Generative Curiosity

All research starts with an idea. Yet contemporary management journals tend to privilege a certain type of idea: one grounded in theory that fills a gap. This focus on gap-driven research is what currently keeps so many professors from doing the research that would matter to them, personally and professionally (Alvesson & Sandberg, 2013). As a result, many of the ideas that would give rise to improved management theory and practice never make it from the minds of scholars into the view of readers. Generative Curiosity, the newest section in the Journal of Management Inquiry (JMI), is envisioned to serve as an outlet for ideas. As Bernard Baruch said, “The ability to express an idea is well nigh as important as the idea itself.” The primacy of the “idea” is the focus of Generative Curiosity. By focusing on ideas, we believe we can unlock the curiosity of management scholars. In many cases, the “genuine” scholar has been lost in favor of the journal publication technician (Alvesson & Sandberg, 2013), toiling away on piecework publications that emphasize quantity over quality (Bedeian, 1996). Given the pressure to publish (Alvesson & Sandberg, 2013; Bedeian, 1996; Macdonald, 2014), researchers’ curiosity is dampened by the absence of incentives for generating knowledge (Beyer, 1992). Generative Curiosity provides a venue that welcomes and rewards curiosity so that scholars can present ideas that stimulate future scholarly activities in expansive, not reductionist, ways. In keeping with the section’s title, we are particularly interested in ideas that stimulate management scholarship. We invite scholars and practitioners to identify a new or ignored fact, phenomenon, pattern, event, or other issue of interest, and to draw it to the attention of others. In doing so, we hope to stimulate inquiries that (a) improve our understanding of how organizations work and how they can be made more effective (Ashforth, 2005); (b) develop and disseminate knowledge that matters to organizations and society (Alvesson & Sandberg, 2013); and (c) address the human condition (van Aken & Romme, 2009). Ultimately, we wish to generate management inquiries that are not just about “what is,” but also “what can be” (Aguinis & Vandenberg, 2014, p. 581). Why a New Section? And Why JMI?