Paradigms lost: integrating history and organization studies

Stephanie D. Decker*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


This article reviews recent attempts at mapping research paradigms in Management and Organizational History and argues that the old distinctions between supplementarist, integrationist, and reorientationist approaches have been superseded by attempts at integrating historical research in organization studies. A typology of these integrationist approaches differentiates between pluralist and unitary integration, as well as between models based on either historical theory or organization theory. Each has distinct weaknesses and strengths, but essentially all limit their integration of historical research paradigms to only a few. As a result, there is a danger that history might become reduced to a methodology, an empirical endeavor, narrative representations, or indeed be considered the subject of research rather than a research approach in its own right. I argue that all of these present an impoverished picture of the rich research traditions available in the discipline of history, which has unique insights and approaches to offer to the study of organizations.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)364-379
JournalManagement and Organizational History
Issue number4
Early online date5 Dec 2016
Publication statusPublished - 31 Dec 2016

Bibliographical note

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in on 5/12/16, available online:


  • historic turn
  • paradigm maps
  • integrationist MOH
  • history and organization studies
  • historical theory


Dive into the research topics of 'Paradigms lost: integrating history and organization studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this