Content area
Full text
The Production of Knowledge: The Challenge of Social Science Research WILLIAM H. STARBUCK. New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 2006. 194 pp. ISBN 0199288534
Recent interest in the deficiency of social science research in solving real complex organizational problems had prompted researchers to engage actively in the discussion of knowledge production problems and the problem in linking theory to practice (e.g. see Van de Ven and Johnson, 2006; Sturdy, 2004). Starbuck, a prominent researcher who has worn many hats such as the president of the Academy of Management, editor and researcher, echoes similar calls by these researchers in addressing these problems.
Starbuck's main objectives are to call for reform within the social scientist committee and to minimize the use of research tactics that produces costly knowledge which are of little practical significance. Building on his previous work (Starbuck, 2004), Starbuck uses the technique of 'meta-theoretical reflection' to analyze the production of theory (Tsoukas, 2005). He examines the research processes involved in the production of valid and relevant knowledge and the validity of the assumptions made in these processes. From this reflection, he proposes the use of alternative unconventional research tactics that have been proven to produce reliable and practical knowledge.
Starbuck commences the book by providing his motivation and intentions for the book. This is followed by an introduction to the remaining four chapters and the justification of the style used. Starbuck presents his book in a problem-solution format. Following the footsteps of researchers and consultants such as Martin (2004) and Lynton (1998), Starbuck uses chronological autobiography to support his ideas. Autobiographies provide readers with not just Starbuck's explicit knowledge but also his double-loop learning journey and the processes involved in production of that knowledge. Tacit knowledge on the learning process are sometimes more valuable than the actual knowledge. For example, his tacit knowledge is extremely useful to novice researchers who can learn from his mistake. In addition, by using autobiography, Starbuck scrutinizes not just the academic committee but also himself. This strategy appears to be less threatening and acceptable by fellow researchers.
In Chapter 2, Starbuck brings us on his disillusioned journey over the period of 1950s to 2000s in which he progressed from a green researcher who accepted wholeheartedly knowledge in the field...