ABSTRACT
The purpose of this book was to examine what has counted as legitimate knowledge in the organisation/management area, to define and establish criteria for the types of knowledge produced and for the types of knowledge absented. Comparisons between Burns and Stalker’s influential book in the management and management accounting fields and its representations were used as benchmarks against which the types of knowledge produced were evaluated. The main finding and central argument of this book is that mainstream representations of Burns and Stalker’s study exemplify objectivist, structuralist approaches typical of the dominant scholarship in the organisation/management and management accounting fields, in contrast to Burns and Stalker’s original concerns which included subjective factors such as the political and practical problems facing managers and experienced by staff at different levels in their organisations.
