2021/08/02 by Garry D. Bruton, Shaker A. Zahra, Andrew H. Van de Ven +1 · 191 citations
Business, Management and Accounting · Psychology · Social Sciences · #Computer science #Economics #Epistemology #Global and Cross-Cultural Management #Ideology #Indigenous #Law #Law and economics #Management Theory and Practice #Management and Organizational Studies #Optimal distinctiveness theory #Perspective (graphical) #Political science #Positive economics #Psychology #Relevance (law) #Social psychology #Sociology
paper · doi:10.1111/joms.12755
published in Journal of Management Studies 59(4), 1057-1073 (Wiley)
openalex publication_date 2021/08/02 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/26
Abstract Management theories developed in the United States and Europe have dominated management and organizational studies. As a result, scholars often overlook subtle cultural and ideological differences in other settings as they treat the theories from the United States and Europe as universal. All too often, as they attempt to apply these theories, scholars ignore critical research questions relevant to groups of people outside the United States and Europe. To overcome this shortcoming, Filatotchev, Ireland, and Stahl (in this issue) propose an open systems perspective that draws on multiple universal theories. Instead, we argue that such a solution does not address the fundamental problem of theories framed within the United States and European perspective. Using more of these theories does not solve this problem and may even exacerbate it. We argue, rather than simply placing bandages on existing theories, scholars should develop indigenous theory based on the distinctiveness of local contexts. The use of indigenous theory can also spur innovations in research methods, enhancing the rigor and relevance of findings.