From Positivism to Pragmatism A Systematic Literature Review of Philosophical Paradigms in Management Science
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study examines the philosophical foundations of management science through a systematic literature review of 25 journal articles published between 2015 and 2025. The background of this research is the growing complexity of organizational challenges and the need for clearer research paradigms in management studies. Many management studies focus on methods and results, but often do not clearly explain the philosophical assumptions behind them. Therefore, this study aims to identify the dominant research paradigms in management, analyze how these paradigms influence research methods, and understand their contribution to theory and practice. Using a qualitative systematic review approach, the selected articles were analyzed based on ontology, epistemology, methodology, and axiology. The results show that positivism and post-positivism still dominate, especially in strategic management, finance, and risk management research. However, interpretivism, critical realism, critical theory, and pragmatism are increasingly used in studies related to leadership, sustainability, governance, and innovation. The findings indicate a shift toward methodological pluralism and a stronger awareness of ethical and contextual issues in management research. This study concludes that understanding philosophical foundations is important to ensure theoretical clarity, methodological consistency, and practical relevance in management science.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
[1] S. Dzreke, “Adapt or perish: How dynamic capabilities fuel digital transformation in traditional industries,” Advanced Research Journal, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 67–90, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.71350/3062192584.
[2] M. Jiménez-Partearroyo and A. Medina-López, “Leveraging Business Intelligence Systems for Enhanced Corporate Competitiveness: Strategy and Evolution,” Systems, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 94, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.3390/systems12030094.
[3] M. Cristofaro and P. L. Giardino, “Surfing the AI waves: the historical evolution of artificial intelligence in management and organizational studies and practices,” Journal of Management History, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1108/JMH-01-2025-0002.
[4] T. Peng, C. Wang, J. Xu, J. Dai, and T. Yu, “Evolution and Current Research Status of Educational Leadership Theory: A Content Analysis-Based Study,” Sage Open, vol. 14, no. 3, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1177/21582440241285763.
[5] F. Imran, K. Shahzad, A. Butt, and J. Kantola, “Digital Transformation of Industrial Organizations: Toward an Integrated Framework,” Journal of Change Management, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 451–479, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1080/14697017.2021.1929406.
[6] D. D. Bergh, B. M. Sharp, H. Aguinis, and M. Li, “Is there a credibility crisis in strategic management research? Evidence on the reproducibility of study findings,” Strateg. Organ., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 423–436, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1177/1476127017701076.
[7] H. Aguinis, R. S. Ramani, and W. F. Cascio, “Methodological practices in international business research: An after-action review of challenges and solutions,” J. Int. Bus. Stud., vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 1593–1608, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1057/s41267-020-00353-7.
[8] J. Gehman, V. L. Glaser, K. M. Eisenhardt, D. Gioia, A. Langley, and K. G. Corley, “Finding Theory–Method Fit: A Comparison of Three Qualitative Approaches to Theory Building,” Journal of Management Inquiry, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 284–300, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.1177/1056492617706029.
[9] M. J. Reeder et al., “Occupational Contact Dermatitis in Construction Workers: A Retrospective Analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data, 2001–2020,” Dermatitis®, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 467–475, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1089/derm.2024.0018.
[10] E. Vaara and J. Tienar, “A Discursive Perspective on Legitimation Strategies in Multinational Corporations,” Academy of Management Review, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 985–993, Oct. 2008, doi: 10.5465/amr.2008.34422019.
[11] D. A. Shepherd and M. Gruber, “The Lean Startup Framework: Closing the Academic–Practitioner Divide,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 967–998, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1177/1042258719899415.
[12] A. G. Scherer and C. Voegtlin, “Corporate Governance for Responsible Innovation: Approaches to Corporate Governance and Their Implications for Sustainable Development,” Academy of Management Perspectives, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 182–208, May 2020, doi: 10.5465/amp.2017.0175.
[13] J. Gond, L. Cabantous, N. Harding, and M. Learmonth, “What Do We Mean by Performativity in Organizational and Management Theory? The Uses and Abuses of Performativity,” International Journal of Management Reviews, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 440–463, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12074.
[14] M. Blom and M. Alvesson, “All-inclusive and all good: The hegemonic ambiguity of leadership,” Scandinavian Journal of Management, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 480–492, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.scaman.2015.08.001.
[15] P. M. Podsakoff, N. P. Podsakoff, L. J. Williams, C. Huang, and J. Yang, “Common Method Bias: It’s Bad, It’s Complex, It’s Widespread, and It’s Not Easy to Fix,” Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 17–61, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110721-040030.
[16] J. W. Creswell and V. L. Plano Clark, “Revisiting Mixed Methods Research Designs Twenty Years Later,” in The Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods Research Design, 1 Oliver’s Yard, 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP : Sage Publications Ltd, 2023, pp. 21–36. doi: 10.4135/9781529682663.n6.
[17] C. Ansell and A. Boin, “Taming Deep Uncertainty: The Potential of Pragmatist Principles for Understanding and Improving Strategic Crisis Management,” Adm. Soc., vol. 51, no. 7, pp. 1079–1112, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1177/0095399717747655.
[18] John W. Creswell, Research Design Pendekatan Kualitatif, Kuantitatif, dan Mixed. Pustaka Pelajar, 2012.
[19] Q. Xiao and F. L. Cooke, “Contextualizing employee perceptions of human resource management: a review of China‐based literature and future directions,” Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 252–282, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1111/1744-7941.12259.
[20] C. Rhodes, Woke Capitalism. Bristol University Press, 2021. doi: 10.2307/j.ctv21zp20t.
[21] G. C. Banks et al., “Answers to 18 Questions About Open Science Practices,” 2022, pp. 111–124. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-19922-6_7.
[22] A. Mari, F. A. Baker, R. Pellicano, and T. Khoury, “Diagnosis and management of achalasia: Updates of the last two years,” Aug. 02, 2021, MDPI. doi: 10.3390/jcm10163607.
[23] S. Nambisan, M. Wright, and M. Feldman, “The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes,” Res. Policy, vol. 48, no. 8, p. 103773, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.03.018.
[24] E. Akanpaadgi, “Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Practices,” Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, vol. 11, no. 01, pp. 138–146, 2023, doi: 10.4236/jhrss.2023.111009.
[25] S. Giorgi, C. Lockwood, and M. A. Glynn, “The Many Faces of Culture: Making Sense of 30 Years of Research on Culture in Organization Studies,” Acad. Manag. Ann., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–54, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.1080/19416520.2015.1007645.
[26] J. M. Bryson, B. C. Crosby, and L. Bloomberg, “Public Value Governance: Moving Beyond Traditional Public Administration and the New Public Management,” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 74, no. 4, pp. 445–456, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1111/puar.12238.
[27] S. Oreg, J. M. Bartunek, G. Lee, and B. Do, “An Affect-Based Model of Recipients’ Responses to Organizational Change Events,” Academy of Management Review, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 65–86, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.5465/amr.2014.0335.
[28] P. Hallinger and J. Kovačević, “Mapping the intellectual lineage of educational management, administration and leadership, 1972–2020,” Educational Management Administration & Leadership, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 192–216, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.1177/17411432211006093.
[29] S. Ramasubramanian, J. M. Riles, and O. O. Banjo, “Culture Counts,” in The Handbook of Critical Intercultural Communication, Wiley, 2023, pp. 395–405. doi: 10.1002/9781119745426.ch27.
[30] A. L. Cunliffe and S. Ivaldi, “Embedded ethics and reflexivity: narrating a charter of ethical experience,” Manag. Learn., vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 294–310, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1177/1350507620960014.
[31] J. Machnik, Ł. Bryl, J. M. Fryczak, and D. Hadro, “Communicating strategic change in social media: lessons from the world’s largest ICT companies,” in Strategic Response to Turbulence, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2025, pp. 103–117. doi: 10.4337/9781035340408.00014.
[32] Md. A. Babu et al., “A Firm’s Market Performance: How Does Sustainability Practice Influence It?,” ECONOMICS, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 267–287, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.2478/eoik-2025-0020.
[33] I. Sadad and G. A. Sangidana, “Analisis Pengaruh Manajemen Konstruksi dalam Penanganan Keterlambatan pada Proyek Konstruksi,” 2024.