Morrell, K. and Learmonth, M. and Heracleous, L. (2015) 'An archaeological critique of 'evidence-based management' : one digression after another.', British journal of management., 26 (3). pp. 529-543.
Fundamental problems remain with evidence-based management. We argue that, rather than being addressed, these problems are treated as digressions. One explanation for this is an ongoing incoherence: the evidence-based approach relegates narrative to a ghetto category of knowledge, but it is itself a narrative. Moreover, while this narrative is becoming more polished through repetition and selective assimilation of critique, it is also becoming simplified and less interesting. A Foucauldian, archaeological analysis accounts for this development by locating evidence-based management in a broader historical context. This analysis shows how the roots of incoherence can be informed by older exchanges between evidence and narrative.
|Full text:||(AM) Accepted Manuscript|
Download PDF (446Kb)
|Publisher Web site:||https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12109|
|Publisher statement:||This is the accepted version of the following article: Morrell, K., Learmonth, M. and Heracleous, L. (2015), An Archaeological Critique of ‘Evidence-based Management’: One Digression After Another. British Journal of Management, 26(3): 529-543, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12109. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.|
|Date accepted:||No date available|
|Date deposited:||09 February 2015|
|Date of first online publication:||19 March 2015|
|Date first made open access:||19 March 2017|
Save or Share this output
|Look up in GoogleScholar|