What is it about?
Fundamental problems remain with evidence-based management. We argue that, rather than being addressed, these problems are treated as digressions. One explanation for this is an ongoing incoherence: the evidence-based approach relegates narrative to a ghetto category of knowledge, but it is itself a narrative. Moreover, while this narrative is becoming more polished through repetition and selective assimilation of critique, it is also becoming simplified and less interesting.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
We locate evidence-based management in a broader historical context. This analysis shows how the roots of incoherence can be informed by older exchanges between evidence and narrative.
Perspectives
This was an exciting and interesting paper to write we bring in ideas from literature and history of science to show problems with the evidence-based approach. We also use novel ways of presenting our criticisms in terms of the screenplay format.
Professor Kevin Morrell
University of Warwick
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: An Archaeological Critique of ‘Evidence-based Management’: One Digression After Another, British Journal of Management, March 2015, Wiley,
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8551.12109.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
