Advancing interdisciplinary management science: A pathway to sustainable development goals

Bunmi Isaiah Omodan

doi:10.38140/ijms-2024.vol1.01

Authors

Bunmi Isaiah Omodan Walter Sisulu University, South Africa https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9093-3108

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.38140/ijms-2024.vol1.01

Keywords:

Interdisciplinary research, management science, sustainable development, innovation, organisational efficiency

Abstract

The Interdisciplinary Journal of Management Sciences (IJMS) plays a crucial role in advancing the understanding and application of management science in various fields. This editorial paper explores the intersection between interdisciplinary research and management science, emphasising the Journal's contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). IJMS encourages innovative research that addresses complex managerial issues, discourses, and challenges by incorporating principles from economics, engineering, social sciences, and technology. This paper highlights key areas of focus, such as decision-making, supply chain management, innovation, human resources, financial management, marketing, sustainability, educational management, conflict management, and governance. The relevance of each area to specific SDGs is discussed, showcasing how interdisciplinary approaches can provide comprehensive understanding and solutions to global issues. Despite the cognitive obstacles posed by disciplinary boundaries, methodological disparities, and pedagogical peculiarities inherent in interdisciplinary research, there are ample opportunities to leverage technological advancements and foster collaborative research for effective knowledge advancement. The IJMS's commitment to bridging theory and practice not only advances knowledge in management science but also makes a significant contribution to achieving the SDGs. This editorial calls for increased support from scholars, practitioners, and policymakers to further recognise interdisciplinary research in line with the Journal's vision for a future where management science drives sustainable development.

References

Audretsch, D. B. (2007). The entrepreneurial society. Oxford University Press.

Bebbington, J., & Unerman, J. (2018). Achieving the United Nations sustainable development goals: An enabling role for accounting research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 31(1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-05-2017-2929

Betts, A. (Ed.). (2011). Global migration governance. Oxford University Press.

Börner, K., Chen, C., & Boyack, K. W. (2003). Visualising knowledge domains. Annual review of information science and technology, 37(1), 179-255.

Bruce, A., Lyall, C., Tait, J., & Williams, R. (2004). Interdisciplinary integration in Europe: the case of the fifth framework programme. Futures, 36(4), 457–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2003.10.003

Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. WW Norton & Company.

Bush, T., & Middlewood, D. (2013). Leading and managing people in education. SAGE Publications.

Choi, B. C., & Pak, A. W. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education, and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical and Investigative Medicine, 29(6), 351–364.

Christopher, M. (2016). Logistics and supply chain management: Logistics & supply chain management. Pearson UK.

Elkington, J. (1999). Cannibals with Forks: The triple bottom line of 21st-century business. Capstone Publishing.

Friedman, M. (2016). Capitalism and freedom. In Democracy: A reader (pp. 344–349). Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/blau17412-074

Frodeman, R., Klein, J. T., & Mitcham, C. (2010). The oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press.

Frodeman, R., Klein, J. T., & Pacheco, R. C. D. S. (Eds.). (2017). The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press.

Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2003). A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(2), 110-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.1920110

G?bska-Kuczerowska, A., Lahiri, S., & Gajda, R. (2020). Bridging the gap between theory, practice, and policy: A decision-making process based on public health evidence feasible in multi-stage research on biological risk factors in Poland. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(20), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17207657

Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Scott, P., Schwartzman, S., & Nowotny, H. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. SAGE Publications.

Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmaier, W. (2011). Heuristic decision-making. Annual review of psychology, 62, 451-482. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145346

Hallsworth, M., & Kirkman, E. (2020). Behavioral insights. MIT Press.

Janssens, M., & Steyaert, C. (2003). Theories of diversity within organisation studies: Debates and future trajectories. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(3), 293-311. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.389044

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.

Kaufmann, D., & Kraay, A. (2008). Governance indicators: Where are we, where should we be going? The World Bank Research Observer, 23(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkm012

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (Eds) (2016). Marketing Management. Pearson.

Kusiak, A. (2013). Innovation: The living laboratory perspective. Computer-Aided Design and Applications, 4(6), 863–876. https://doi.org/10.1080/16864360.2007.10738518

Lélé, S., & Norgaard, R. B. (2005). Practicing interdisciplinarity. BioScience, 55(11), 967-975. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0967:PI]2.0.CO;2

Manyika, J., Chui, M., Brown, B., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Roxburgh, C., & Byers, A. H. (2011). Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. McKinsey Global Institute.

Mingers, J., & White, L. (2010). A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(3), 1147-1161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.12.019

Newell, B., & Proust, K. (2012). Introduction to Collaborative Conceptual Modelling, Working Paper. ANU Open Access Research. https://digitalcollections.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/9386

Pettit, T. J., Croxton, K. L., & Fiksel, J. (2013). Ensuring supply chain resilience: development and implementation of an assessment tool. Journal of Business Logistics, 34(1), 46–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12009

Porter, M. E., & Lee, T. H. (2013). The strategy that will fix health care. Harvard Business Review, 91(10), 50-70.

Rafols, I., & Meyer, M. (2010). Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience. Scientometrics, 82(2), 263-287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0041-y

Rainey, D. L. (2010). Sustainable business development: Inventing the future through strategy, innovation, and leadership. Cambridge University Press.

Repko, A. F., & Szostak, R. (2020). Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory. Sage publications.

Rhoten, D., & Parker, A. (2004). Risks and rewards of an interdisciplinary research path. Science, 306(5704), 2046-2046. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1103628

Roberson, Q. M. (2019). Diversity in the workplace: A review, synthesis, and future research agenda. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6, 69-88. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015243

Sembel, R. H. (2015). Bridging the gap between theory and practice. DeReMa Jurnal Manajemen, 10(1), 1-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.19166/derema.v10i1.157

United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations.

Wang, H., Tsui, A. S., & Xin, K. R. (2011). CEO leadership behaviours, organisational performance, and employees' attitudes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(1), 92–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.12.009

Williams, C. A., & Schallmo, D. (2021). Interdisciplinary Approach to Innovation Management Research: A Conceptual Methodological Framework. In ISPIM Conference Proceedings (pp. 1–16). The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).

Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in the production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099