Epistemological posture in management sciences: The Lakatocian scientific research program as a verification test

Abstract

In management science nowadays, there is a lot of discussion concerning epistemological stance. Is management a real science? In other words, can management science currently be considered a coherent scientific subject, or is it still a patchwork of information from economics, sociology, and psychology? The purpose of this article is, first and foremost, to propose a purely epistemological methodology; in fact, it is a set of epistemological molds built by outstanding epistemological theorists that allow each theory to be valued fairly; these are Kuhn's theory, Popper's theory, and Lakatos' theory. It also intends to investigate management science methodologico-epistemologically in the Lakatocian mussel. Therefore, we propose a conceptual and critical approach that is, in fact, neither inductive nor deductive. The different methodological mussels we have chosen correspond exactly to an epistemological-methodological analysis; they come from three different theses, two of which are diametrically opposed and the third is an attempt to reconcile them. This is exactly the epistemology of T.Kuhn, which is considered historical, cyclical, and softer than that of K.Popper, which is historical and aggressive. In between the two, I.Lakatos positions himself as a conciliator of the two theses. He is renowned for his methodology of the scientific research program. These three authors have fundamentally different approaches, but they overlap in the assessment of scientific theories.

Keywords: management science, epistemology, epistemological mussels, scientific research program

JEL classification: Z00

Paper type : Theoretical Article