more decision power in the hands of governments, implementing diffuse metrics, and diluting effective ownership can hamper the functioning of markets, encourage crony capitalism, and reduce the resources that are available for dealing with grand challenges. Existing management theory provides powerful tools for understanding the benefits and costs of alternative institutional arrangements; abandoning these tools will push management theory to the sideline in policy debates.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47759,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956522122000215/pdfft?md5=192221fafb7613178333445679fd3317&pid=1-s2.0-S0956522122000215-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956522122000215\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956522122000215","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

政策制定者、评论员和学者都呼吁进行一次大重置,对全球经济的组织进行一次深层次的改革。一些人认为,管理理论本身也需要重新设定。我们认为,“大重启”的支持者未能认识到市场带来理想社会结果的力量,而且对政府在缓解所谓的市场失灵方面所能做的事情过于乐观。这些观点还推动了对利益相关者治理、政府在创新中发挥更大作用以及对评估结果的新指标的呼吁,这些都是“大重置”叙事的一部分。然而,将更多的决策权集中在政府手中,实施分散的衡量标准,以及稀释有效所有权,可能会阻碍市场的运作,鼓励裙带资本主义,并减少可用于应对重大挑战的资源。现有的管理理论为理解替代性制度安排的收益和成本提供了强有力的工具;放弃这些工具将把管理理论推到政策辩论的边缘。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The economy doesn’t need a reset, and neither does management theory

Policymakers, commentators, and academics have called for a Great Reset, a deep-seated overhaul of the organization of the global economy. Some suggest that management theory needs a reset of its own. We argue that Great Reset proponents fail to appreciate the power of markets to bring about desirable social outcomes and are overly sanguine about what governments can do to alleviate alleged market failures. These views also drive the increasing enthusiasm for stakeholder governance, an increased government role in innovation, and the call for new metrics for assessing outcomes, all part of the Great Reset narrative. And yet, concentrating more decision power in the hands of governments, implementing diffuse metrics, and diluting effective ownership can hamper the functioning of markets, encourage crony capitalism, and reduce the resources that are available for dealing with grand challenges. Existing management theory provides powerful tools for understanding the benefits and costs of alternative institutional arrangements; abandoning these tools will push management theory to the sideline in policy debates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Management (SJM) provides an international forum for innovative and carefully crafted research on different aspects of management. We promote dialogue and new thinking around theory and practice, based on conceptual creativity, reasoned reflexivity and contextual awareness. We have a passion for empirical inquiry. We promote constructive dialogue among researchers as well as between researchers and practitioners. We encourage new approaches to the study of management and we aim to foster new thinking around management theory and practice. We publish original empirical and theoretical material, which contributes to understanding management in private and public organizations. Full-length articles and book reviews form the core of the journal, but focused discussion-type texts (around 3.000-5.000 words), empirically or theoretically oriented, can also be considered for publication. The Scandinavian Journal of Management is open to different research approaches in terms of methodology and epistemology. We are open to different fields of management application, but narrow technical discussions relevant only to specific sub-fields will not be given priority.
期刊最新文献
Key internal drivers for an SME’s dynamic ambidextrous growth strategy: A case study of a Norwegian seafood group Conditional openness to racio-ethnic otherness: Exploring white employers’ ambivalent self-Other constructions in the everyday work of reproducing whiteness Paradoxical tensions at multiple levels: A model of unbalanced supranational coopetition Shifting from an analytical paradigm to a systems paradigm: A fundamentally systemic approach of the business model concept to tackling complexity Going collective: worker takeovers, entrepreneurship and collective actions
×
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