Discussion: View Thread

Colleagues,

I agree with Bob's perspective that we are missing the opportunity to do some great work in the field of religion and spirituality as aligned with our core competencies as management researchers. I have presented research on religiosity and spirituality at the Academy, but often get the feeling that when the outcomes of the research don't mesh with a practical zeitgeist, it is slighted, irrespective of the methods or quantitative evidence. My hope is that we can reach out to each other and aligned research communities to start cross-disciplinary research agendas that address some of the larger questions in religiosity and spirituality using criterion studies. I have a few more coming down the turnpike, and will be speaking about criterion related studies in religiosity/spirituality and plagiarism at the coming AOM.

Thanks,

Dan

______________________________________________
Daniel E. Martin, Ph.D. | Associate Professor, Department of Management | <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">College</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Business</st1:placename></st1:place> and Economics | email: daniel.martin@csueastbay.edu | phone: 510-885-2060

Link w/ me @ www.linkedin.com/in/danmartinvp | SSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=884752 

I have noticed with great interest the flood of emails regarding the caucuses proposed for AOM this year. I support these-I think they are interesting and certainly valuable. Those of you who know me recognize that these issues are personally very interesting to me-sometimes more personally interesting than research.

But being a member of MSR has never been about my personal interests, but about my professional interests. As I read the flurry of emails, I could not help but reflect that I see an historically ongoing and enormous inconsistency between AOM's mission and what seems to excite this group. I've been on this listserve for many years and the only time I see a flood of emails is when there is a non-research issue arising-generally issues of spiritual practice superimposed on an organizational topic.

Before you send hate mail, please realize that I 1) respect that people's values and interests are their own, and I fully support everyone doing what they love, 2) am in no way questioning the inherent quality or value of non-research interests, and 3) in no way want to suggest that we should restrict or exclude any non-research issues in MSR.

What I am suggesting is that there is a serious  and continued disconnect with AOM as a scholarly organization and a venue for teaching and scholarship. We operate within an Academy that values research, yet I see the collective juices flowing in this listserve only when practice is discussed. What does this say about the driving concerns of this group-and our ability to become a division in an Academy that values research above everything? It cannot bode well.

I think that we need to consider this carefully as we continue.  While practice and research are not inconsistent, in MSR it seems that the interest in them is asymmetrical. Practice is critical to those in the psychology of religion as well, but that group is driven by an equally important focus on impeccable scholarship and theoretical development. Their practices inform their scholarship and are often the motivating force in the development of respected, ongoing research programs. They, too, are in a research academy, the American Psychological Association, and have been welcomed in it due to their rigorous investigations-not because of their personal practices.

 I sense that our group does not have the same interests in research.  I'd very much like to hear whether others in the group agree.

Best regards,

Bob

--
Robert A. Giacalone, Ph.D.
Editor, Journal of Management Spirituality and Religion
Professor of Human Resource Management
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Fox</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">School</st1:placetype></st1:place> Of Business and Management
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">Temple</st1:placetype> <st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place>
Alter Hall
1801 Liacouras Walk
Philadelphia PA 19122

When your hourglass runs out of sand, you can't flip it over and start again.
Kenny Chesney

But don't be fooled by the radio
The TV or the magazines
They show you photographs of how your life should be,
But they're just someone else's fantasy.

Dennis DeYoung

_______________________________________________________________________ To send a message to the MSR Listserv, please send your email to: MSR@AOMLISTS.pace.edu To visit the Academy's MSR Web site, please visit: http://group.aomonline.org/msr/ To manage you MSR Listserv subscription, please visit: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=MSR&A=1

Bob,

THX for the input!! As always, your wisdom is greatly appreciated, and you raise important issues worthy of our collective consideration. I think your remarks are a great reminder of MSR's core values and mission, and they are important in sustaining our "forward momentum." I am quick to note that I believe there is always room for greater improvement in our commitment to MSR research.

That said, a couple of more questions/observations for consideration:

n  Could traffic content and frequency on this listserv be more indicative of the technology medium's appropriateness as a method of engaging in "research-related inquiry," rather than of actual interest in conducting research and scholarship, itself?

n  I am subscribed to about 30 of the 44 or so AOM listservs (yes, my inbox is out of control!). While this is certainly not scientific, I tend to see about the same general variety of discussion topics, if not frequency, on many/most of the AOM listservs. I realize that we tend to find what we are looking for, so others may have different phenomenologies...

n  Having recently served as an MSR PDW and Program Chair, I know that there has been some acknowledgement of, discussion about, and even concern over the increasing popularity of PDW's within the Academy vs. scholarly paper sessions....

n  I know that MSR experienced tremendous participation in terms of paper reviews and submissions during my term of service as program chair last year (no doubt, the conference theme was influential). As an aside, I would be interested in opinions on whether we feel that we in MSR are overly-critical, under-critical, or "just about right" in terms of our collective "review rigor" of scholarly paper submissions? I have posted an informal poll on AOM Connect (navigate to the MSR Blog), or you can register your opinion here: http://www.polleverywhere.com/multiple_choice_polls/NzU5MzI3OTE/web

n  If this is any indication of research interest, we in MSR seem to be achieving all-time highs over the last couple of years on paper/symposia submissions within our community....Here are the latest trends (again, there's always room for improvement, but kudos as well J):

n  Finally, as an effort to encourage more scholarship within our Interest Group, the MSR Executive Committee has consciously expanded our conference program this year (2011) to include both a doctoral consortium AND a new research incubator. Being the opportunist that I am, I would highly encourage as much participation as possible in both of these events J

Looking forward to the continued dialog.

Warm regards, Arthur

From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert A. Giacalone
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 7:51 AM
To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Caucuses and Research

I have noticed with great interest the flood of emails regarding the caucuses proposed for AOM this year. I support these-I think they are interesting and certainly valuable. Those of you who know me recognize that these issues are personally very interesting to me-sometimes more personally interesting than research.

But being a member of MSR has never been about my personal interests, but about my professional interests. As I read the flurry of emails, I could not help but reflect that I see an historically ongoing and enormous inconsistency between AOM's mission and what seems to excite this group. I've been on this listserve for many years and the only time I see a flood of emails is when there is a non-research issue arising-generally issues of spiritual practice superimposed on an organizational topic.

Before you send hate mail, please realize that I 1) respect that people's values and interests are their own, and I fully support everyone doing what they love, 2) am in no way questioning the inherent quality or value of non-research interests, and 3) in no way want to suggest that we should restrict or exclude any non-research issues in MSR.

What I am suggesting is that there is a serious  and continued disconnect with AOM as a scholarly organization and a venue for teaching and scholarship. We operate within an Academy that values research, yet I see the collective juices flowing in this listserve only when practice is discussed. What does this say about the driving concerns of this group-and our ability to become a division in an Academy that values research above everything? It cannot bode well.

I think that we need to consider this carefully as we continue.  While practice and research are not inconsistent, in MSR it seems that the interest in them is asymmetrical. Practice is critical to those in the psychology of religion as well, but that group is driven by an equally important focus on impeccable scholarship and theoretical development. Their practices inform their scholarship and are often the motivating force in the development of respected, ongoing research programs. They, too, are in a research academy, the American Psychological Association, and have been welcomed in it due to their rigorous investigations-not because of their personal practices.

 I sense that our group does not have the same interests in research.  I'd very much like to hear whether others in the group agree.

Best regards,

Bob

--
Robert A. Giacalone, Ph.D.
Editor, Journal of Management Spirituality and Religion
Professor of Human Resource Management
Fox School Of Business and Management
Temple University
Alter Hall
1801 Liacouras Walk
Philadelphia PA 19122

When your hourglass runs out of sand, you can't flip it over and start again.
Kenny Chesney

But don't be fooled by the radio
The TV or the magazines
They show you photographs of how your life should be,
But they're just someone else's fantasy.

Dennis DeYoung

_______________________________________________________________________ To send a message to the MSR Listserv, please send your email to: MSR@AOMLISTS.pace.edu To visit the Academy's MSR Web site, please visit: http://group.aomonline.org/msr/ To manage you MSR Listserv subscription, please visit: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=MSR&A=1

Hello Bob, hello MSR members,

This issue seems crucial to me, as it has through more than a decade researching and teaching in this area. As researchers, educators, and practitioners interested in beliefs, we are especially liable to be viewed suspiciously. This is partly inherent to what we research (think about William James writing about religious experience in the late 19^th century and the way his work was interpreted as 'non-scientific' or 'non-academic', despite his scholarship), but surely also partly related to *how* we research and then how we talk about our research, education, and interventions. As Bob says, people working in cognate academic research fields have worked this through, whether as psychologists, sociologists, or theologians, and this then feeds into education and organizational intervention practice – why should we not? Where are the key statements of MSR as a community in relation to research/practice or research topic/personal position, for example? I don't know of anything in the domain statement, or anything published that tackles the personal beliefs/research dynamics interplay in as open, honest, and above all reflexive a way as possible. Until and unless that happens, we can confidently expect to remain marginal, dismissed in terms of research or practice, and slightly odd.

That's what I think here in the south-west of England, anyway... scott

Scott Taylor (Dr), senior lecturer in leadership studies
Centre for Leadership Studies, University of Exeter Business School, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4PU, UK
scott.taylor@exeter.ac.uk; +44 (0)1392 722569

I have noticed with great interest the flood of emails regarding the caucuses proposed for AOM this year. I support these-I think they are interesting and certainly valuable. Those of you who know me recognize that these issues are personally very interesting to me-sometimes more personally interesting than research.

But being a member of MSR has never been about my personal interests, but about my professional interests. As I read the flurry of emails, I could not help but reflect that I see an historically ongoing and enormous inconsistency between AOM's mission and what seems to excite this group. I've been on this listserve for many years and the only time I see a flood of emails is when there is a non-research issue arising-generally issues of spiritual practice superimposed on an organizational topic.

Before you send hate mail, please realize that I 1) respect that people's values and interests are their own, and I fully support everyone doing what they love, 2) am in no way questioning the inherent quality or value of non-research interests, and 3) in no way want to suggest that we should restrict or exclude any non-research issues in MSR.

What I am suggesting is that there is a serious  and continued disconnect with AOM as a scholarly organization and a venue for teaching and scholarship. We operate within an Academy that values research, yet I see the collective juices flowing in this listserve only when practice is discussed. What does this say about the driving concerns of this group-and our ability to become a division in an Academy that values research above everything? It cannot bode well.

I think that we need to consider this carefully as we continue.  While practice and research are not inconsistent, in MSR it seems that the interest in them is asymmetrical. Practice is critical to those in the psychology of religion as well, but that group is driven by an equally important focus on impeccable scholarship and theoretical development. Their practices inform their scholarship and are often the motivating force in the development of respected, ongoing research programs. They, too, are in a research academy, the American Psychological Association, and have been welcomed in it due to their rigorous investigations-not because of their personal practices.

 I sense that our group does not have the same interests in research.  I'd very much like to hear whether others in the group agree.

Best regards,

Bob

--
Robert A. Giacalone, Ph.D.
Editor, Journal of Management Spirituality and Religion
Professor of Human Resource Management
Fox School Of Business and Management
Temple University
Alter Hall
1801 Liacouras Walk
Philadelphia PA 19122

When your hourglass runs out of sand, you can't flip it over and start again.
Kenny Chesney

But don't be fooled by the radio
The TV or the magazines
They show you photographs of how your life should be,
But they're just someone else's fantasy.

Dennis DeYoung

_______________________________________________________________________ To send a message to the MSR Listserv, please send your email to: MSR@AOMLISTS.pace.edu To visit the Academy's MSR Web site, please visit: http://group.aomonline.org/msr/ To manage you MSR Listserv subscription, please visit: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=MSR&A=1

I have noticed with great interest the flood of emails regarding the caucuses proposed for AOM this year. I support these-I think they are interesting and certainly valuable. Those of you who know me recognize that these issues are personally very interesting to me-sometimes more personally interesting than research.

 

But being a member of MSR has never been about my personal interests, but about my professional interests. As I read the flurry of emails, I could not help but reflect that I see an historically ongoing and enormous inconsistency between AOM's mission and what seems to excite this group. I've been on this listserve for many years and the only time I see a flood of emails is when there is a non-research issue arising-generally issues of spiritual practice superimposed on an organizational topic.

 

Before you send hate mail, please realize that I 1) respect that people's values and interests are their own, and I fully support everyone doing what they love, 2) am in no way questioning the inherent quality or value of non-research interests, and 3) in no way want to suggest that we should restrict or exclude any non-research issues in MSR.

 

What I am suggesting is that there is a serious  and continued disconnect with AOM as a scholarly organization and a venue for teaching and scholarship. We operate within an Academy that values research, yet I see the collective juices flowing in this listserve only when practice is discussed. What does this say about the driving concerns of this group-and our ability to become a division in an Academy that values research above everything? It cannot bode well.

 

I think that we need to consider this carefully as we continue.  While practice and research are not inconsistent, in MSR it seems that the interest in them is asymmetrical. Practice is critical to those in the psychology of religion as well, but that group is driven by an equally important focus on impeccable scholarship and theoretical development. Their practices inform their scholarship and are often the motivating force in the development of respected, ongoing research programs. They, too, are in a research academy, the American Psychological Association, and have been welcomed in it due to their rigorous investigations-not because of their personal practices.

 

 I sense that our group does not have the same interests in research.  I'd very much like to hear whether others in the group agree.

 

Best regards,

 

Bob

--
Robert A. Giacalone, Ph.D.
Editor, Journal of Management Spirituality and Religion
Professor of Human Resource Management
Fox School Of Business and Management
Temple University
Alter Hall
1801 Liacouras Walk
Philadelphia PA 19122

When your hourglass runs out of sand, you can't flip it over and start again.
Kenny Chesney

But don't be fooled by the radio
The TV or the magazines
They show you photographs of how your life should be,
But they're just someone else's fantasy.

Dennis DeYoung

_______________________________________________________________________ To send a message to the MSR Listserv, please send your email to: MSR@AOMLISTS.pace.edu To visit the Academy's MSR Web site, please visit: http://group.aomonline.org/msr/ To manage you MSR Listserv subscription, please visit: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=MSR&A=1

Hi Matthew,

THX for your comments – and may I add an "amen." Again, being the opportunist (and insomniac) that I am, I'd like to add two more thoughts:

-          Caucuses: I personally do not see any dichotomy between caucuses and the aims of rigorous scholarship. Rather, I believe that, in embracing the concept of a caucus, the Academy has recognized its integral value to advancing the cause of (more good) scholarship, as noted in the 2011 Caucus Chair's message:

"Dear Academy of Management Member....I am calling for proposals for this year's Caucus Program. Caucus sessions are designed to provide a convenient, informal way for Academy members with shared interests to discuss common issues, and to explore potential research collaborations." [bold and italics added]

My personal hope is that the caucuses this year will lead to an increase in scholarly papers and publications the following year (when I am chair J) and beyond – which leads me to my next opportunistic comment....

-          Division status: As Bob alluded to in his original note, for many of us, (one of) the next natural steps in the progression of MSR's status within the Academy is (re)applying for division status. If my calcs are correct, our next 5 year Interest Group review will occur around the 2012-13 timeframe....This may seem like a long way off, but time passes quickly. During our last review, we simultaneously applied for division status and received valuable guidance from the Academy on the requirements. While MSR seems to be on the right trajectory, especially of late, I'd like to reinforce a sense of urgency to continue accelerating the quantity and quality of our scholarship, a core review item. I know that the MSR Executive Committee has already begun initiating preparations to project-manage the review process, but it will ultimately require the engagement of every MSR member. I am sure this will be a topic of great interest during our MSR Business Meeting this year and encourage everyone to attend....

My 2 cents for today....THX! A

PS My thoughts and prayers are with all who have been affected by the recent quakes and tsunamis around the globe (NZ, Japan, Hawaii, etc.)....We are under a tsunami warning here on West Coast US....back to the news alerts....

From: Management, Spirituality & Religion [mailto:MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mathew Sheep
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 7:03 AM
To: MSR@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Subject: Re: Caucuses and Research

I have followed with great interest the conversation on this topic, as I noted what seemed to be a flow of traffic concerning caucuses and an emergent regional gathering that I had not seen in prior years or on any of the other Academy listserves to which I subscribe (OB, OMT, LDRNET, etc.).  Anything that veers from a usual pattern is not necessarily problematic, but it does increase its salience.

I would humbly add the following considerations to the discussion so far:

1.  How is a theoretical domain developed in the social sciences?  If one were to follow the histories of the development of theories, for example, in the domains of emotion, contemporary leadership theories (e.g., complexity theory), motivation, job attitudes and behaviors-or for that matter, spirituality as theorized in psychology and sociology-one would find rigorously developed and simultaneously creative (highly generative and relevant) streams that constitute a highly scholarly "conversation." 

While almost everything that we study in organizational behavior is by definition experiential (hence the nearly universal applicability of Kolb's learning model in our pedagogy), ideas are not developed as a scientific body of knowledge in such a way.  First, the hard work needs to be done to establish the theoretical basis to prescribe validated and replicated research findings that have been subjected to critical scrutiny.  Frankly, I would not feel ethically comfortable myself (nor would I understand those who do) in prescribing and recommending managerial "solutions" as paths for the future based on anything less. 

2.  We each possess (and I would heartily support and defend) what I consider to be an inalienable human right and freedom to hold and value our anecdotal experiences and personal beliefs/practices that we have personally chosen.  I also optimistically assume that most people will want to choose in such a way that benefits individual, organizational, and societal well-being, or at least "do no harm" to it.  However, we cannot in good conscience co-opt a mantle of academic and scholarly legitimacy until we have earned and demonstrated it in such a way ourselves.  We certainly cannot (and hopefully would not want to) prescribe our spiritual "solutions" to organizations on anecdotal or ideological grounds, but rather on a coherent stream of evidence-based scholarship (and that is what the Academy is all about). 

3.  If we do not hold to that philosophy of science (or to any extant, recognizable philosophy of science or research paradigm), then perhaps we should revisit why MSR desires to conduct its activities under the mantle of the Academy of Management in the first place. If that is not what some in MSR want to be about, then those individuals or groups might perhaps establish alternative venues with differently stated purposes-which seems to be a recently emergent phenomenon. I think this is an honest move. 

If we somehow fancy ourselves to be some sort of Kuhnian revolutionary paradigm shift that is not answerable to ANY extant research paradigm (and I certainly do not hold that view), then it will nevertheless be through rigorous scholarly evidence that makes it happen, not anecdotal experience or personal ideology or practice.  (I hope you understand that I nonetheless personally value spiritual practice and experience highly-that's not the point at all).

4.  If we intend to demonstrate the relevance of spirituality to the management discipline, then we must be seen as highly conversant in, grounded in, relevant to, and speaking the language understood by those with whom we are communicating.  We must be much less about advocating "what WE have to say" but much more about what the accumulated and ongoing evidence of our research findings say coherently-within a culture of rigorous, evidence-based scholarship.

5.   Perhaps it would be a constructive exercise and dialogue for all of us to be re-familiarize ourselves with the governance, mission, vision, and values of the Academy itself:  http://www.aomonline.org/aom.asp?ID=&page_ID=49.  The focus for academic and practitioner members alike in these statements is an interest in and practice of discipline-based and evidence-based scholarship--academic research.  That is what the Academy values, and it is the way that emergent theoretical streams such as ours eventually reach division status within the Academy (and, more importantly, perceived and actual relevance to the management discipline in general).

I humbly offer all of the above as my own opinions for your consideration and conversation, not as undeniable or undebatable assertions.  However, I think they are worth discussing seriously.

Mathew 

_______________________________________________________________________ To send a message to the MSR Listserv, please send your email to: MSR@AOMLISTS.pace.edu To visit the Academy's MSR Web site, please visit: http://group.aomonline.org/msr/ To manage you MSR Listserv subscription, please visit: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=MSR&A=1