Royston Greenwood was named the 2014 Distinguished Scholar by the Organization and Management Theory Division of the Academy of Management. He gave this presentation on the occasion of his award, August 4, 2014, in Philadelphia, PA. Royston is the Telus Professor of Strategic Management at the University of Alberta School of Business. Since 1980, the Organization and Management Theory Division has been presenting the Distinguished Scholar Award to scholars whose contributions have been central to the intellectual development of the field of organization studies. The Distinguished Scholar Award and Breakfast was sponsored in part by the Boston College Carroll School of Management and Oxford University Press. http://omtweb.org/omt-blog/53-main/568-2014-distinguished-scholar-announced

1. The place to be!
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

2. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
John Stewart

3. 1970 - 79
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
John Stewart
Kieron Walsh
Margaret
Lomer
Sir Rodney
Brooke
Stewart
Ranson
Adrian Smith
Bob
Hinings

4. 1980 - 89
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Bill Jenkins
George
Jones
Bob Hinings
Stewart
Ranson
Kieron Walsh
John
Stewart

5. 1990 - 99
J.L. Brown
Danny Miller
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Kay Devine
Ran
Lachman
Peter
Roberts
Bob
Hinings
David
Cooper
Lloyd
Steier
Roy
Suddaby
Theresa
Rose

6. 2000 - 09
Danny Miller
Christine
Oliver
Laura
Empson
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Kerstin
Sahlin
David
Cooper
Gerry
Johnson
Steve
Salterio
Dev
Jennings
Trish Reay Celeste
Wilderom
Renate
Meyer
Stan Li
Tom
Lawrence
Jennifer
Jennings
Rajshree
Prakash
David
Deephouse
Patrick
Vermeulen
R. Büch
Megan
McDougald
Amy Pablo
Karen
Golden-
Biddle
Ann
Casebeer
Bob
Hinings
Lloyd
Steier
Roy
Suddaby
Theresa
Rose

7. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
A.D. Brown
2010 -
Bob Hinings
Danny Miller
Christine
Oliver
Tyler Wry
Mike
Lounsbury
Tim Morris
Samantha
Fairclough
Ignasi Marti P Monin
Peter
Walgenbach
Chris
Marquis
Kim
Elsbach
Tamar Zilber
Amalia
Magan Diaz
Stan Li
Mehdi
Boussebaa
Michael
Smets Mia Raynard
Farah
Pietro Kodeih
Mazzola
Mario Minoja
Megan
McDougald Claudia
Gabbioneta
Bernard Forgues
Susanne
Boch
Waldorff
Roy Suddaby
Evelyn
Micelotta
Rajshree
Prakash
David
Wilson
Renate
Meyer
Gerry
Johnson
Dev
Jennings
Kerstin
Sahlin
Don Palmer

8. ‘The past is another country:
they do things differently
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
there.’
L.P. Hartley

9. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AGENDA
THEN NOW: THE MATURING FIELD
A. Infrastructure/governance
B. Growth
C. Internationalization
-----------------------
D. Salami slicing
E. Horizons, ‘boxes’ ‘museums’

10. A. THEN AND NOW: INFRASTRUCTURE:
ASSOCIATIONS CONFERENCES
1971 Academy of Management
1985 ANZAM
1986 British Academy of Management
1989 Federation of Scholarly Associations of
Management
1974/1998 EGOS
2001 EURAM
2002 International Association for Chinese Research
2008 Indian Academy of Management
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

11. A. THEN NOW: INFRASTRUCTURE -
MONITORING RANKING AGENCIES
1916: 1997 AACSB
1967 AMBA
1998 EQUIS
1986 BUSINESS WEEK - Ranking of US schools
1999 FINANCIAL TIMES - Global ranking of MBAs
1999 FORBES - MBA
2001 WALL STREET JOURNAL
2002 THE ECONOMIST - ‘Which MBA?’
1992 ‘Research Assessment Exercise’ (UK)
1998 ‘QUALIS’ (BRAZIL)
2010 ‘Excellence in Research’ (AUSTRALIA)
2012 ‘VQR’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

12. B. THEN AND NOW: GROWTH - ALL ACADEMY
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

13. B. THEN NOW: GROWTH - EGOS
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

14. B. THEN NOW: GROWTH - BAM
2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

15. B. THEN NOW: HOW ARE WE DOING?
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

16. C: THEN AND NOW: INTERNATIONALIZATION
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
All Academy
International

17. C. THEN NOW: INTERNATIONALIZATION
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
- EGOS
0
Total
International

18. C. THEN NOW: HOW ARE WE DOING?
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(2013)
BPS
OB
OMT
Entrep
%
47%
41%
52%
46%
Countries
94
83
69
72

19. CHALLENGE #1
‘These members have different views on the issues that we
should study and how we should study them, and we must find
a way of meeting their needs…’
‘We need to…increase the diversity of backgrounds of
individuals on our editorial boards so that our journals will
be more welcoming to other types of research…(and) bring
more non-North Americans into the leadership of the
Academy’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Angelo DeNisi, Presidential Address (2010)

20. ‘Who cares about Canadian accounting firms…’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(VERY) B l ind reviewer, AMJ

21. HOW ARE WE DOING?
COMPOSITION OF THE OMT EXECUTIVE
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Nelson
Phillips
Michael
Lounsbury
Candace
Jones
Mark Ebers
Anne
Langley
Christine
Beckman
Forrest
Briscoe
Peer Fiss
Martine
Haas
Braydon
King
Chris
Marquis
Anne Claire
Pache
Pat
Thornton
Bill
McEvily
Marc-David
Seidel
Eva
Boxenbaum
Renate
Meyer

22. HOW ARE WE DOING?
COMPOSITION OF THE OMT EXECUTIVE
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Nelson
Phillips
Michael
Lounsbury
Candace
Jones
Mark Ebers
Anne
Langley
Christine
Beckman
Forrest
Briscoe
Peer Fiss
Martine
Haas
Braydon
King
Chris
Marquis
Anne Claire
Pache
Pat
Thornton
Bill
McEvily
Marc-David
Seidel
Eva
Boxenbaum
Renate
Meyer

23. HOW ARE WE DOING?
COMPOSITION OF THE OMT
RESEARCH COMMITTEE
non-US 40%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

24. HOW ARE WE DOING?
SHORT LISTS FOR OMT AWARDS (2014)
Best Paper
3 US, 1 non-US
Lou Pondy Award
1 US, 1 non-US
Best Student Paper
3 US, 0 non-US
Best Empirical Paper
2 US, 3 non-US
Best Symposium
4 US, 2 non-US
Best International
0 US, 4 non-US
TOTAL
11 US, 13 non-US
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

25. HOW IS THE AOM DOING?
INTERNATIONAL COMPOSITION - AMJ
EDITORIAL BOARD
1984
non-US
5%
US
95%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
US
66%
2014
non-US
34%

26. INTERNATIONAL COMPOSITION - ASQ
EDITORIAL BOARD
1984
non-US
10%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
2014
US
77%
non-US
23%
US
90%

27. INTERNATIONAL COMPOSITION - JMS
EDITORIAL BOARD
US
33%
1984
non-US
67%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
US
39%
2014
non-US
61%

28. INTERNATIONAL COMPOSITION - ORG
STUDIES EDITORIAL BOARD
1984
US
10%
non-US
90%
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
2014
US
14%
non-US
86%

29. % OF PAPERS IN AMJ AND ASQ
WRITTEN BY ‘NON-US’ AUTHORS
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
1973
1983
1993
2003
2013
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AMJ
ASQ

30. AUTHORS OF ‘BEST PAPERS’ BY
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
COUNTRY
US
Non-US
Mixed
AMJ
11
4
7
22
AMR
13
3
5
21

31. HOW ARE WE DOING?
‘BEST PAPERS’ WITH AT LEAST ONE
AUTHOR WHO IS A MEMBER OF:
BPS
OB
OMT
ENT
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AMJ
12
11
5
AMR
10
8
4

32. HOW ARE WE DOING?
‘BEST PAPERS’ WITH AT LEAST ONE
AUTHOR WHO IS A MEMBER OF:
BPS
OB
OMT
ENT
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AMJ
12
11
16
5
AMR
10
8
14
4

33. HOW ARE WE DOING?
TERRY BOOK AWARD WINNERS WITH AT
LEAST ONE AUTHOR WHO IS A
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
MEMBER OF:
OMT
BPS
OB
ENT
46%
25%
21%
13%

34. D. THEN AND NOW: SALAMI SLICING
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

35. THEN NOW: NEW JOURNALS BY DECADE
11
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
9
26
11
12
Pre 1970
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000 onwards

36. THEN NOW:‘BUSINESS MANAGEMENT’ OPEN
ACCESS JOURNALS FOUNDED ANNUALLY
60
50
40
30
20
10
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(FORGUES LIARTE, 2013)
0
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

37. D. THEN AND NOW: SALAMI SLICING
‘…the baleful influence of research assessment exercises has led to
salami slicing of research…’
‘Where once an academic might have produced a considered
monograph over a period of five or even ten years, the research
assessment process demands instant gratification’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(Tom Wilkie, 2014, Research Information)
‘…the rise of evaluation and ranking systems has led to a stronger
differentiation between journals and even greater US domination’
(Hinings, 2010)

38. SALAMI SLICING - DOES THE SHIFT TO
ARTICLES MATTER?
• Incoherence and/or silos?
• Format conformity
• ‘Boxed-in research’?
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

39. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

40. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

41. ‘BOXED-IN’ SILOS?
• ‘silo identities’
• ‘silo mentalities’
• ‘safe intellectual habitat’
‘academic journal technicians…’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

42. WHICH LEADS TO…
‘…incremental rather than
frame-bending research…
…and facilitates career advancement
rather than innovative and
influential research…’
(Alvesson Sandberg, 2014)
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

43. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

44. ‘A tiny research question…
…followed by a compendious literature
review…a discussion of methodology…some
findings…then some suggestions for further
work…an acknowledgement of limitation…
and a modest conclusion given.’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

45. ‘The elite US journals and those European
journals that seek (with inevitable failure) to
join that elite have become increasingly
formulaic and dull.’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(Grey, 2010)

46. A PERNICIOUS CATEGORICAL
IMPERATIVE?
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
• Overly formulaic
• ‘Boxed-in’ themes
• Dull
International
competition across
business schools
Journal rankings
e.g. FT
Tenure
Promotion

47. ‘Our journals are dominated by North
American scholars who share a specific model
of how research should be conducted and
reported.’
‘For all others we have insisted…we will
accept you if you adopt our model of how to
do research.’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(DeNisi, 2010)

48. WHERE ARE WE? (A PERSONAL VIEW)
1. Salami emphasis? (Guilty – more research monographs
please
2. Incoherence? (see the Annals, Reviews in journals,
Handbooks, etc.) BUT…
3. Silos? – we need more ‘nomads’
4. Formulaic? Yes, but:
- rigour is much higher
- some old biases have been (almost) overcome
- more essays please!
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

49. E. THEN AND NOW –
‘MUSEUMS’ OR EXCITING HORIZONS?
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

50. IN ONE CORNER…
‘…organizational research can sometimes appear
like a museum of the 1970s’
‘…our theoretical debates are largely stuck where
they were two decades ago’
‘…paradigms in organization theory appear to be
encased in amber’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

51. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
AND IN THE
OTHER CORNER
‘If organization theory is a museum …New pieces are
being added to the collection, and many of these are
potential anchors for new rooms of the museum.’
Organization theory is ‘…a tremendously vibrant and
generative field.’

52. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
Institutional Prescriptions
(Logics)
Mechanisms
of Diffusion
Convergence
• interlocks
• proximity
• exemplars
• ‘carriers’
Mechanisms
of Divergence
• translation
• intra-organizational
dynamics
• visibility/status
• location (core-periphery)
Mechanisms of
Reflexivity
Change
• shocks
• social movements
• contradictions
• ‘theorization’
• practice
improvisation
Mechanisms
of Legitimacy
Management
• impression
management
• ‘strategic
responses’
• reputation
‘repair’
Mechanisms
of
Maintenance
‘Repair’
• FCEs
• practices
• categorical
imperative
• professional
associations

53. TO WHICH THE FIRST CORNER
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
RESPONDS…
‘…if progress is judged by answering important
questions about the world, then some skepticism is
warranted’
‘A major challenge for organization theorists is
that we need good taste in problems…’

54. PROBLEM #1
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

55. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
PROBLEM #2

56. PROBLEM #2: INEQUALITY
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

57. ‘It is surprising to discover that
empirical research on greed is rare.’
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
(Wang Murnighan, 2011)

58. PROBLEM #3
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

59. PROBLEM #3: CORPORATE CORRUPTION
‘ … a worldwide problem that cuts
across ideological and cultural
divides.’ (Zahra et al., 2005)
‘Canada now dominates the World
Bank corruption list, thanks to SNC-Lavalin.’
(National Post, 2013)
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

60. PROBLEM #4: CLIMATE CHANGE
U N I V E R S I T Y OO FF AA LL BB E R T AA

61. WHERE ARE WE?
• OMT - PDWs Symposia
- Submissions e.g. social responsibility
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
e.g. hybrid organizations
• EGOS
• OMT - ‘Best Paper on Environmental and
Social Practices’

62. ‘SCHOLARLY CONTRIBUTIONS TO
MANAGEMENT’ AWARD WINNERS - BY
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A
DIVISION
BPS
OB
OMT
ENT
%
23%
27%
45%
5%

63. U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A

64. THANK YOU!
U N I V E R S I T Y O F A L B E R T A 64