Here is some of our research that demonstrate the merits of teaching multiple approaches to management
Dyck, B., K. Walker, F. Starke, and K. Uggerslev, (2012). “Enhancing critical thinking by teaching two distinct approaches to management.” Journal of Education for Business, 87(6): 343-357.
This is the only empirical study we know of that shows how students’ critical thinking ability can be improved within one business course. Although there is some debate in the literature about how to define critical thinking, there is general agreement that it has two components: (1) the ability to think in a logical linear way, and (2) the ability to think meaningfully outside-the-box. Past research suggests that business students are good at the first, but poor at the second in comparison to other students. Teaching multiple approaches to management is well-suited to improve the latter, deeper component of critical thinking. Students who were taught multiple approaches to management improved their critical thinking, compared to students who were taught only a regular approach.
Dyck, B., K. Walker, F. Starke, and K. Uggerslev (2011). “Addressing concerns raised by critics of business schools by teaching multiple approaches to management.” Business and Society Review, 116 (1): 1-27.
Previous research suggests that business students tend to become more materialistic and individualistic during their programs of study. Our study shows how the materialism-individualism scores are reduced for students who learn both mainstream management (emphasis on maximizing profits for shareholders) and an alternative approach to management (emphasis on balancing multiple forms of well-being for multiple stakeholders).
Dyck, B. and R. Kleysen (2001). “Aristotle’s virtues and management thought: An empirical exploration of an integrative pedagogy.” Business Ethics Quarterly, 11 (4): 561-574.
This study describes what students found when asked to analyze the video-tapes of managers’ everyday activities through three lenses: 1) Mintzberg’s ten managerial roles, 2) Fayol’s four management functions; and 3) Aristotle’s four cardinal virtues.
This is the only empirical study we know of that shows how students’ critical thinking ability can be improved within one business course. Although there is some debate in the literature about how to define critical thinking, there is general agreement that it has two components: (1) the ability to think in a logical linear way, and (2) the ability to think meaningfully outside-the-box. Past research suggests that business students are good at the first, but poor at the second in comparison to other students. Teaching multiple approaches to management is well-suited to improve the latter, deeper component of critical thinking. Students who were taught multiple approaches to management improved their critical thinking, compared to students who were taught only a regular approach.
Dyck, B., K. Walker, F. Starke, and K. Uggerslev (2011). “Addressing concerns raised by critics of business schools by teaching multiple approaches to management.” Business and Society Review, 116 (1): 1-27.
Previous research suggests that business students tend to become more materialistic and individualistic during their programs of study. Our study shows how the materialism-individualism scores are reduced for students who learn both mainstream management (emphasis on maximizing profits for shareholders) and an alternative approach to management (emphasis on balancing multiple forms of well-being for multiple stakeholders).
Dyck, B. and R. Kleysen (2001). “Aristotle’s virtues and management thought: An empirical exploration of an integrative pedagogy.” Business Ethics Quarterly, 11 (4): 561-574.
This study describes what students found when asked to analyze the video-tapes of managers’ everyday activities through three lenses: 1) Mintzberg’s ten managerial roles, 2) Fayol’s four management functions; and 3) Aristotle’s four cardinal virtues.
Research that develops the conceptual frameworks of alternative approaches to management
The authors have been involved in a variety of studies that develop and extend the conceptual foundations and provide some of empirical support for the multiple approaches described in the textbooks, including:
Neubert, M., and B. Dyck (2016). “Developing sustainable management theory: Goal-setting theory based in virtue.” Management Decision, 54(2): 304-320.
This study describes two parallel approaches to goal-setting theory, one consistent with a Financial Bottom Line approach, and the second consistent with Social and Ecological Thought.
Bell, G., B. Dyck,and M.J. Neubert, M. J. (forthcoming). "Ethical leadership, virtue theory and generic strategies: When the timeless becomes timely." In Robert A. Giacalone and Carole L. Jurkiewicz (eds.), Radical Thoughts on Ethical Leadership. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
This study describes, contrasts, and compares Porter’s conventional generic strategies (cost leader, differentiator) with two parallel generic strategies consistent with Social and Ecological Thought management (minimizer, transformer).
Bell, G.G., and B. Dyck (2012). “Conventional resource-based theory and its radical alternative: A less materialist-individualist approach to strategy.” Journal of Business Ethics, 99(1): 121-130.
This study describes, contrasts, and compares conventional resource-based theory with a parallel approach consistent with Social and Ecological Thought.
Dyck, B., and J. M. Weber (2006). “Conventional and radical moral agents: An exploratory look at Weber’s moral-points-of-view and virtues.” Organization Studies 27(3): 429-450.
This empirical study demonstrates how the relative emphasis that managers place on materialism and individualism is related to their management style, in ways that are consistent with Dyck and Schroeder (2005).
Dyck, B. and D. Schroeder (2005). “Management, theology and moral points of view: Towards an alternative to the conventional materialist-individualist ideal-type of management.” Journal of Management Studies, 42 (4): 705-735.
This paper presents the moral-point-of-view described in Weber’s Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, shows how it is consistent with contemporary mainstream management theory, and then shows how a parallel moral-point-of-view (consistent with virtue theory) is consistent with radical management theory.
Walker, K., and B. Dyck (2014). “The primary importance of corporate social responsibility and ethicality in corporation reputation: An empirical study.” Business and Society Review, 119(1): 147-174.
This paper demonstrates the importance of considering corporate social responsibility and ethicality when determining and organization's reputation (ethicality is more important than profitability), and to consider the views of multiple stakeholders.
Neubert, M., and B. Dyck (2016). “Developing sustainable management theory: Goal-setting theory based in virtue.” Management Decision, 54(2): 304-320.
This study describes two parallel approaches to goal-setting theory, one consistent with a Financial Bottom Line approach, and the second consistent with Social and Ecological Thought.
Bell, G., B. Dyck,and M.J. Neubert, M. J. (forthcoming). "Ethical leadership, virtue theory and generic strategies: When the timeless becomes timely." In Robert A. Giacalone and Carole L. Jurkiewicz (eds.), Radical Thoughts on Ethical Leadership. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
This study describes, contrasts, and compares Porter’s conventional generic strategies (cost leader, differentiator) with two parallel generic strategies consistent with Social and Ecological Thought management (minimizer, transformer).
Bell, G.G., and B. Dyck (2012). “Conventional resource-based theory and its radical alternative: A less materialist-individualist approach to strategy.” Journal of Business Ethics, 99(1): 121-130.
This study describes, contrasts, and compares conventional resource-based theory with a parallel approach consistent with Social and Ecological Thought.
Dyck, B., and J. M. Weber (2006). “Conventional and radical moral agents: An exploratory look at Weber’s moral-points-of-view and virtues.” Organization Studies 27(3): 429-450.
This empirical study demonstrates how the relative emphasis that managers place on materialism and individualism is related to their management style, in ways that are consistent with Dyck and Schroeder (2005).
Dyck, B. and D. Schroeder (2005). “Management, theology and moral points of view: Towards an alternative to the conventional materialist-individualist ideal-type of management.” Journal of Management Studies, 42 (4): 705-735.
This paper presents the moral-point-of-view described in Weber’s Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, shows how it is consistent with contemporary mainstream management theory, and then shows how a parallel moral-point-of-view (consistent with virtue theory) is consistent with radical management theory.
Walker, K., and B. Dyck (2014). “The primary importance of corporate social responsibility and ethicality in corporation reputation: An empirical study.” Business and Society Review, 119(1): 147-174.
This paper demonstrates the importance of considering corporate social responsibility and ethicality when determining and organization's reputation (ethicality is more important than profitability), and to consider the views of multiple stakeholders.
Other relevant studies supporting the pedagogy in the textbook
Dyck, B. (2017). “Reflecting on 25 years of teaching, researching, and textbook-writing for introduction to management: An essay with some lessons learned.” Journal of Management Education.
This essay describes how the lead author of the textbook came to see the merit of teaching multiple approaches to management.
Walker, K., B. Dyck, J. Zhang and F. Starke (2017). "The use of praxis in the classroom to evoke student transformation." Journal of Business Ethics.
This empirical study describes the importance of not only teaching students facts and theory and concepts, but also developing assignments where students apply their cognitive knowledge in a practical way.
This essay describes how the lead author of the textbook came to see the merit of teaching multiple approaches to management.
Walker, K., B. Dyck, J. Zhang and F. Starke (2017). "The use of praxis in the classroom to evoke student transformation." Journal of Business Ethics.
This empirical study describes the importance of not only teaching students facts and theory and concepts, but also developing assignments where students apply their cognitive knowledge in a practical way.
