There is a large and growing imbalance between the differentiation and integration of the management theory literature. As a result, the scholarly field needs better tools of conceptual integration to make sense of its varied questions, topics, disciplines, and communities. Here, I propose a language and logic for addressing this imbalance by addressing the simple but penetrating research question: Why do management theories say what they do? First, the article explores different facets to the question to reveal several alternative reasons for this differentiation. Second, it utilizes the resultant rationales for better understanding past approaches toward theoretical integration. Specifically, I construct a multidimensional framework that can be used to reconcile these rationales—that is, integrate the integrative frameworks—to propose an answer to the question. Third, it illustrates how this management M-theory (MMT) framework might be used to stitch together the broad spectrum of management theories. Fourth, it considers implications of this mapping for management research, teaching, and practice.
AstleyW. G.Van de VenA. H. (1983). Central perspectives and debates in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 245-273.
4.
BaumJ.RowleyT. (2002). Companion to organizations: An introduction. In BaumJ. (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to organizations (pp. 1-34). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
5.
BojeD. M.OswickC.JeffreyD.FordJ. D. (2004). Language and organization: The doing of discourse. Academy of Management Review, 29, 571-577.
6.
BurrellG.MorganG. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. London, England: Heinemann.
7.
ByR. T.HughesM.FordJ. (2016). Change leadership: Oxymoron and myths. Journal of Change Management, 16, 8-17.
8.
CampbellD. T. (1969). Ethnocentrism of disciplines and the fish scale model of omniscience.” In SherifM.SherifC. W. (Eds.), Interdisciplinary relationships in the social sciences (pp. 328−348). Chicago, IL: Aldine.
9.
CapraF.LuisiP. L. (2014). The systems view of life: A unifying vision. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
CleggS. R.HaugaardM. (2009). The Sage handbook of power. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
ColquittJ. A.Zapata-PhelanC. P. (2007). Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1281-1303.
12.
CostiganR. D.BrinkK. E. (2015). Another perspective on MBA program alignment: An investigation of learning goals. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14, 260-276.
13.
CsárdiG.NepuszT. (2006). The igraph software package for complex network research. Interjournal Complex Systems, 1695, 1-9.
14.
DavisG. F. (2006). Mechanisms and the theory of organizations. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15, 114-118.
15.
DavisG. F.MarquisC. (2005). Prospects for organization theory in the early 21st century: Institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science, 16, 332-343.
16.
DurantW. (2014). Fallen leaves. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
GhoshalS. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, 75-91.
19.
GilsonL. L.GoldbergC. B. (2015). So, what is a conceptual paper?Group & Organization Management, 40, 127-130.
20.
GioiaD. A.PitreE. (1990). Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building. Academy of Management Review, 15, 584-602.
21.
GulatiR. (2007). Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigor-relevance debate in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 775-782.
22.
HawkingS. (2001). The universe in a nutshell. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
23.
HawkingS.MlodinowL. (2010). The grand design. New York, NY: Bantam Books.
24.
HeathC.SitkinS. B. (2001). Big-B versus Big-O: What is organizational about organizational behavior?Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 43-58.
25.
HittM. A.BeamishP. W.JacksonS. E.MathieuJ. E. (2007). Building theoretical and empirical bridges across levels: Multilevel research in management. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1385-1399.
26.
JagoA. G. (1982). Leadership: Perspectives in theory and research. Management Science, 28, 315-336.
27.
JamesW. (1907). Pragmatism: A new name for some old ways of thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28.
KesslerE. H. (Ed.). (2013a). Encyclopedia of Management Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29.
KesslerE. H. (2013b, August). Management m-theory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Lake Buena Vista, FL.
30.
KesslerE. H.BartunekJ. M. (2014). Designing management maps and apps: Insights for discovering and creating our management realities. Academy of Management Review, 39, 234-243.
KoontzH. (1980). The management theory jungle revisited. Academy of Management Review, 5, 175-187.
33.
LawrenceP. R.LorschJ. W. (1967). Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 1-47.
34.
LewinK. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers (CartwrightD., Ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
35.
LockeE. A.LathamG. P. (2004). what should we do about motivation theory? Six recommendations for the twenty-first century. Academy of Management Review, 29, 388-403.
36.
LordR. G.DinhJ. E.HoffmanE. L. (2015). A quantum approach to time and organizational change. Academy of Management Review, 40, 263-290.
37.
LordR. G.HallR. J. (2005). Identity, deep structure and the development of leadership skill. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 591-615.
38.
MeyerJ. H. F.LandR. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Education, 49, 255-289.
39.
MinerJ. B. (2003). The rated importance, scientific validity, and practical usefulness of organizational behavior. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2, 250-268.
40.
MintzbergH. (2004). Managers not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of managing and management development. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
41.
MorganG. (2006). Images of organization. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
42.
PfefferJ. (1993). Barriers to the advancement of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18, 599-620.
43.
PfefferJ. (1995). Mortality, reproducibility, and the persistence of styles of theory. Organization Science, 6 (6), 681-686.
44.
PfefferJ.SuttonR. I. (2000). The knowing-doing gap: How smart companies turn knowledge into action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
45.
PooleM. S.Van de VenA. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14, 562-578.
RousseauD. M.ManningJ.DenyerD. (2008). Evidence in management and organizational science: Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through reflective reviews. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 475-515.
48.
RynesS. L.BartunekJ. M.DaftR. L. (2001). Across the great divide: Knowledge creation and transfer between practitioners and academics. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 340-355.
49.
SchultzM.HatchM. J. (1996). Living with multiple paradigms: The case of paradigm interplay in organizational culture studies. Academy of Management Review, 21, 529-557.
50.
ScottW.DavisG. F. (2007). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural and open systems perspectives. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
51.
StinchcombeA. L. (1991). The conditions of fruitfulness of theorizing about mechanisms in social science. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 21, 367-388.
52.
SuddabyR.HardyC.HuyQ. N. (2011). Where are the new theories of organization?Academy of Management Review, 36, 236-246.
53.
TariqueI. (2014). Seven trends in corporate training and development: Strategies to align goals with employee needs. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson FT Press.
54.
ThompsonJ. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
55.
TsoukasH. (1994). What is management? An outline of a metatheory. British Journal of Management, 5, 289-301.
56.
Van de VenA. H. (2007). Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational and social research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
57.
Van de VenA. H.PooleM. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20, 510-540.
58.
Van MaanenJ. (1995). Style as theory. Organization Science, 6, 133-143.
59.
WassermanS.FaustK. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
60.
WeickK. E. (1999). Conclusion theory construction as disciplined reflexivity: Tradeoffs in the 90s. Academy of Management Review, 24, 797-806.
61.
WhettenD. (2014). Theory development. In KesslerE.H. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Management Theory (pp. 849-855). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
62.
WhitmoreJ. (2009). Coaching for performance: GROWing human potential and purpose: The principles and practice of coaching and leadership. Boston, MA: Nicholas Brealey.
