Scholarly Conflict in Practice
Conflicts between scholars who are working together are not unusual. Some of these conflicts are famous (or infamous). Freud and Jung came to disagree strongly with each other (Borch-Jacobsen & Shamdasani, 2012). After developing grounded theory together, Glaser and Strauss (1967) had a falling out that led them in two conflicting directions regarding grounded theory (Locke, 1996). There have been major disagreements between scholars whose ethnicity or political views differ from each other (Special editorial: Boycott by passport, 2002; Smith & Redington, 2010). These conflicts frequently end in splits between the scholars that are not reconciled.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bartunek, J.M., & Rynes, S.L. (2014b). The gap between academics and practitioners is a reflection of the underlying tensions of academic belonging. Impact of Social Science blog, London School of Economics. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impac-tofsocialsciences/2014/05/23/the-paradoxes-of-academic-and-practitioner-relationships/Google Scholar
- Borch-Jacobsen, M., & Shamdasani, S. (2012). The Freud Files: An inquiry into the history of psychoanalysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- De Dreu, C.K., & Weingart, L.R. (2003). A contingency theory of task conflict and performance in groups and organizational teams. International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working, pp. 151–166.Google Scholar
- Eberly, M.B., Holley, E.C., Johnson, M.D., & Mitchell, T.R. (2011). Beyond internal and external: A dyadic theory of relational attributions. Academy of Management Review, 36, 731–753.Google Scholar
- Foldy, E.G., & Buckley, T.R. (2016). Permeable borders: How understanding conflict in research teams can enhance understanding conflict in work teams. In D.T. Kong & D.R. Forsyth (Eds, Leading through conflict: Into the fray (pp. 45–64). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
- Jarvenpaa, S.L. (2016). Leadership in global service teams: Strong subgroups without active faultiness. In D.T. Kong & D.R. Forsyth (Eds, Leading through conflict: Into the fray (pp. 131–152). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Rynes, S.L., & Bartunek, J.M. (2013). Curriculum matters: Toward a more holistic graduate management education. In B.C. Holton & L.W. Porter (Eds.), Disrupt or be disrupted: A blueprint for change in management education (pp. 179–218). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Rynes, S.L., & Bartunek, J.M. (In Press). Qualitative Research: It just keeps getting more interesting! In R.D. Kramer & K.D. Elsbach (Eds.), Handbook of Innovative Qualitative Research Methods: Pathways to Cool Ideas and Interesting Papers. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Special editorial: Boycott by passport. (2002). International Journal of Psychanalysis, 83(5), 1001.Google Scholar