8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

1/29

9029TOMADO DE: THE ACADEt-fY OF MANAGEMENT REV IEW. Volume 16, Number 2,April 1991.

f two l

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

2/29

1991 Boyac gLller and dler 63sentod lnternallonalization as one of the Academy's four main challenges.Steven Kerr, 1990 president, presided over discussions to join an internotional federatlon of academies of management. Sim ilarly , Eastern Academy of Management president Carolyn Dexter moved her region's biannualmeetings overseas, arguing that the Academy can no longar remain withinthe conceptual or geographicaJ borders of the United States. The WestemAcademy o{ Management followed suit by convening its unlque 1990 meeting in Jopan.

This article inves1igates the global context of management research,educalion, and theory development in the United States from three perspectivas: contextua . quantilative, and quolitative. First, from a contextua} perspective, it reviews chonges in the externa environment tha1 potentiollyimpoct academic manogement, including inherent influences that hoveresultad from its being o post-World Wor II. American-basad profession.Second, from a quanlitative perspectiva. i t reviews the publication of internationol articles in U.S. managemenl journols, olong with American scholars ' preparation to conducl such research. Third, and perhops most importan , i t reviews o selecton of manogement theories (rom a qualitative perspectiva. Although mony differences exist between domestlc and globalmanogement (including myriad issues involving scale, scope, and complexity), given the limits of a single article, we focus on the cultural assumptions that underlie and often frome monagement research as well as theimplicit universalism inherenl in much of organizational science.

Parochiolism ls bosed on lgnorance of others' ways. Ethnocentr ismjudges [oreign ways as inferior to one's ow n. This article does nol criticizeAmerican -moda organizalional science for beng ethnocentric. It does notsuggest that the main problem ls that American theorists view Americantheories as superior lo others' theories. Rother, based on the multiple observations presentad, one of our prlmary conclusions s that of parochialism. Americana hove developed theories without being sufficiently aware ofnon- U.S. conlexts, models, research, and values. O ur goal, however, isnot lo extend mode-in-America orgonizational sdence beyond its currentgeographical boundaries, but rather to strengthen i t by suggesting fundamental changas in how scholars can think about and create theories. Thepurpose of this arlicle, therefore, is nol to casUga1e the field, its pioneers, orits presentleaders ; rather, by drawing attention to the forces promulgatingparoch ialism, i t reconceptualizes the fleld's roo ts and thereby focilitates thecreation of a more relevan futura. A1though the indictments in this articleare at times strong, they ore attempts to ovoid relegating the Americanacademic monagement tradilion to lhe cur iosity of a mid -twentieth-centuryfossil.

CONTEXTU L P ROCHI LISMIndustrial Compe titlv n s Th e Vi wSince World m

In critical reviews of the field, Law rence 1987) and Pfeffer 1982) undersco red the importance of appreciating social context and its influence on

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

3/29

264 Academy ol Monagement Review Apriltheory development. They indicated that the questions organizationa l the-o rists hove deemed most interesting to study hove been a function of managers concerns and , thus, a product of the time Similarly, such scholars asKuhn 1962). Merton 1968) , and Whitley 1984). among others, suggestedthat the social system of scientists and the environment of scientilic activitycorwlroin knowledgc produclion (Graham Gronhaug, 1989). Accord ing toMerton (1968: 539 :

Social orgonization of intellectual activity is significantly relatedlo the charocter of lhe knowledge which develops under itsauspices lncreosingly. i t has been assumed that the socialstructure does not inOuence science merely by focusing the attention of scienlists upon certain problems fo r research . [butalso in] the ways in which the cultural and social context entersinto the conceptua l phrasing of scientlfic problems.What is the sociocultural context of academic management? Most man

agement schools and academic managemenl journals are American . They,a long with the Acade my of Management. grew up as distinctly Americaninstitutions in a particular geographical. cu lturaL and temporal contextthol of post-Wo rld War Unted States. Although the Academy of Man-agement is over S years old, two of the most prestigious managementjournals, Administrative Science Quarterly and the Academy of Manage-me nt ]ournal were established in 1956 and 1958 . respectively, as Whitley1988 : 47) accurate ly described (based on Gordon Howell, 1959; Pierson e tal., 1959; Smiddy Naum. 1954; Whtley England, 1977):

The encouragement of systematic research into managerialproblems and business behavior in the 19S0s was based on thewidespread belief in the United States at the time that scientificknowledge could provide the foundation for mproved managerial declslon mak.ng and upgrade the quality of business education

Thus, as William Ouchi presentad in his 1990 Western Academy of Man-agement keynote address, rnanagement knowledge began to be c:odifieddu ring a particula r period of American hislory. To understand the strengthsond limitations of lhot k:nowledge base, it is incumbent to understand bothits particular historlcal context as well as Lhe currenl economc situalion.The United States emerged from World War ll as the only major, eco-nomically developed na tion with ts industrial sector unscathed. lmmed i-ate ly following Wor ld War II, the United States occounted for 75 percent ofthe world 's GNP (Thurow, 1988). For the next two decades, U.S. multina-tional corporations dominated world trade. During this period of the UnitedSlates' postwar economic dominance, American researchers focused onAmerican firms, Ame rican perspectives, and those questions most salient toAmerican managers, rather than systematically including either non-U.S.sites or issues. In this context, it was ea sy for researchers-including non-

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

4/29

1991 oyacigliJer nd Adler 265U.S. researchers (Servan-Schreiber, 1968)-to assume implicitly that Americon thcories also dominoted . We could argue that the field was imprinledwil o U.S. orientation (Stinchcornbe, 1965). Beechler and Pucik 0989). {orexample . noted that the Japanese importad American managerial theoriesprimarily during periods of U.S. economic and organizational dominance.Similarly, consulting firms, such as McKinsey and Company, grew ropidlyfo llowing World War II and actlvely exported both the structural and processsolutions they used for U.S. industry (Blackford, 1988: 124). Today, the UntedStates produces less than one quarter (22 ) of the world's GNP Along withthe United Slales' decline in the global economy, the need lo question thepreviously assumed universality of U.S. theories has become apparent.

Even though sorne academics and managers believe tha l Americanmanagerlal know-how created U.S. econom ic success-an d concomitantly , that Americans must now look lo their management systems to regain econom lc superior t y Thurow (1984. 1988) contends that Americawas never competltive, but rather, had effortless economic superiority. Ouchi (1984) concurs. describing U.S. corporations during the postwar perlad os ea rning rnonopo ly profils and thelr workers as earnlng monopolywages; th is was not due to the superiority of American management techn1ques, but rather it was primarily due to the Jack of signlficant foreigncompetition . Recognizlng the presence today of vigorous foreign competition, O uch (1984) predicts thot Americans wUl never again eam the monopoly profils and wages that characterized the decades immedialely ollowing World War l l. Both Thurow's and Ouchi's argumenta suggest ana ttribulion error: The economic success of the United States has been attributed, in part, to A mericans' conceptlon of management (a co l lective internaattribution) ra ther lhan lo the re1ative lack of competition (an externa attribution).

In lh e 1990s, American industry faces becoming just anolher, albeitim portan , region of lhe globe. Though corporate and academic performance are cerlainly nol identical, perhaps the time has come for Americanmanagement professors and faculties to embrace a similar fate. Moreover,perhaps the particular American heritage thot facilitated the eld's inception and its initial development now hinders its future contributlons. Tounderstand better these dynamics, the central institution of American academ ic management, the Academy of Management, is examinad.The Academy of Management A lobal Perspective

As mentioned, post-World War economic conditions played a determining role in lhe way business approached developing, manufacturing,and marketing products ond servces. In 1966, Vemon proposed a simple.yel widely used, three-phase model for understanding firms' developmentbased on the product lile cycle (see also Vernon, 1971). Adding a fourthphase to capture the complexilies of todays highly competitive global environment. these phases could be labeled domestic, intemational, multinalional. and global (Adler & Ghadar, 1990). Although the expended model

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

5/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

6/29

1991 oyofg iller ond dler 67Pub lication in non-U.S. journals (and. lo a lesser extent, U.S. journalsfocusing on international topics) is considerad suspect, that is, suspect ofbeing inferior (a Phase l assumption). flfth, inlernational research, ratherthan being integrated Lhroughoul the Academy, constitules a separateand in lhe past. somelimes disparaged-division. The Academy lhus echoes the struclural dynamics of Phase 2 firms; it too has an intemationaldvision that is kept organizatlonally disUnct frorn the mainstrearn core of theorganJzation. Curiously. because the International Oivison has beenbeled as a separata division , the Acaderny's Management History, Organlzation Th0ory, and Organization Behavior Divisions implicitly becomedomestic divlslons posturing as "universal divisions." ll loglcal as l l seems(except lhrough Phase 2lenses), at present, international is a subdivlsion odomeslic. Basad on these five examples, as well as many simJlar observations, the Academy currently appears to combine primarily aspecls of domestic and inlernatlonal organizations, whlle exhibiting few rnultinationalor global characteristics.

Given the dramatic shifts in the externa economic envlronment. werecommend that the Academy consider new, more global structures andprocesses (the final section of this article lists specific recommendations).Although the precise formal for "going global" is not important, the resu l t rnoving from Phase 1 and 2 structures to lhose of Phases 3 and 4 i s critically importan lo the future relevance and potential con lribution of American academlc management.

QU NTIT TIVE P ROCHI USMHaving brlefly reviewed the global context, we can now focus directly

on the issues addressed and the research produced within that context.Today, between 15 and 30 of the world's 185 countries possess most of itsscientific knowledge, while representing less than one third of its population(von Alleman, 1974). If rnost science is practicad in fewer than 30 countries,all social science is practicad in fewer still, and all organizational science instill fewer (Roberts Boyacigiller, 1984: 425). The vasl majority o management schools are In the United States. The majorlty of management professors and researchers are American trained. Moreover, as prevlously rnentioned, the vasl majority of management research focuses on the UnitedStates (see Gergen. 1973, for similar trends in social psychological theory).Lawrence (1987: 2-3) cited 30 key contributions in the development of organizatlonal science, only 5 of which were contributed by non-Americans 6 ifKurt Lewin is mcluded). Additionally, all five of the non-U.S. researchersore European; none are from outside of the occidental tradition (see Adler,Doktor, Redding, 1986).

Academic institutons (management schools included) produce and disseminate knowledge. The following section reviews the record of Americanmanagement schools in producing internationally educated managers andprofessors, as well as the record of those professors in producing internationally focused research.

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

7/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

8/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

9/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

10/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

11/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

12/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

13/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

14/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

15/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

16/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

17/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

18/29

1991 oy cigi ler and Adler 79

TABLE 1Recommendations for a Mo re ln temationally Relevant

Organ izational ScienceR ec:oromenda1 lonaReflectl o nr :xpllcllly oddrass thelnf luence o f

nt l tm ol Vlllues on ho w wo. 1 p l u a l l z o orgonizollon phenomena

on construc l organ lza l lo n th eories.E xam ine tha eJctent lo wh ic h th e

organizational ~ c l o n c o l raf locl U .S .cultural values.

Actl on Stepa for ndividual Re s archersSta te thecu ltural and geographlcal

dol TlOlno f theortes ond reseorch. asw ell aslndu:oteo th er lo ca les m whichrt apphes .

lndtcate the nationol ond \:ulturalcharacterlstlcs o f reseorch samples.

Reseorch management system s outs ideolthe Unlted States .

Stu dy non - U .S . monoge m ent sys tems onth elr o wn terms ( drogrophic resaorch ;develop thlck descnplions o lo rgonl7.alio nul p l l ~ n o r u r - n n nnrl thecontexls In which th ey ore embedded .

Creote m ore multinallonal andmulticulturol re seorch tooms

Use non - U S se tllngs to fra m etheoret icol and methodologicolapproaches.

Take sabbot icols n fo re lgn countr ies.

Orga:nUa1iona l C hange aJo urnal edrtors, revtew ers. and scholars

should question one onother regardingth er r cultural aa sumphons andreseorch domolns.

Expond editorial boards lo include globairepresentatlon and expertise.

He lp s scholars uncover neglec ted.overornphaslzed, ond overgeneralizedaspects o l theorloa.

Incrooses scho laru understondin g o (American cu lture an d lts impact o ntholr pe rc optl o ns. thoughts andscholarahtp.

Man lmrzes l rnphdt unlversahsm.

Asslsts rooders ol thcresearch lorecogn lz o po ton tlal hm rtal lons.

C reotes now thoorohcol ondmethodo loglcol op proaches notpred lcoto o n Americanassumpt ions .

lncreooos tho orgonlzatlono l fo rms andcontexls wlth whtc h scholarsar elomihor. as woll as increosing theirunderstandtng o l the unlqueness olU.S. o rgonlzotlonal lo rms.

Foc llltalos rocognl t lon o f cultural biasesIn th eory dovolopm ent.

Exponds domoln o l o rganizationalth130rlos.

lncreasos sch olo rs understanding ollo re ign cultures o nd their owncu ltures, lncludlng prov iding personaJth tc k d escrlpllo ns o l the loreign sobbaucolculture

Reworchn o ca ro fu l expos1ti on o f thegoogrophrcol ond cultural domain willch eck lmpllctt unave rsoltsm.

ln c reoses the pe rspectivos representadboth 3ubsta nllvely ond symbohcally .

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

19/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

20/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

21/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

22/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

23/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

24/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

25/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

26/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

27/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

28/29

8/13/2019 Ar20613 Apa Ocr

29/29

29 Academy o ManagomentRevrew April

Nakiye AvdanBoyac: lg l ll er rece iv ed he rPh .D. lrom the Unlversltyo l Ca li forn ia. Berkoley. She is an associate professor o f lnternatlonal management al San }ose Sta teUnlvers rty. Hercurren research inlerests mclude human res ourco management issueslacing fapanose multmationals in the Unl led States and lhe lnfluen ce of nallonal,lndustry, and organ izat ional focto rs on th eanlroductlon of n wp roducts In the apon'lse, U S., an d Gorman pharmaceuhcol In dustries.Nancy J Ad ler rocel ved her Ph.D. in managoment from the Un iversl ty o CalHomla atLos Angeles. Sho ls a pro fessoro o rganizal lonal behavior andcross-cultura lman agement al the culty o Management, M cGill University in Montreal, Ganada.Herl e ld s o l ln le re st lnclude strategic temali ono l human resources management. expalriatlon, w ornen in ln ternallonol managemenl, ln tornatlonal n egotlo ti ng. cult u raUysynerglstl c opproaches lo problem so lv lng. a n d fntomotlonal organ izo t lon devolop-rnnnt