Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Philosophy of Management Between Scientism and Technology

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Philosophy & Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article addresses the difficulty in pursuing a philosophical engagement with management without falling into the trap of scientism. It also explores the option to turn management theorists away from science to seek insights from technology. The article is organized in four parts: a preliminary discussion on management from a philosophical viewpoint, a crucial distinction between philosophy of management as a mode of inquiry and a field of study, an analysis of the risk of scientism in the current philosophical work on management, and an initial inspection across the waters separating management and philosophy of technology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agamben, G. (2011). The kingdom and the glory: for a theological genealogy of economy and government, tr. Lorenzo Chiesa, Matteo Mandarini. Stanford: Stanford University Press; Il regno e la gloria: Per una genealogia teologica dell’economia e del governo, Neri Pozza, 2007.

  • Alvesson, M., Bridgman, T. and Willmott, H. (eds). (2009). Oxford handbook of critical management studies. Oxford University Press.

  • Aristotle (1945). Aristotle’s politics. In J. A. Smith and W.D. Ross (Eds). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  • Arjoon, S. (2010). An Aristotelian-Thomistic approach to management practice. Philosophy of Management, 9(2), 47–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barley, S. R. (1983). Semiotics and the study of occupational and organizational cultures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 393–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L., & Cahill, G. (2007). Measure less, succeed more: a Zen approach to organizational balance and effectiveness. Philosophy of Management, 6(1), 147–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bathurst, R. (2009). Enlivening management practice through aesthetic engagement: Vico, Baumgarten and Kant. Philosophy of Management, 7(2), 61–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjee, A. (ed.) (2017). Ancient philosophies. Philosophy of Management 16(1).

  • Bhattacharjee, A., McKenna, B. and Ray, S. (eds.) (2016). Indian philosophical issues - relevance to contemporary management. Philosophy of Management 15(1).

  • Bucheli, M. and Wadhwani, R. D. (eds.). (2014). Organizations in time: history, theory, methods. Oxford University Press.

  • Burrell, G. (1988). Modernism, post modernism and organizational analysis 2: the contribution of Michel Foucault. Organization Studies, 9(2), 221–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coeckelbergh, M. (2015). Money machines: electronic financial technologies, distancing, and responsibility in global finance. Ashgate.

  • Cooper, R. (1989). Modernism, post-modernism and organizational analysis 3: the contribution of Jacques Derrida. Organization Studies, 10(4), 479–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czarniawska, B. (1999). Writing management organization theory as a literary genre. Oxford University Press.

  • Czarniawska, B. (2007). A four times told tale: combining narrative and scientific knowledge in organization studies. In S. Minahan and J.W. Cox (Eds), The aesthetic turn in management. Ashgate.

  • Darwin, J. (2010). Kuhn vs. Popper vs. Lakatos vs. Feyerabend: contested terrain or fruitful collaboration? Philosophy of Management, 9(1), 39–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dibben, M. R. (2009). Exploring Whitehead’s understanding of organizations: moving beyond the organising experience of individual managers. Philosophy of Management, 7(2), 13–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dibben, M., & Sheard, S. (2013). Reason in practice: a unique role for a ‘Philosophy of management’. Philosophy of Management, 11(3), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, D. (2003). Critical management studies and the ‘Academy of Management Journal’: challenges and counterchallenges. Academy of Management Journal, 46(4), 390–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, N. (1997). Virtual history: towards a “chaotic” theory of the past. In N. Ferguson (Ed), Virtual history: alternatives and counterfactuals: 1–90. Papermac.

  • Fontrodona, J., & Mele, D. (2002). Philosophy as a base for management: an Aristotelian integrative proposal. Philosophy of Management, 2(2), 3–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (2003). Society must be defended. New York: Picador.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, G. (2014). Rethinking management scholarship. Academy of Management Journal, 57(1), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grey, C., & Sinclair, A. (2006). Writing differently. Organization, 13(3), 443–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griseri, P. (2011). Editorial: foundations and processes. Philosophy of Management, 10(2), 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griseri, P. (2013). An introduction to the philosophy of management. SAGE Publications Limited.

  • Hamel, G. (2011). Management 2.0. Wall Street Journal. February 17.

  • Hatch, M. J. (2006). Organization theory: modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. Oxford University Press.

  • Hillman, A. (2011). Editor’s comments: what is the future of theory? Academic of Management Review, 36(4), 606–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jay, A. (1971). Corporation man. Random House.

  • Kessels, J. (2001). Socrates comes to market. Philosophy of Management, 1(1), 49–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kieser, A. (1994). Crossroads - why organization theory needs historical analysis - and how this should be performed. Organization Science, 5(4), 608–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkeby, O.F. (2000). Management philosophy: a radical-normative perspective. Springer-Verlag.

  • Krentz, A. A., & Malloy, D. C. (2005). Opening people to possibilities: a Heideggerian approach to leadership. Philosophy of Management, 5(1), 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macaulay, M., & Lawton, A. (2003). Misunderstanding Machiavelli in management: metaphor, analogy and historical method. Philosophy of Management, 3(3), 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minahan, S. and J.W. Cox (eds.). (2007). The aesthetic turn in management. Ashgate.

  • Mintzberg, H. (2009). America’s monumental failure of management. Globe and Mail. March 16, p. A13.

  • Ossewaarde, M. (2017). ‘Crises of modernity’ discourses and the rise of financial technologies in a contested mechanized world. Philosophy and Technology, 30(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N. (1995). Telling organizational tales: on the role of narrative fiction in the study of organizations. Organization Studies, 16(4), 625–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Postman, N. (1993). Teechnopoly: the surrender of culture to technology. Vintage.

  • Rehn, A., & Taalas, S. (2009). On Wittgenstein and management at rest: prolegomena to a philosophy of problems. Philosophy of Management, 7(2), 89–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rooney, D., & McKenna, B. (2007). Wisdom in organizations: whence and whither. Social Epistemology, 21(2), 113–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rooney, D., McKenna, B., and P. Liesch. (2010). Wisdom and management in the knowledge economy. Routledge.

  • Ross, D., Ladyman, J., and Spurrett, D. (2007). In J. Ladyman (Ed), Every thing must go: metaphysics naturalized. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass.

  • Schmitt, Carl. (2005). Political theology: four chapters on the concept of sovereignty. Translated and with an introduction by G. Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Sheard, S. (2009). Strategy as a feature of reflective action: Edmund Husserl’s theories as a temporal model of organisational identity. Philosophy of Management, 7(2), 25–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenhav, Y. (2003). The historical and epistemological foundations of organization theory: fusing sociological theory with engineering discourse. In H. Tsoukas and C. Knudsen (Eds), The Oxford handbook of organization theory. Oxford University Press.

  • Styhre, A. (2004). Thinking driven by doubt and passion: Kierkegaard and reflexivity in organization studies. Philosophy of Management, 4(2), 9–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51(2), 273–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, R. (2010). What is the relevance of Karl Popper’s critical rationalism to management studies and practice? Philosophy of Management, 9(1), 5–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Üsdiken, B., & Kieser, A. (2004). Introduction: history in organisation studies. Business History, 46(3), 321–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viana, D. (2016). Two technical images: blockchain and high-frequency trading. Philosophy and Technology, 29(4), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vissing, L. (2004). A philosopher in public management In P. Gagliardi and B. Czarniawska (Eds), Management education and humanities. Edward Elgar.

  • Whitley, R. (1984a). The fragmented state of management studies. Reasons and consequences. Journal of Management Studies, 21(3), 331–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, R. (1984b). The scientific status of management research as a practically oriented social science. Journal of Management Studies, 21(4), 369–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witzel, M. (2012). A history of management. Routledge.

  • Wren, D. A. (2004). The history of management thought. Wiley.

  • Wren, D. A., & Badeian, A. G. (2008). The evolution of management thought. Wiley.

  • Zald, M. N. (1993). Organization studies as a scientific and humanistic enterprise - toward a reconceptualization of the foundations of the field. Organization Science, 4(4), 513–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zald, M. N. (1996). More fragmentation? Unfinished business in linking the social sciences and the humanities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2), 251–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

A preliminary version of this paper was presented at the 12th Annual Conference of Philosophy of Management, St. Louis, Missouri, July 13–16, 2017. I thank John Orr, Paulina Segarra, Ajnesh Prasad, and Steven Segal for their valuable comments. I am indebted to two anonymous reviewers of an earlier version of this paper for providing insightful comments and directions for additional work which has resulted in this improved version.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Notre Dame de Namur University, Belmont, CA, USA

    Enrico Beltramini

Authors
  1. Enrico Beltramini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Enrico Beltramini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Beltramini, E. Philosophy of Management Between Scientism and Technology. Philos. Technol. 32, 535–548 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0314-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0314-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation