Organizational analysis in North America and Europe: a comparison of co-citation networks

Organization Studies, Summer, 1995 by Behlul Usdiken, Yorgo Pasadeos

Abstract

Over the last decade, the field of organization studies has been characterized by a proliferation of divergent perspectives. Using bibliometric techniques, this paper examines the extent to which this state of differentiation may be associated with regional differences in scholarly orientation, specifically, between North America and Europe. The study is based on citation and co-citation analyses of articles published by North American authors in Administrative Science Quarterly and by European authors in Organization Studies in the three-year period from 1990 to 1992. Results do show that there is divergence in the perspectives that are currently dominant in Europe and North America, and, to some degree between Britain and elsewhere in Europe. The discussion section elaborates on the nature of the differences in orientation and speculates on factors that may have fostered and helped to maintain this divergence. Descriptors: comparative organization theory, co-citation analysis

Most Popular: The Five Levels Of Leadership; Bet Your Excel Spreadsheet Can't Do This - Align IT and Business with Demand Management; 13 Job Interview Mistakes To Avoid; 3 Questions No Job Seeker Ever Wants To Be Asked?; Announcement Of Termination Of Employee

Introduction

Every once in a while, the focus of scholarship within a discipline turns to the literature itself as the particular topic of investigation. A discipline normally grows around a core of publications disseminating research findings, which, in turn provide inspiration for further. research. Thus, over the years, a field of study develops a body of literature which can itself be investigated to ascertain patterns of disciplinary growth, the advent of various schools of thought and the building of a knowledge base. For the field of organizational analysis, the 1960s was a period of expansion culminating in what some would be inclined to identify as the establishment of organization theory as a separate discipline. The 1970s saw the consolidation of open systems and contingency theory with its claims towards synthesis (Miner 1984; Mealiea and Lee 1979; Luthans and Stewart 1978; Behling 1978). The same decade, particularly the latter part, also marked the emergence of pioneering work which has led to the development of influential research programmes such as population ecology, the resource dependence perspective, transactions cost, and institutional theory. These new developments, within what has been labelled mainstream organization theory, have been accompanied by alternative formulations which differ in their substantive concerns and epistemological positions. Indeed, the last decade has been a period in which the field of organization studies has been characterized by a proliferation of theoretical perspectives and research orientations. The field now looks much more pluralistic than a decade ago and is replete with controversy and spirited debate engendered by competing paradigms. For some authors, central debates concern issues such as levels of analysis and the role of choice versus environmental determinism (Astley and Van de Ven 1983; Hrebiniak and Joyce 1985). For others, there seems to be more fundamental disagreement over the nature of the phenomenon being studied (Cooper and Burrell 1988; Gergen 1992). What constitutes organization theory or a theory of organization appears to be a matter of controversy. In a somewhat related vein, the previous decade has also evidenced a greater concern with the internationalization of organizational theorizing. Typically, work of this nature (e.g. Hofstede 1983; Boyacigiller and Adler 1991) has been critical of the parochialism of, and the universality assumption inherent in, dominant American-based theories of organization. Against the context of increasing paradigmatic diversity in organizational analysis, there has been a call for greater global sensitivity and theories that would help to integrate thinking on management and organization in different parts of the world (Doktor et al. 1991). In view of this latter theme however, the possibility of a relationship between the recent increase in paradigmatic diversity and international differences in theoretical orientation has received very little research attention. Interestingly, the occasional conjectures which have addressed the possibility of regional differences in theoretical orientation and their contribution to greater paradigmatic diversity seem to arrive at conflicting conclusions. Whitley (1984), for example, whilst acknowledging the dominance of North America in management research at large, has noted that regional or national differentiation is more likely in fields like industrial relations and organizational behaviour. Likewise, Hinings (1988) has suggested that organization theory has been institutionalized as a separate discipline in North America and that alternative paradigms and critical theories are products of European organizational analysis which has not distanced itself from a sociological perspective. Lammers (1990), on the other hand, has argued that there appears to be convergence around core contributions and that intra-national variance is greater than international variance. In a similar vein, based on citation data for the period 1978-1986, Aldrich (1988) concluded that critics of `mainstream' organization theory seemed to have little impact on writings in either North American or European organization theory journals. He did, however, observe that the critics he had singled out for analysis appeared to have some impact on work in applied social science journals published outside North America. The purpose of the present paper is to examine the extent to which current paradigmatic diversity in organizational analysis reflects international differences, specifically between North America and Europe. The study is based on a bibliometric analysis of articles published in the period 1990-1992 in two leading organization theory journals, namely, Administrative Science Quarterly (A.S.Q.) and Organization Studies (O.S.). Bibliometric analysis is a method that can provide valuable information on the theoretical foundations of, and current research activity within a discipline (Sharplin and Mabry 1985; Pasadeos and Renfro 1992). In addition to citation counts, the present study employs a citation indexing procedure known as co-citation analysis Tankard, Chang and Tsang 1984), which can provide a better indication of prevailing orientations in an area of study. Citation counts and co-citation analyses are employed to compare citation frequencies and networks mainly for two categories of articles, namely, contributions of European authors in O.S. and North American authors in A.S.Q.

Featured White Papers

Organizational analysis in North America and Europe: a comparison of co-citation networks

Organization Studies, Summer, 1995 by Behlul Usdiken, Yorgo Pasadeos

Find Research Guides for:

Find Featured Titles for: News

Most Popular Articles in Business

Most Popular Publications in Business