You are on page 1of 4

Bhat, Akshay Submitted by: Akshay S Bhat, Guide: Dr.

Munish Thakur Advanced Research Methods Summary on the paper Administrative Science as a Socially Constructed Truth by W. Graham Astley 1. Introduction

The crux of why the paper is written is to acknowledge and address administrative science as a subjective enterprise, as researchers hold on to different world views; they impose different interpretations on data. This then entails that the knowledge that constitutes administrative science is then a socially constructed product, Truth then, as per the author is defined in terms of theoretical constructs1 and conceptual vocabulary that mediate and guide research. The problem then is that we end up with theoretical language rather than objective data.

Warriner et al. invited all scholars from the fields of administrative sciences in formulating a list of operationalized and observable variables to describe organizations, so that all the concerned stakeholders are then at a common footing, this was to counter the problem how different sets of scientists had their own individual interpretations which was different from the other scientists studying the same organization.

The conventional model of scientific progress views progress in terms of a conventional aspect, for the model describes progress as a linear function, and that the knowledge base keeps on increasing as new data is added on an existing set of data. Therefore an inconsistency in two scientists disagreeing on varied interpretations of the same data of an organization impedes the growth of this field.

In contrast to the conventional model, Astley states that the fields development is not characterized by an increased convergence of an understanding, but rather a divergence a fight between schools of thought adhering to and defending their own established paradigms.

Decree issued by an authority

Bhat, Akshay

2. The Subjective construction of truth

The author, Astley believes that we have some a priori sets of theoretical models and frameworks, and often, rather than approaching organizations as a set of unbiased observers and noting what the organization is doing, we let bias become a precursor and a set of intentions are kept in minds as to what is supposed to be studied, And there is a role of theory in this which again dictates as to what will be counted as a fact also.

Since there is a lot of subjectivity into this approach, the facts consisting of our knowledge are necessarily theory dependent. This then makes administrative science an interpretive exercise, in which data is embedded through perception, rendering it more or less of a story telling exercise. Astley then puts forth Kuhns2 view in which he talks about paradigm development and how competing sets of schools compete for followers, and how inter rivalry amongst these schools try to displace each other.

Finally truth is that which the truth makers (here scientists decide) these are further strengthened when some institution affixes its stamp of approval. 3. Language as a product of Research

Since we have appreciated and taken the view of Knowledge formation through an argumentative and a dialectic way, and stated that social negotiation leads to the same, the vehicle for this is the language; it rather is a linguistic convention.

Word systems then play an important role, word systems are then quintessentially scientific fields which are created and maintained through a process of negotiations between conflicting schools.

Paradigm Approach, wont be covered in detail, see The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

Bhat, Akshay

Often the views here are highly negotiable. Since our knowledge structures are then linguistic conventions. Analytically skewed interpretations of the same empirical observation.

4. Linguistic Ability

The above statements then force us to believe that Language rather than objective fact is the chief product of research; on the other hand empirically inconsistent language leads to theorizing.

Linguistic ambiguity then forces us with climbing and descending the ladder of abstraction, sometimes this is farthest removed from reality as to what was observed empirically leading to the formation of explicit hypothesis.

But not all approaches exert a disproportionate influence; Linguistic ability enhances the pragmatic value of administrative theory, while empirical precision only diminishes its applicability. All this is analogous to concept stretching and concept travelling.

5. The role of Imagery As Astley puts it The abstraction of theoretical language from empirical reality is nowhere better demonstrated than in the use of compelling visual imagery that requires the audience to join the author in a kind of make-believe

Sometimes the theorists move into fictional constructs and imaginative aspects for which no empirical counterpart exist, sometimes there are works of scientists which are not empirical phenomena into taxonomical categories, but intentional fictionalization of the reality under examination, which includes the theorists sense of logical aesthetics.

But it is also stated herein that creative imagery is important, crystallizing theory in images is what captures scientific imagination and not bare fact reporting, often purely theoretical works have gained acclaim over purely empirical research.

6. Theoretical Traditions and Iconoclasm

Bhat, Akshay

While it is put across that construction of images is important in creating attractive theories, breaking of images is in fact probably more important, sometimes denying a base and challenging existing paradigms often puts a theory into highlight. This forces the audience to view the existing theory again from a novel viewpoint; this is akin to Kuhns paradigm shift. Also it has been blatantly mentioned citing the work of a few scientists that more than the truth value the interest of the theory makes the work popular. That is why most research works end up as literature driven rather than objective driven

7. Fragmentation of the Discipline The fact that we dont know where administrative science is a) Pre Paradigmatic Stage, or is it b) Multiple Paradigm but this paper asserts a third kind: Disciplinary fragmentation from the proliferation of Interest Theories interests which are guided by the theories which guide the pool of researchers. This pluralistic approach is detrimental when adherents of a school of thought squabble over to win converts, finally the truth is not sought after and even scholarly work ends up a political tool.

8. Social Control of Intellectual Advance & Conclusion

The Authors voice with a bit of dissidence that Administrative Science has an objective way of doing things, he claims that Instead of discovering enduring facts and reporting them through natural description we create truth by assigning meaning to the phenomena we observe, which makes it subjective in construction, which is what Scientists must do to make knowledge more meaningful. Which in this view makes Administrative Science a theoretical enterprise?

You might also like