In The Slow Professor (Berg and Seeber 2016) a number of issues are raised about work in the modern University. They identify that conflicts over time or more specifically time management is at the forefront of academic work (and life in general – just look at the gig economy). There are broader issues here that I want to discuss in a later post. Taking time to treat yourself and others as a human being. The thing I want to talk about is one of the other key themes they raise: time for reflection. Specifically these issues have been raised in a couple of Journal of Management Studies essays.

Fast Food Research (Marinetto, 2018) raises the issue of what is good research? Marinetto references the economist James Buchanan asking ‘What are you writing that will be read 10 years from now? What about 100 years from now?’ at a job interview. He quotes a number of statistics about academic research never being read and comes to the conclusion that in order to be read for any prolonged period of time you need to write books in an accessible style (possibly textbooks but also books for the general reader). It does make sense to me that a more comprehensive study of a subject or topic would be “better research” than a series of bite-sized individual efforts. On the other hand, surely the bite-sized pieces are required to establish some of the initial ideas in a field before a more comprehensive review would be possible? Then again, while they may be useful, surely their production should not be incentivised to the extent that they are the primary form of academic research. Such bite-sized research provides a good way for PhD students and the like to establish themselves in the academic world before thinking about bigger issues.

Suddaby (2018) raises the role of essays within academic output. He justifies the use of essays on four grounds: the legitimisation of knowledge, providing the bounds on knowledge (e.g. criticism), exploring the boundaries of knowledge and contextualising knowledge. The essay places specific emphasis on the fact that research is largely becoming irrelevant. A lot of focus is placed on presenting the past/current and not at adding a broader future aspect to knowledge as this is deemed “unscientific”. I should add that the above is within the context of the social sciences and, more specifically, business schools. One of the most annoying things about academia is that people make quite strict assertions while failing to recognise that what happens in one field is quite different from another.

One of the criticisms of The Slow Professor, from the THE, was written by a scientist who was complaining that such an approach would hold back the advance of science into curing medical diseases and such like (sadly the article no longer appears to be on the THE website). The key issue that “reflection in research” is trying to address is that if you rush headlong into research into such an important topic then there is a danger that the time may be wasted. This is reflected in that essays can be used to “overcome the dogmas of empiricism” (Suddaby, 2018). I titled this post: “Everybody wants to be a scientist. Nobody wants to be a philosopher.” In fact it should be: “Everybody wants to be an empiricist.” In my opinion the social sciences are focussing too much on empiricism (and appearing scientific) and too little on the philosophical side of things. Empiricism alone is easier.

Berg, M. and Seeber, B. K. (2016). The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Marinetto, Michael. 2018. “Fast Food Research in the Era of Unplanned Obsolescence.” Journal of Management Studies, March. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12338.
Suddaby, Roy. 2018. “Objectivity and Truth: The Role of the Essay in Management Scholarship.” Journal of Management Studies, March. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12340.