Abstract
In commenting Meyer’s article “Asian management research needs more self-confidence” in APJM (2006), Yang and Terjesen (Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(4):497–507, 2007) described ground realities in Australia that may have inhibited the development of a robust management research community. As an Australia-trained and Australia-based Asian management scholar, I extend the “P” perspective by exploring how the formal and informal institutions interact in shaping Australia-based scholars’ publication strategies and research performance. Reflecting on my experience in Australia, I argue that like in any other businesses, institutions matter in our business of research and publication. They matter because they can shape the local “rule of the game” within which a country’s or a region’s scholars conduct and publish their research. A full institutional account of the current state of management research in the Asia Pacific region requires a deeper understanding of both formal and informal local institutions. From such an institutional perspective, this commentary concentrates on why Australian management research lags behind that in the US and Europe and yet leads the Asia Pacific region.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Au, K. 2007. Self-confidence does not come isolated from the environment. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(4): 491–496.
Butler, L. 2003. Academic reactions: Modifying publication practices in response to funding formulas. Research Evaluation, 12(1): 39–46.
Czinkota, M. R., Ronkainen, I. A., & Moffett, M. H. 2002. International business. Singapore: Thomson Learning.
Harzing, A.-W. 2005. Australian research output in economics and business: High volume, low impact. Australian Journal of Management, 30(2): 183–200.
Hofstede, G. 1984. Cultural dimensions in management and planning. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1(2): 81–99.
Meyer, K. E. 2006. Asian management research needs more self-confidence. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23: 119–137.
Meyer, K. E. 2007. Asian context and the research for general theory: A rejoinder. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(4): 527–534.
Mudambi, R., Peng, M. W., & Weng, D. H. 2008. Research rankings of Asia Pacific business schools: Global versus local knowledge strategies. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25 (in press).
Peng, M. W. 2003. Institutional transitions and strategic choices. Academy of Management Review, 28(2): 275–296.
Peng, M. W. 2007. Celebrating 25 years of Asia Pacific management research. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(4): 385–393.
Puffer, S. M., & McCarthy, D. J. 2007. Does Asian management research needs more self-confidence? Reflections from Russia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(4): 509–518.
Ramaswamy, K. 2007. Asian management research needs broader initiatives and focused incentives. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(4): 519–526.
Yang, X., & Terjesen, S. 2007. In search of confidence: Context, collaboration, and constraints. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 24(4): 497–507.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The author would like to thank Editor-in-Chief Mike Peng for the opportunity to write this commentary.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, Y. Extending the “P” perspective: An institutional account of management research in Australia. Asia Pac J Manag 26, 353–360 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-008-9091-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-008-9091-6