Editorial
| Published date | 01 December 1998 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00095 |
| Author | David Otley |
| Date | 01 December 1998 |
Some ten years ago my telephone rang, and it was
suggested that I might like to consider becoming
the founding editor of a new journal that was
to be introduced by the British Academy of
Management. Today sees the British Journal of
Management firmly established as a significant
outlet for management research of all types, with
nine volumes now published. Initially, I had
envisaged taking on the role of General Editor
for five years, but circumstances conspired to
elongate this period. Nevertheless, the time has
now come for me to hand on the baton and I
am delighted to announce that Professor Gerard
Hodgkinson of the University of Exeter will be
taking over from 1 January 1999.
Starting up the journal was less difficult than I
had anticipated. The membership of the British
Academy of Management responded well to their
new house journal, and we quickly built up a
stream of manuscripts of good quality. What has
surprised me more recently is that the total
number of submissions has not increased as much
as I had expected, but this is more than compen-
sated for by the quality of those articles that are
submitted, which is now generally very high.
Today, many of the articles published are clearly
significant contributions to research into the prac-
tice of management in its many forms, and repre-
sent work of the highest international standard.
The policy of the BJM has undergone only a
subtle change over the past nine years. We began
as we surely continue; that is, to publish the best
of the work being undertaken by BAM members.
To that end, we have to be eclectic, as the BAM is
an inclusive organization that represents many of
the diverse streams of work conducted under the
banner of ‘management’ in the UK. However, it is
also clear that much work conducted in the UK
(and, indeed, in continental Europe) has its own
distinct flavour and approach that differs from
that being published by the major US manage-
ment journals. We tend to be more sociological
and organizational in our approaches, to focus on
process as much as on content, and to be willing
to experiment with a wider range of research
methods than is common in the USA. Thus the
BJM has rightly developed a flavour of its own,
which has come to emphasize European perspec-
tives on the practice of management.
British academics in management have always
cast a glance over their shoulder to be aware of
what is being done by their North American
colleagues. Interestingly, we now see North
American academics taking an interest in some of
the approaches being adopted here. The signing
of the friendship agreement by the US and British
Academies of Management is a welcome sign of
beneficial co-operation. We hope that the BJM
will provide a useful opportunity to act as an
English language report for some of the develop-
ments that are occurring this side of the Atlantic,
and that this will be of interest to our North
American colleagues.
I am frequently taken to one side at con-
ferences and other events to be challenged by
colleagues as to why I am biased against certain
types of research. In response, I tend to gently
enquire why they believe this to be the case. The
most common rejoinder is that I have published
little or nothing in the area in question. But, I
reply, little or nothing has been submitted in this
field. Clearly, a journal can publish only what
authors choose to submit or editors actively seek.
I can assure you that we have always been eclectic
and that we will continue in this vein. But, it is
also clear that much more work is submitted from
the disciplines on which management is based,
and from the functional divisions of managerial
work, than on the activity of general management
itself. My hope is that we conduct more work
explicitly on management, in addition to the more
discipline-based work that is currently under-
taken. The original mission of the BJM included
a commitment to publish inter-disciplinary work;
British Journal of Management, Vol. 9, 249–250 (1998)
Editorial
© 1998 British Academy of Management
To continue reading
Request your trial