|
| Considerations of Use? | |
|
| No | Yes |
Quest for Fundamental Understanding? | Yes | Pure basic research (Bohr) | Use-inspired basic research (Pasteur) |
No |
| Pure applied research (Edison) | |
For me, the interesting quadrant is the empty one, which consists of research that is neither after fundamental understanding, nor practical applicability. I think most of management research fits in that box.
This is not necessarily intentional, of course. Putatively, management research is supposed to fall in the top left box, or, if things go really well, the top right box. But most of it clearly falls in the left column, and unfortunately not in the top row.
The problem is that the field has become too professionalized. Academics is a career, and it is very similar to cultural industries like music and film in which people work as individuals on one-time projects or products (e.g., songs and films), and hope to get a "hit". If a person does a hit (or especially, several hits), they become stars, celebrities. And this is the principal reward that they are looking for. The problem of course, is that a hit can be hit without being a contribution to fundamental knowledge or to practical application.
