LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Butler, Michael J. R.; Lee, Nick; Senior, Carl (2017)
Publisher: Sage Publications Ltd.
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: HD28, QP
In this critical essay, we respond to Lindebaum’s (2016) argument that neuroscientific methodologies and data have been accepted prematurely in proposing novel management theory. We acknowledge that building new management theories requires firm foundations. We also find his distinction between demand and supply side forces helpful as an analytical framework identifying the momentum for the contemporary production of management theory. Nevertheless, some of the arguments Lindebaum (2016) puts forward, on closer inspection, can be contested, especially those related to the supply side of organizational cognitive neuroscience (OCN) research: fMRI data, motherhood statements and ethical concerns. We put forward a more positive case for OCN methodologies and data, as well as clarifying exactly what OCN really means, and its consequences for the development of strong management theory.
  • No references.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article