This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Redding, S. G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Comparative Management Theory: Jungle, Zoo or Fossil Bed?

S. Gordon Redding University of Hong Kong Business School, Hong Kong

Earlier reviews of the state of comparative management theory are considered and summarized and lead to the following conclusions: the literature suffers from an excess of simple empirical reportage; theoretical development is weak in the middle ground and at higher levels; there is a bias away from ethnographic work; perspectives tend to be narrow and partial. Some progress is visible as a result of the unifying work of Hofstede but its contribution also entails new avenues of enquiry about the determinants and consequences of culture. Some middle-range theory building is now occurring in specific fields such as expatriation, leadership, and HRM techniques, but it remains tentative. Dilemmas stemming from altern ative frameworks of meaning and complex causation pose severe epistemological challenges and require new approaches to comparison. The economics-based positivist paradigm is seriously inadequate for such challenges, but dangerously imperialist. A new, more theoretically sophisticated, approach is advocated and outlined as a route for progress.

Organization Studies, Vol. 15, No. 3, 323-359 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/017084069401500302


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. Jack International management and ethnography: What and why? Ethnography, September 1, 2007; 8(3): 361 - 372. [PDF]

				B. W. Stening and M. Y. Zhang Methodological Challenges Confronted when Conducting Management Research in China International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, April 1, 2007; 7(1): 121 - 142. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Williamson Forward from a Critique of Hofstede's Model of National Culture Human Relations, November 1, 2002; 55(11): 1373 - 1395. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. Tomlinson and S. Egan Organizational Sensemaking in a Culturally Diverse Setting: Limits to the `Valuing Diversity' Discourse Management Learning, March 1, 2002; 33(1): 79 - 97. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. A. Miller and B. Dev Sharda Organizational Structure in the Middle East: a Comparative Analysis International Journal of Comparative Sociology, January 1, 2000; 41(3-4): 315 - 329. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Dimmock and A. Walker Comparative Educational Administration: Developing a Cross-Cultural Conceptual Framework Educational Administration Quarterly, October 1, 1998; 34(4): 558 - 595. [Abstract]

				B. W. Stening and E. F. Ngan The Cultural Context of Human Resource Management in East Asia Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, January 1, 1997; 35(2): 3 - 15. [Abstract] [PDF]