In this article, I examine a recent turn in the paradigm debate towards the incommensurability thesis and the proposed possibility of adjudication between theories from different paradigms. In particular, I argue that McKelvey and Baum's views (among others) appear to be based on a desire to reduce paradigmatic pluralism and, in turn, reduce uncertainty about what is the empirically valid view among competing theories. By contrast, I make the case that an incommensurability of values still permeates any attempt to engage in theory-adjudication. Such values, I assert, will stall any attempt to adjudicate between theories from different paradigms. In the face of widespread cognitive bias, confirmation bias and belief perseverance, we cannot, I conclude, hope to deal with this issue in any satisfactory way.
Adorno, T. (1976) `Introduction', in T. W. Adorno, H. Albert, R. Dahrendorf, J. Habermas , H. Pilot and K. R. Popper (eds) The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology, pp. 1-67. Trans. G. Adey and D. Firsby. London: Heinemann.
Astley, W.G. and Zammuto, R.F. (1992) `Organization Science, Managers, and Language Games' , Organization Science3: 443-60.
4.
Baum, J.A.C. and McKelvey, B. (1999) `Donald T. Campbell's Evolving Influence on Organization Science', in J. A. C. Baum and B. McKelvey (eds) Variations in Organization Science: In Honor of Donald T. Campbell, pp. 1-15. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
Baum, J.A.C. and Rowley, T.J. (2002) `Companion to Organizations: An Introduction', in J. A. C. Baum (ed.) The Blackwell Companion to Organizations, pp. 1-34. Oxford: Blackwell.
6.
Bergstrom, L. (1993) `Quine, Underdetermination, and Skepticism', The Journal of Philosophy90(7): 331-58.
7.
Bernstein, R. (1983) Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science, Hermeneutics and Praxis. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
8.
Bouchikhi, H. and Kimberley, J.R. (2001) `"It's Difficult to Innovate": The Death of the Tenured Professor and the Birth of the Knowledge Entrepreneur', Human Relations54: 77-84.
9.
Burrell, G. (1997) `Organization Paradigms', in A. Sorge and M. Warner (eds) The IEBM Handbook of Organizational Behavior, pp. 33-47. London: International Thompson Business Press.
10.
Burrell, G. (1999) `Normal Science, Paradigms, Metaphors, Discourses and Genealogies of Analysis', in S. R. Clegg and C. Hardy (eds) Studying Organization: Theory and Method, pp. 388-404. London: Sage.
11.
Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979/1992) Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis. Aldershot: Ashgate.
12.
Chalmers, A.F. (1999) What is this Thing Called Science?, 3rd Edn. Buckingham: Open University Press.
13.
Clegg, S.R. (2002) ```Lives in the Balance": Comment on Hinings and Greenwood's "Disconnects and Consequences in Organization Theory?"', Administrative Science Quarterly47(3): 428-41.
14.
Clegg, S. R., Hardy, C. and Nord, W. R., eds (1996) Handbook of Organization Studies. London: Sage.
15.
Czarniawska, B. (1998) `Who is Afraid of Incommensurability', Organization5(2): 273-75.
16.
Davidson, D. (2001) Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, 2nd edn. Oxford: Clarendon .
17.
De Cock, C. and Jeanes, E. (2006) `Questioning Consensus, Cultivating Conflict', Journal of Management Inquiry15(1): 18-30.
18.
Deetz, S. (2000) `Putting the Community into Organizational Science: Exploring the Construction of Knowledge Claims', Organization Science11(6): 732-38.
19.
Donaldson, L. (1985) In Defence of Organization Theory: A Reply to the Critics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
Fabian, F.H. (2000) `Keeping the Tension: Pressures to Keep the Controversy in the Management Discipline', Academy of Management Review25(2): 350-71.
21.
Feyerabend, P. (1975) Against Method. London: New Left Books.
22.
Feyerabend, P. (1978) Science in a Free Society. London: New Left Books.
23.
Feyerabend, P. (1999) Conquest of Abundance. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
24.
Feyerabend, P.K. (1981) `Historical Background: Some Observations on the Decay of the Philosophy of Science', in P. K. Feyerabend (ed.) Problems of Empiricism: Philosophical Papers, Volume 2, pp. 1-33. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Gergen, M. (1998) `Proliferating Discourses: Resources for Relationships' , Organization5(2): 277-80.
26.
Gordon, M.D. (1982) `Cognitive Relativism and Peer Review Bias', The Behavioral and Brain Sciences5(2): 213.
27.
Greenwald, A.G. and Pratkanis, A.R. (1988) `On the Use of "Theory" and the Usefulness of Theory' , Psychological Review95(4): 575-79.
28.
Greenwald, A.G., Pratkanis, R., Leippe, M.R. and Baumgardner, M.H. (1986) `Under What Conditions Does Theory Obstruct Research Progress?', Psychological Review93(2): 216-29.
29.
Grey, C. (2005) A Very Short, Fairly Interesting and Reasonably Cheap Book About Studying Organizations. London: Sage.
30.
Hardy, C. (2002) `On the Edge of a Pluralistic World', Journal of Management Inquiry11(1): 16-18.
31.
Hoyningen-Huene, P. (1995) `Two letters of Paul Feyerabend to Thomas S. Kuhn on a Draft of the Structure of Scientific Revolutions', Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A26(3): 353-87.
32.
Hoyningen-Huene, P. (2006) `More Letters by Paul Feyerabend to Thomas S. Kuhn on Proto-Structure', Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A37(4): 610-632.
33.
Hunt, S.D. (1991) `Positivism and Paradigm Dominance in Consumer Research: Toward Critical Pluralism and Rapprochment', Journal of Consumer Research18(June): 32-44.
34.
Jackson, N. and Carter, P. (1991) `In Defence of Paradigm Incommensurability', Organization Studies12(1): 109-27.
35.
Jackson, N. and Carter, P. (1993) ``Paradigm Wars': A Response to Hugh Willmott' , Organization Studies14(5): 721-27.
36.
Kruglanski, A.W., Pierro, A., Manetti, L. and De Grada, E. (2006) `Groups as Epistemic Providers: Need for Closure and the Unfolding of Group-Centrism', Psychological Review113(1): 84-100.
37.
Kuhn, T.S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
38.
Kuhn, T.S. (1970a) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Second Edition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
39.
Kuhn, T.S. (1970b) `Notes on Lakatos', in R. C. Buck and R. S. Cohen (eds) PSA 1970: In Memory of Rudolf Carnap, pp. 137-146. Dordrecht : D. Reidel.
40.
Kuhn, T.S. (1970c) `Reflections on My Critics', in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, pp. 231-78. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
41.
Kuhn, T.S. (1970d) `Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research' , in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge , pp. 1-23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
Kuhn, T.S. (1977) `Objectivity, Value Judgment, and Theory Choice' , in T. S. Kuhn, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, pp. 320-39. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
43.
Kuhn, T.S. (1983a) `Rationality and Theory Choice, The Journal of Philosophy80(10): 563-71.
44.
Kuhn, T.S. (1983b) `Commensurability, Comparability, Communicability' , in P. D. Asquith and T. Nickles (eds) PSA 1982, pp. 2-13. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.
45.
Kuhn, T.S. (1989) `Possible Worlds in History of Science', in S. Allén (ed.) Possible Worlds in Humanities, Arts and Sciences: Proceedings of Novel Symposium 65, pp. 9-32. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
46.
Kuhn, T.S. (1990) `Dubbing and Redubbing: The Vulnerability of Rigid Designation', in C. W. Smith (ed.) Scientific Theories, pp. 298-318. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press.
47.
Kuhn, T.S. (1991) `The Road Since Structure', in A. Fine, M. Forbes and L. Wessels (eds) PSA 1990 Vol 2, pp. 2-13. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association .
48.
Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A., eds (1970) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
49.
Laudan, L. and Leplin, J. (1991) `Empirical Equivalence and Underdetermination' , The Journal of Philosophy88(9): 449-472.
50.
Lord, C.G., Lepper, M.R. and Preston, E. (1984) `Considering the Opposite: A Corrective Strategy for Social Judgement', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology47(6): 1231-43.
51.
MacCoun, R.J. (1998) `Biases in the Interpretation and Use of Research Results', Annual Review of Psychology49(1): 259-87.
52.
MacCoun, R.J. (2005) `Conflicts of Interest in Public Policy Research' , in D. A. Moore, D. M. Cain, G. Lowenstein and M. Bazerman (eds) Conflicts of Interest: Problems and Solutions from Law, Medicine and Organizational Settings, pp. 233-62. London: Cambridge University Press.
53.
MacIntyre, A. (1989) `Relativism, Power, and Philosophy', in M. Krausz (ed.) Relativism: Interpretation and Confrontation, pp. 182-204. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
54.
Marsden, R. (1993) `The Politics of Organizational Analysis', Organization Studies14(1): 93-124.
55.
McKelvey, B. (1997) `Quasi-Natural Organization Science', Organization Science8(4): 352-380.
56.
McKelvey, B. (1999) `Toward a Campbellian Realist Organization Science' , in J. A. C. Baum and B. McKelvey (eds) Variations in Organization Science: In Honor of Donald T. Campbell, pp. 383-411. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
57.
McKelvey, B. (2003a) `Postmodernism versus Truth in Management Theory' , in E.A. Locke (ed.) Postmodernism and Management: Pros, Cons and the Alternative, pp. 113-68. Amsterdam : JAI Press.
58.
McKelvey, B. (2003b) `From Fields to Science: Can Organization Studies Make the Transition?', in R. Westwood and S. Clegg (eds) Debating Organization: Point-Counterpoint in Organization Studies, pp. 47-73. Oxford : Blackwell.
59.
McKelvey, B. and Baum, J.A.C. (1999) `Donald T. Campbell's Evolving Influence on Organization Science', in J. A. C. Baum and B. McKelvey (eds) Variations in Organization Science: In Honor of Donald T. Campbell, pp. 1-15. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
60.
McKinley, W. (1995) `Commentary: Towards a Reconciliation of the Theory-Pluralism in Strategy Management-Incommensurability and the Constructivist Approach of the Erlangen School (Andreas Georg Scherer and Michael J. Dowling)', in P. Shrivastava and C. Stubbert (eds) Advances in Strategic Management: Challenges from the Outside the Mainstream, pp. 249-60. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
61.
McKinley, W. (2003) `Postmodern Epistemology in Organization Studies: A Critical Appraisal', in E. A. Locke (ed.) Postmodernism and Management: Pros, Cons and the Alternative, pp. 203-26. Amsterdam: JAI Press .
62.
McKinley, W. and Mone, M.A. (1998) `The Re-construction of Organization Studies: Wrestling with Incommensurability', Organization5(2): 169-189.
63.
Miller, A.G., Hoskey, J.W., Bane, C.W. and Dowd, T.G. (1993) `The Attitude Polarization Phenomenon: Role of Response Measure, Attitude Extremity, and Behavioral Consequences of Reported Attitude Change', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology64: 561-74.
64.
Moldoveanu, M.C. and Baum, J.A.C. (2002) `Contemporary Debates in Organizational Epistemology' , in J. A. C. Baum (ed.) The Blackwell Companion to Organizations, pp. 733-51. Oxford: Blackwell.
65.
Mouffe, C. (1996) 'Deconstruction, Pragmatism and the Politics of Democracy', in C. Mouffe (ed.) Deconstruction and Pragmatism, pp. 1-12. London: Routledge.
66.
Munévar, G. (1998) Evolution and the Naked Truth: A Darwinian Approach to Philosophy. Aldershot: Ashgate .
67.
Nola, R. and Sankey, H. (2000) `A Selective Survey of Theories of Scientific Method' , in R. Nola and H. Sankey (eds) After Popper, Kuhn and Feyerabend: Recent Issues in Theories of Scientific Method, pp. 1-65. Dordrecht : Kluwer.
68.
Nola, R. and Sankey, H. (2007) Theories of Scientific Method. Stocksfield: Acumen.
69.
Nord, W.R. and Connell, A.F. (1993) `From Quicksand to Crossroads: An Agnostic Perspective on Conversation', Organization Science4(1): 108-20.
70.
Pfeffer, J. (1993) `Barriers to the Advance of Organization Science: Paradigm Development as Dependent Variable', Academy of Management Review18(4): 599-620.
71.
Phillips, D.L. (1977) Wittgenstein and Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Perspective. London: Macmillan.
72.
Popper, K.R. (1962) Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
73.
Popper, K.R. (1970) `Reason or Revolution?', Archives Européennes De Sociologie11(2): 252-62.
74.
Popper, K.R. (1976) `The Logic of the Social Sciences', in T. W. Adorno, H. Albert , R. Dahrendorf, J. Habermas, H. Pilot and K. R. Popper (eds) The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology, pp. 87-104, trans. G. Adey and D. Firsby. London: Heinemann.
Popper, K.R. (1980) The Logic of Scientific Discovery, 4th edn. London: Routledge .
77.
Popper, K.R. (1989) `The Critical Approach versus the Mystique of Leadership' , Human Systems Management8(4): 259-65.
78.
Pronin, E., Lin, D.Y. and Ross, L. (2002) `The Bias Blind Spot: Perceptions of Bias in Self versus Others', Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin28(3): 369-81.
79.
Reed, M. (1985) Redirections in Organizational Analysis. London: Tavistock.
80.
Reed, M. (1990) `From Paradigms to Images: The Paradigm Warrior Turns Post-Modernist Guru', Personnel Review19(3): 35-40.
81.
Reed, M.I. (1993) `Organizations and Modernity: Continuity and Discontinuity in Organization Theory', in J. Hassard and M. Parker (eds) Postmodernism and Organizations, pp. 163-82. London: Sage.
82.
Sankey, H. (1994) The Incommensurability Thesis. Aldershot: Avebury.
83.
Sankey, H. (1997) Rationality, Relativism and Incommensurability . Aldershot: Avebury.
84.
Scherer, A.G. (1998) `Pluralism and Incommensurability in Strategic Management and Organization Theory: A Problem in Search of a Solution', Organization5(2): 147-68.
85.
Scherer, A.G. and Dowling, M.J. (1995) `Towards a Reconciliation of the Theory-Pluralism in Strategic Management-Incommensurability and the Constructivist School of the Erlangen School', in P. Shrivastava and C. Stubbert (eds) Advances in Strategic Management: Challenges from the Outside the Mainstream, pp. 195-247. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
86.
Scherer, A.G. and Steinmann, H. (1999) `Some Remarks on the Problem of Incommensurability in Organization Studies', Organization Studies20(3): 519-44.
87.
Shapere, D. (1971) `The Paradigm Concept', Science172: 706-9.
88.
Shapin, S. (1995) `Here and Everywhere: Sociology of Scientific Knowledge' , Annual Review of Sociology21: 289-321.
89.
Spicer, A. (2004) `Opening the Companion', ephemera: critical dialogues on organization4(1): 7-20.
90.
Stablein, R.E. and Frost, P.J. (2004) `Institutional Terrain', in R. E. Stablein and P. J. Frost (eds) Renewing Research Practice, pp. 93-6. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books.
91.
Stern, R.N. and Barley, S.R. (1996) `Organizations and Social Systems: Organization Theory's Neglected Mandate', Administrative Science Quarterly41(1): 146-62.
92.
Toulmin, S. (1972) Human Understanding, Volume 1. Oxford: Clarendon.
93.
Von Dietz, E. (2001) Paradigms Explained: Rethinking Thomas Kuhn's Philosophy of Science. Westport, CT: Praeger .
94.
Wicks, A.C. and Freeman, R.E. (1998) `Organization Studies and the New Pragmatism: Positivism, Anti-Positivism, and the Search for Ethics', Organization Science9(2): 123-40.
95.
Willmott, H. (1993) `Breaking the Paradigm Mentality', Organization Studies14(5): 681-719.
96.
Wilson, T.D. and Brekke, N. (1994) `Mental Contamination and Mental Correction: Unwanted Influences on Judgements and Evaluations', Psychological Bulletin116(1): 117-42.
97.
Woodward, J. and Goodstein, D. (1996) `Conduct, Misconduct and the Structure of Science' , American Scientist84(September/October): 479-90.
