赋予与国外的管理学相对应的学科以应有的学科地位

在我国,与国外的管理学相应的学科尚未完全确立其学科地位,与国外该学科研究对象清晰、研究队伍强大、研究成果卓著的局面形成了巨大反差。导致这种状况的根本原因在于该学科与管理学科门类、工商管理和管理科学等相关学科的关系模糊,从而导致该学科泛化和空洞化。我国要发展与国外的管理学相应的学科,必须首先赋予该学科应有的学科地位,明确界定该学科的研究对象,同时为该学科的发展创造良好的条件。     

改革开放四十年中国企业管理学的发展——情境、历程、经验与使命

本文将快速工业化、渐进市场化和全球信息化作为中国企业管理学发展的主要国家情境因素,以此为基础系统回顾了改革开放40年中国企业管理学的发展历程,将发展历程划分为"恢复转型"、"完善提高"、"全面创新"3个阶段,总结了中国企业管理学发展的基本经验:坚持马克思主义在发展中国企业管理学中的指导地位,重视企业改革、管理与发展的系统性,坚持跟踪国际学术前沿问题与解决中国具体管理问题相结合,坚持自主创新思维与科学研究规范相结合,坚持企业管理理论与企业管理实践相结合。本文最后指出,中国正在努力培育具有国际竞争力的世界一流企业,未来中国管理学者的使命是全面创新、加快构建中国特色企业管理学,形成具有中国特色、中国风格、中国气派的管理理论和学科体系,促进中国情境下的企业管理方式走向世界。     

东方管理学的现状与展望——东方管理学学科建设研讨会综述

作为我国管理学科中的一个亮点,东方管理学已经成为一个比较完整的学科体系。东方管理学的核心思想、框架已经基本构筑完毕,然而学科研究的对象仍有待进一步的厘定,研究的方法有待创新,学科的国际影响力有待进一步提升。     

管理学的价值性困境:回顾、争鸣与评论

历经百年发展,管理学仍然面临着诸多困境和挑战,人们对学科内一些元问题的认识仍然充满争议:管理学的发展因学科内关于管理学基本性质的争鸣得到了促进,但这些不同的观点也恰恰反映了管理学的发展仍处于"前科学"阶段;管理学大量借鉴了相关学科的知识,这促进了管理学本身的发展,但也随之带来理论界对于学科本身合法性的质疑;为了维护学科合法性,学者们不断向"科学化"靠拢,但又面临着"实践相关性"的挑战。这些争议意味着管理学在学科的基本性质、学科的合法性、实践相关性、学科构建的方式和方法等诸多方面仍然存在着矛盾和困境,即管理学面临着学科价值性和实践价值性的双重窘境。厘清不同争论之间的差异性与普遍性,对于以何种标准判断什么是有效的管理学研究,进而对管理学本身进行清晰定位十分重要。为此,本专题围绕管理学百年来针对一些元问题所阐发的争鸣性观点进行了回顾、比较和评述。     

管理学研究中的假设解构:方法论视角下的考察

为了明晰复杂的管理学研究假设体系,提升管理学的科学价值和合法性地位,从一般假设的概念体系与层次划分出发,基于方法论视角在哲学思考、学科建构和操作研究3个层次上梳理和解构了管理学研究的假设问题,并对各个层次的管理研究假设的有效性改善进行了相应的探讨.     

《管理学报》2007年总目次

学术探讨赋予与国外的管理学相对应的学科以应有的学科地位周祖城(1-1)从管理与文化的关系看中国特色的管理学周建波(2-144)从管理与文化的关系看中国式管理彭贺(3-253)试问管理学——管理学在中国侧议本刊特约评论员(5-549)管理学的基本概念与学科地位——一种基于科学计量学的再认识陈悦刘则渊(6-695)“管理学”断想刘文瑞(6-703)管理学在中国基于“心理场”的消费者气质研究——全息系统方法论在消费者行为研究中的应用罗纪宁(6-706)中国管理论坛元决策:支持决策科学化与民主化的手段王众托(2-127)中国企业十年盘点郭重庆(5-537)系统集成…     

从管理学到公共管理学--历史角度的考量

公共管理学作为一门科际学科,其学科定位以及与管理学的关系一直少有定论.事实上,管理学与公共管理学在共通中存在着差异,在两者的互动过程中彼此借鉴,相互超越.这是一个从传统公共行政的效率主义到新公共行政对公平等社会价值的回归,到新公共管理的管理主义新形式对效率的追求,再到新公共服务对公共服务技术与方式的再造,更到对这些服务的价值取向的重新审视,它们构成一个动态的、连续的螺旋式递进的过程.在公共管理学逐步成为独立的学科范式的进程中,必须重新梳理公共管理学与管理学两者间的历史渊源关系,重新考量其研究对象、研究方法与价值取向,着重塑造自己鲜明的公共价值取向,突出其公共实践的理论先声这一科学致用功能,并在基于一般管理学但又高于一般管理层面的发展战略高度,构建普适于公共运作的管理理论体系和管理技术方法体系.公共管理学的未来发展将始终以管理学为其母学科定位基础,但不再是全盘地吸收.如何在管理学基本理论与方法基础上,结合其他相关学科,创新公共管理学科自身的方法论体系和理论体系,使之能够不断应对公共管理实践需求的全新挑战,并在公共价值取向和公共治理变革中引导现实,将是未来相当长时间内摆在公共管理学科发展定位高度上的重大议题.     

试比较知识管理学与知识学、知识社会学、知识工程学之间的关系

随着知识经济的崛起,对知识的研究越来越成为各学科的关注焦点,进而出现了以知识为核心概念的学科。知识学、知识社会学、知识工程学和知识管理学都是这一元概念下的产物,统称为知识科学。从各学科的界定、研究方法、内容体系和学科发展趋势几方面加以比较。     

元管理学及其主要研究取向

元管理学是对管理学的研究对象、研究目标、研究方法、学科性质、体系结构进行自身的系统反思和研究的学科。“元管理学”作为一个即与管理学本身有密切联系又与其相互区别的领域，至少可以从哲学认识论好社会学分析两个方面开展系统的研究。元管理学的研究能揭示管理学的认识论特征、提供检验、批判管理学的认识论规范、促进管理学的自我建设。     

管理学研究中的“价值无涉”与“价值涉入”

在目前的主流话语中,管理学研究与价值判断俨然已成为2个截然对立的词汇。"价值无涉"被视为管理学研究的基本准则,然而,管理学作为一门介于自然科学和社会科学之间,兼具人文特质的学科,要做到完全的"价值无涉"是不可能的。与其信奉虚假的"价值无涉",不如主动承认价值判断的地位,并将其限定在一个可接受的范围。"价值涉入"也是体现研究者社会责任的重要途径。     

基于元分析的国际知识管理研究特征分析

利用元分析方法,对1990～2007年间发表在20种国际管理学科核心期刊上的知识管理论文进行分析,从研究主题、参考学科、研究方法和分析层次4个维度分别揭示了国际知识管理的研究特征,明确了知识管理的研究现状和存在的问题,为完善知识管理学科结构提供实证研究数据,为知识管理的研究和发展提供参考依据.     

An Integrative Review of Employee Voice: Identifying a Common Conceptualization and Research Agenda

Employee voice has been studied across a diverse range of disciplines, generating an extensive body of literature on the topic. However, its conceptualization across the disciplines has differed, resulting in a lack of integrative theories and frameworks on employee voice. The main objective of this paper is to conduct a multidisciplinary review of the academic research on employee voice, to show where there is an opportunity to adopt and adapt the findings and research on employee voice within alternate disciplines, and to demonstrate how this may lead to more common ground in the conceptualization of employee voice. This review focuses on an analysis of the Human Resource Management/Employment Relations and Organizational Behaviour disciplines' conceptualization of employee voice, beginning with the identification of where the disciplines diverged in their concept and study of employee voice. Further, it maps their similarities and differences, on the basis of motive, content, mechanism, target and management of voice. Finally, it identifies opportunities to incorporate the alternate disciplinary perspective and proposes a conceptual model, which addresses the blind spots in each discipline. It is proposed that the consideration of formal and informal employee voice in future studies will enable the better integration of voice research.     

Accounting for the formation of scientific fields in organization studies

There are few qualitative organizational accounts that explore the constitution of scientific fields in management. We developed a methodology for understanding the academic modes of scientific knowledge production in management research from the perspective of the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK) and actor-network theory (ANT). SSK and ANT offer a way to account for how scientific fields in organization studies are enacted. Key to this process are splitting and inversion of statements; credibility and network formation; and the concepts of credit, trajectory, and position. Specific statements making key knowledge claims (e.g., handbooks, special editions) are situated in academic practices that obscure those rhetorical strategies that enable the production of a network of knowledge that can act, organizationally, as a more or less unified sub-field. We take as a starting point a collection of texts, dated 2011, which sought to systematize the main currents of a disciplinary sub-field during the last decade, focusing on how statements are transformed into scientific certainty and how the question of credibility is established. The sub-field is that of organizational learning (OL). The particular language of OL relies on approaches that make its epistemic assumptions intelligible within a network. It is a language that tends to reify and naturalize specific practices that become accredited as organization learning. The material/textual artifacts that sustain these practices, instead of being reified, can be reframed as enacting a scientific field whose resignification acts upon the network that enabled its existence.     

A Disciplinary Perspective on the Epistemological Status of Risk

A unique multidisciplinary perspective on the risk literature is used to establish a fresh and provocative argument regarding the epistemological understanding and definition of risk. Building on economic conceptualizations that distinguish risk from uncertainty and argue that risk is an ordered application of knowledge to the unknown, the survey identifies each of the disciplines as having a particular knowledge approach with which they confront the unknown so as to order its randomness and convert it into a risk proposition. This epistemological approach suggests the concept of risk can act as a mirror, reflecting the preoccupations, strengths, and weaknesses of each discipline as they grapple with uncertainty. The conclusion suggests that the different disciplines can, and desirably should, act in concert toward a cumulative appreciation of risk that progresses our understanding of the concept. One way in which the article challenges risk experts to join disciplinary forces in a collaborative effort is to holistically appreciate and articulate the concept of political risk calculation.     

INTEGRATED OPERATIONS: A PROPOSAL FOR OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT TEACHING AND RESEARCH

This paper, addressed to professors of operations management (om) in research institutions, suggests that the long-term academic viability of our discipline requires the generation of a theory uniquely associated with the practice of OM. Such a theory will rest on foundations laid by other disciplines, but must find its own unique synthesis that attends to the problems of OM practice. The paper proposes a framework that recognizes physics, social psychology and philosophy as foundational disciplines for an integrative theoryof OM and suggests which concepts from those disciplines may find voice in such a theory.     

Human resources management and corporate governance: Integration perspectives and future directions

The aim of this article is to investigate, through a systematic review of the literature, what has been studied and published in the international academic literature regarding the integration between human resources management (HRM) and corporate governance (CG).We accomplished it answering two research questions: How has evolved the academic publications regarding the integration between HRM and CG? and Under which theoretical perspectives the integration between HRM and CG has been studied? The research covered the publications from 2000 to 2017, and the analysis comprises 79 articles from relevant international journals. The results revealed the predominance of a shareholder theoretical perspective and the apparent legitimation of HRM as an important variable of CG, but with a secondary position, as consultant or processes provider. Besides exploring and exposing the state of the art in this area of knowledge, through a critical analysis of the literature, this study highlights the gaps in the literature and provides suggestions for future studies.     

"管理学在中国"研究的理论反思与实践探索——第2届"管理学在中国"学术研讨会综述

第2届“管理学在中国”学术研讨会的研讨内容可分为3个方面：①对“管理学在中国”研究的理论反思;②“管理学在中国”的实践探索,包括中国企业管理实践模式和战略管理实践等问题的研究;③“管理学在中国”的理论体系建构。本届研讨会的学术特色为：逐渐向解决中国实际管理问题聚焦;平等、热情与自信的学术对话;更加开放的学术视野。在研究的前瞻与期盼方面,要有研究中国实际问题的切实行动;进一步营造宽松自由的学术环境,鼓励采用那些适合于原创性知识形成的研究方法：加强“管理学在中国”的国际学术交流等。     

Knowledge dissemination in operations management: Published perceptions versus academic reality

The channels for knowledge generation and dissemination in the business disciplines are many: presenting research at conferences, writing books, distributing working papers, offering insights in society newsletters, giving invited talks, publishing studies in academic journals, and many other venues, including even blogs and perhaps Facebook^®. But the most important venue is probably published research in “top-level” academic journals. In the discipline of Operations Management, many studies and lists have been published that attempt to determine which of these journals are supposedly the “top” according to either citation analyses, the opinion of recognized experts, author affiliations, bibliometric studies, and other approaches. These lists may then, in turn, be used in different degrees to evaluate research. However, what really counts is what the academic institutions actually use for guidance in evaluating faculty research. Based on a new source of ranking data from AACSB-accredited schools, we compare published journal-ranking studies against that of academe to determine the degree to which the studies reflect academic “reality”. We present rankings of OM journals based on this new source of data and on an aggregate of the stream of published studies, and evaluate their consistency.     

Why Do Countries Regulate Environmental Health Risks Differently? A Theoretical Perspective

Why do countries regulate, or prefer to regulate, environmental health risks such as radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and endocrine disruptors differently? A wide variety of theories, models, and frameworks can be used to help answer this question, though the resulting answer will strongly depend on the theoretical perspective that is applied. In this theoretical review, we will explore eight conceptual frameworks, from different areas of science, which will offer eight different potential explanations as to why international differences occur in environmental health risk management. We are particularly interested in frameworks that could shed light on the role of scientific expertise within risk management processes. The frameworks included in this review are the Risk Assessment Paradigm, research into the roles of experts as policy advisors, the Psychometric Paradigm, the Cultural Theory of Risk, participatory approaches to risk assessment and risk management, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the Social Amplification of Risk Framework, and Hofstede's Model of National Cultures. We drew from our knowledge and experiences regarding a diverse set of academic disciplines to pragmatically assemble a multidisciplinary set of frameworks. From the ideas and concepts offered by the eight frameworks, we derive pertinent questions to be used in further empirical work and we present an overarching framework to depict the various links that could be drawn between the frameworks.