Critical Essay: Organizational cognitive neuroscience drives theoretical progress, or: The curious case of the straw man murder: organizational cognitive neuroscience drives theoretical progress, or: The curious case of the straw man murder

Michael J.R. Butler*, Nick Lee, Carl Senior

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In this critical essay, we respond to Lindebaum’s (2016) argument that neuroscientific methodologies and data have been accepted prematurely in proposing novel management theory. We acknowledge that building new management theories requires firm foundations. We also find his distinction between demand and supply side forces helpful as an analytical framework identifying the momentum for the contemporary production of management theory. Nevertheless, some of the arguments Lindebaum (2016) puts forward, on closer inspection, can be contested, especially those related to the supply side of organizational cognitive neuroscience (OCN) research: fMRI data, motherhood statements and ethical concerns. We put forward a more positive case for OCN methodologies and data, as well as clarifying exactly what OCN really means, and its consequences for the development of strong management theory.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1171-1190
Number of pages20
JournalHuman Relations
Volume70
Issue number10
Early online date2 Feb 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2017

Fingerprint

neurosciences
homicide
management
supply
new building
methodology
motherhood
Momentum
Inspection
Cognitive Neuroscience
Straw Man
Murder
Management theory
Neuroscience
demand
Methodology
Supply side

Keywords

  • management
  • methodology
  • organizational cognitive neuroscience
  • practice
  • theory

Cite this

@article{6205285c754743dea3c07362131a78af,
title = "Critical Essay: Organizational cognitive neuroscience drives theoretical progress, or: The curious case of the straw man murder: organizational cognitive neuroscience drives theoretical progress, or: The curious case of the straw man murder",
abstract = "In this critical essay, we respond to Lindebaum’s (2016) argument that neuroscientific methodologies and data have been accepted prematurely in proposing novel management theory. We acknowledge that building new management theories requires firm foundations. We also find his distinction between demand and supply side forces helpful as an analytical framework identifying the momentum for the contemporary production of management theory. Nevertheless, some of the arguments Lindebaum (2016) puts forward, on closer inspection, can be contested, especially those related to the supply side of organizational cognitive neuroscience (OCN) research: fMRI data, motherhood statements and ethical concerns. We put forward a more positive case for OCN methodologies and data, as well as clarifying exactly what OCN really means, and its consequences for the development of strong management theory.",
keywords = "management, methodology, organizational cognitive neuroscience, practice, theory",
author = "Butler, {Michael J.R.} and Nick Lee and Carl Senior",
year = "2017",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0018726716684381",
language = "English",
volume = "70",
pages = "1171--1190",
journal = "Human Relations",
issn = "0018-7267",
publisher = "SAGE",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Critical Essay: Organizational cognitive neuroscience drives theoretical progress, or: The curious case of the straw man murder

T2 - organizational cognitive neuroscience drives theoretical progress, or: The curious case of the straw man murder

AU - Butler, Michael J.R.

AU - Lee, Nick

AU - Senior, Carl

PY - 2017/10/1

Y1 - 2017/10/1

N2 - In this critical essay, we respond to Lindebaum’s (2016) argument that neuroscientific methodologies and data have been accepted prematurely in proposing novel management theory. We acknowledge that building new management theories requires firm foundations. We also find his distinction between demand and supply side forces helpful as an analytical framework identifying the momentum for the contemporary production of management theory. Nevertheless, some of the arguments Lindebaum (2016) puts forward, on closer inspection, can be contested, especially those related to the supply side of organizational cognitive neuroscience (OCN) research: fMRI data, motherhood statements and ethical concerns. We put forward a more positive case for OCN methodologies and data, as well as clarifying exactly what OCN really means, and its consequences for the development of strong management theory.

AB - In this critical essay, we respond to Lindebaum’s (2016) argument that neuroscientific methodologies and data have been accepted prematurely in proposing novel management theory. We acknowledge that building new management theories requires firm foundations. We also find his distinction between demand and supply side forces helpful as an analytical framework identifying the momentum for the contemporary production of management theory. Nevertheless, some of the arguments Lindebaum (2016) puts forward, on closer inspection, can be contested, especially those related to the supply side of organizational cognitive neuroscience (OCN) research: fMRI data, motherhood statements and ethical concerns. We put forward a more positive case for OCN methodologies and data, as well as clarifying exactly what OCN really means, and its consequences for the development of strong management theory.

KW - management

KW - methodology

KW - organizational cognitive neuroscience

KW - practice

KW - theory

UR - http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0018726716684381

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027703117&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0018726716684381

DO - 10.1177/0018726716684381

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85027703117

VL - 70

SP - 1171

EP - 1190

JO - Human Relations

JF - Human Relations

SN - 0018-7267

IS - 10

ER -