Applicability of Management Theories to Developing Countries: A Synthesis

Zusammenfassung

---

In 1983, Kiggundu/Jorgensen/Hafsi published in ASQ a synthesis on issues related to the applicability of management theories to developing countries. They found that theory was applicable only where the organization could behave as a closed system. The authors argue that isomorphic trends and new theoretical developments support the hypothesis that their findings should not hold anymore. This article reviews 170 articles published in the 1983-2002 period to replicate their study and tests the hypothesis.

Siehe den Gesamtinhalt dieses Dokumentes

Auszug

---

Applicability of Management Theories to Developing Countries: A Synthesis

Applicability of management theories and practices has historically been a major concern of scholars dealing with developing country situations (Hoskisson et al. 2000). Researchers have been debating this issue from divergence, universality, convergence, and situational perspectives. According to the divergence, mostly comparative management literature western management theories stop at the cultural border of each nation. According to this view culture is indeed the main source of management differences between developed and developing countries (Hofstede 1980). Cross-cultural researchers believe that there is no such thing as a universal theory of management (Hofstede 1993, Jaeger 1990). In contrast, those with universal view (Simon 1997) argue that culture does not limit the applicability of management theories and believe that there are similar management practices within organizations all around the world. For example, Mintzberg (1973, 1975) suggested certain universal hypotheses that have been replicated in other studies (Ndiaye et al. 1996). Those with convergence perspective consider the degree of industrialization as the main determinant for applicability of management theories (Lauter 1969). According to convergence view western management theories may not be applicable in developing countries as a result of the technical and economic difficulties in these countries rather than cultural constraints. Situational or contingency theorists, as opposed to universalists, consider different situational factors such as manager's personality, firms' ownership and sector (i.e. private or public), and their hierarchy as the main determinants for the applicability of management theories.

A more detailed analysis of all these perspectives reveals the fact that there has always been ambiguity about whether the primary concern was practice or theory. This is not a trivial issue. Practice is usually situational, affected by the specific conditions and circumstances in which it takes place, which is now a common finding of most of the research in strategy and organization theory, particularly of contingency theory research (Lawrence/Lorsch 1967, Thompson 1967). Applicability of practices is therefore almost a non-issue, the answer being straight-forward. Generations of researchers in cross-cultural management have reported the differences that exist across different cultural settings, while researchers in strategic management and organization theory have regularly reported the various constraints and contingencies that come to bend practices and give them their unique shapes (see in particular Andrews 1987, Oliver 1997, and Roethlisberger 1977).

Applicability of theory is another matter, more relevant to inquiry and only incidentally dealt with in the literature (Farashahi/Hafsi/Molz 2005). It is also a very important matter as dominant theories shape cognitive orientations and, although taken for granted, end up shaping practice (Dacin/Goodstein/Scott 2002). Economic development of countries has traditionally been a challenge to theory. It has often been argued that managing in developing count...

Siehe den Gesamtinhalt dieses Dokumentes

---