An Archaeological Critique of 'Evidence‐based Management': One Digression After Another. (19th March 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Morrell, Kevin; Learmonth, Mark; Heracleous, Loizos
• Is Part Of: British journal of management. Volume 26:Number 3(2015:Sep.)
• Page Start: 529
• Page End: 543
• Publication Date: 2015-03-19
• Subjects: Management -- Periodicals; 658.00941
• DOI: 10.1111/1467-8551.12109
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1045-3172

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <p>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.</p> </abstract>