Is Management and Organizational Studies divided into (micro‐)tribes?

Summary, in English

Many claims have been made in the past that Management and Organization Studies (MOS) is becoming increasingly fragmented, and that this fragmentation is causing it to drift into self-reference and irrelevance. Despite the weight of this claim, it has not yet been subjected to a systematic empirical test. This paper addresses this research gap using the tribalization approach and diachronic co-citation analyses. Based on 22,430 papers published in 14 MOS journals between 1980 and 2019, we calculate local and global centrality measures and the flow of cited articles between co-citation communities over time. In addition, we use a node-removal strategy to test whether only ritualized citations ensure MOS cohesion. Rather than tribalization, our results suggest a center–periphery structure. Furthermore, more peripheral papers are integrated into the central co-citation communities, but the lion's share of the flow of cited papers occurs over time to only a small number of large clusters. An increase of fragmentation and crowding-out of smaller clusters in MOS in seen in the polycentrically organized core 2014–2019.

• Author: Oliver Wieczorek; Olof Hallonsten; Fredrik Åström
• Department/s: Organizational Studies; CIRCLE; Information Studies; Department of Scholarly Communication
• Publishing year: 2024
• Language: English
• Pages: 3871-3995
• Publication/Series: Scientometrics
• Volume: 129
• Issue: 7
• Links: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11192-024-05013-3.pdf; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05013-3
• Document type: Journal article
• Publisher: Akademiai Kiado
• Topic: Business Administration
• Status: Published
• ISBN/ISSN/Other: ISSN: 1588-2861