Diffusion of Knowledge Related to Management Studies and Practical Benefits

Yasuhiro Hattori (Yokohama National University)
Kohei Arai (Gunma University)

INTORODUCTION
Social scientists have long believed the development of science to be significant forthe development of economies and societies. De Tocqueville (1842) held the view thatscience could become the source of a country’s development and wealth; research hasprovided evidence in support of this claim (Mansfield, 1972; Sveikauskas, 1981). At thecorporate level, Taylor (1913), in his work on scientific management, advocated atransformation from management based on “craft” and “art” to that based on “science.” In
addition, Follet (1918) and Simon (1996) highlighted that science and practice could makegood partners.
From the 1980s, researchers in fields such as economics and psychology conductedempirical studies to address the question of what type of effect science has on practice. For
example, in economics, it was shown that by acquiring economic knowledge, learners cameto behave rationally (i.e., taking ideal actions envisaged in economics) (Carter & Irons, 1991;
Frank, Gilovich, & Regan, 1993; Marwell & Ames, 1981). The effects of education were also
directly investigated in the field of psychology; it was found that knowledge of psychology
does not necessarily reduce psychological bias (Nisbett & Borgida, 1975). Kahneman (2011)even noted that the experiment conducted by Nisbett and Borgida “also supports theuncomfortable conclusion that teaching psychology is mostly a waste of time.”
In response to these experiments in economics and psychology, from the 1990s in the field of
management studies, the relevance of management theories was actively debated, particularly

1Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

among management theorists in the United States (Argyris, 1996; Mintzberg, 2005; Pfeffer &Sutton, 2006; Rousseau, 2012a, 2012b)1). Within this debate, the arguments of Rousseau,
Pfeffer, and Sutton et al. on Evidence-Based Management (EBMgt) provided an important
point of discussion on knowledge in management studies (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006; Rousseau,
2012a, 2012b). Some advocates of EBMgt highlight that management practitioners rarely use
management studies in workplace decision making. They argue that the reason for this is thegap between management theorists’ interest in the establishment of theories and workplacemangers’ interest in the pursuit of facts, that is, the question of “how (not why) things go
well?”In this manner, the effects of science on practice have also been debated inmanagement studies. However, the problem is that researchers have not provided anexperimental answer to this question. From the standpoint of this research, the argument on
the relevance of management theories must begin by answering the following empiricalquestions: Has knowledge related to management studies diffused across workplaces? If so,through what paths has it diffused and what are the benefits of this knowledge? However, thearguments, including those on EBMgt, have been based on the assumptions that knowledge
related to management-studies” and “practitioners do not employ management studies
research. Thus, attention has not been focused on the diffusion of knowledge related to
management-studies (Latham, 2007). Bloom, Eifert, Mahajan, McKenzie, and Roberts (2013)
noted that even though empirical studies have examined its usefulness for management
practice, a sufficient body of research on the diffusion of knowledge related to management
studies and its effects on practice has not yet been accumulated.
Given the assumptions in the debate over the effects of science on practice, theobjective of this research is to conduct an empirical study on the diffusion of knowledge
related to management studies. The study has two fundamental research topics. First,

2Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

establishing the current state of the diffusion of knowledge related to management studies
among practitioners in Japan and factors promoting this diffusion. The second is establishing
the benefits of knowledge related to management studies for practitioners.

EXISTING RESEARCH
In this section, the scope of the argument on knowledge related to management
studies is first specified, and then hypotheses are derived. “Knowledge related to
management studies”2) is limited to declarative knowledge about management studies. In
cognitive science, knowledge is divided into two broad categories. The first is declarativeknowledge, which is concerned with the meaning and names of things and facts, andknowledge expressed by the rules and theorems of phenomena (Rousseau, 2007). Declarativeknowledge includes the theories and propositions of management studies, such as “Becauseof the limitations of the psychological environment of the individual, it is impossible for any
decision-maker to be purely rational” (Simon, 1997). The second is procedural knowledge(Rousseau, 2007), which is related to questions on how each phenomenon is performed andstages followed to solve a problem. In organizational decision making, this knowledge
corresponds to the expertise required to follow specific procedures. Declarative knowledge
answers the question “What is known?,” while procedural knowledge answers the question“What should be done?” As Rousseau (2012b) highlighted, up till now most findings
provided by management theorists have been declarative knowledge3). In this research, thediscussion is restricted to knowledge related to management studies as declarative knowledge.
In this article, “the diffusion” of knowledge refers to whether people know the findings ofmanagement studies. According to Rogers (1985), diffusion is “a process by which an
innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of asocial system.” Diffusion occurs in a number of stages including, the individual obtains

3Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

knowledge on the innovation concerned (the knowledge stage), the innovation is introduced
and used (the decision stage), and its advantages and disadvantages are confirmed(confirmation stage). This research focuses on the knowledge stage (what is known andunderstood) because, above all, the innovation’s progression to subsequent stages depends onwhether the people concerned have the required knowledge.

Channels for the diffusion of management studies
In the field of mass communication, it has been claimed that only a small amount of
the information from mass media is directly transmitted to the public. Instead, a two-stepflow of communication comes into play, in which information is transmitted to a large
number of people through a small group of people known as opinion leaders (Katz &Lazarsfeld, 1970; Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, 1944). Opinion leaders are a small groupof people sensitive to new knowledge and information who pay close attention to media(Rogers, 1995)4). Rogers (1995) explained that in the context of the diffusion of innovation,
this small group of users forges ahead of the majority to obtain information on new products
and other knowledge. They are known as early adopters. According to Lazarsfeld et al. (1944),
early adopters of knowledge are interested in new ideas and try to obtain knowledge from awide range of information sources not limited to contact with people from the sameorganization or region. Therefore, they frequently access mass media channels such as radio,
TV, newspapers, and books, and acquire new ideas from these sources (Katz & Lazarsfeld,
1970; Lazarsfeld et al., 1944).
Thus, if early adopters mainly acquire knowledge related to management studies frommass media channels, then their knowledge related to management studies increases the more
often they access media. From this, the following hypothesis is derived.

4

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

Hypothesis 1.1

If other conditions are the same, the more frequently a person accesses

mass media channels—reading/viewing books, magazines, newspapers, andwebsites—the more the volume of knowledge related to management studies isacquired.

The diffusion of knowledge most likely occurs through interpersonal communication
channels such as formal and informal conversations within and outside a company (Rogers,
1995). The objective of much of the training conducted within and outside a company is totransmit knowledge to trainees (Baldwin & Ford, 1988). Also, it is thought that informal
communication with colleagues and friends functions as a channel for knowledge acquisition.
In particular, knowledge transmission in training and meetings frequently occurs throughtrainers or superiors playing the opinion leader role. Therefore, at the stage of informationtransmission to other parties, it is likely that the knowledge is filtered through a process of
selection and being converted into a form that others can understand. In this manner, even forthe diffusion of knowledge related to management studies, if there is a two-step flow ofcommunication (Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1970; Lazarsfeld et al., 1944), then both formal andinformal communication function as knowledge transmission channels. This leads to thefollowing hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1.2

If other conditions are the same, the more frequently formalinterpersonal communication channels such as training sessions and meetings are
utilized within and outside the company, the more the volume of knowledgetransmitted related to management studies is acquired.

Hypothesis 1.3

If other conditions are the same, the more frequently informal

5Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

interpersonal communication channels such as one-to-one communication are
utilized within and outside the company, the more the volume of knowledgetransmitted related to management studies is acquired.

Individual characteristics leading to the diffusion of information related to management
studies
Mintzberg (2005) proposed art, craft, and science as three essential elements ofmanagement. He defined them as follows: Art is intuition that backs up creativity andgenerates hunches and vision, craft generates practical skills based on the person’s own
experiences, and science is a person’s analytical orientation to find order in the actual state ofaffairs through systematic analysis and evaluation. Mintzberg (2005) considers science-type
practitioners to be those who, during decision making, value sophisticated analytical tools
and logical thought. As understood from the assumption that the typical science type is an
MBA graduate, science-oriented practitioners generally have a positive attitude towardscience and are capable of dealing with abstract concepts. Rogers (1995) noted that early
adopters of innovation must acquire new knowledge based on abstract information obtained
from mass media or other channels. Thus, they tend to be highly tolerant of abstract concepts
and capable of understanding as well as processing them. Therefore, science-oriented
individuals are considered capable of both acquiring and understanding knowledge related to
management studies, which leads to the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 1.4

If other conditions are the same, a strong science orientation positively

impacts the volume of knowledge possessed related to management studies .

The last factor determining the intake of information related to management studies is6

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

career awareness. Guest (2007) stated that people adopt knowledge when perceiving certain
knowledge as useful for solving a work- or career-related problem. However, to do this, areadiness to tackle and resolve the work- or career-related problem is necessary. For career
theorists, this corresponds to a “state of high-level career maturity” (King, 1989). Individuals
with a high level of career maturity possess a broad range of knowledge and have developed
the readiness required to make career decisions appropriate for their age. They accurately
understand and are willing to tackle their work- and career-related problems (King, 1989).
Therefore, the greater a person’s career maturity, the more likely they will apply theirknowledge related to management studies to solving their work- and career-related problems.
This leads to the next hypothesis.

Hypothesis 1.5

If other conditions are the same, the greater a person’s career maturity,

the greater the volume of knowledge possessed related to management studies is acquired.

Benefits of the diffusion of knowledge related to management studies
What are the benefits of knowledge related to management studies? Daft (2012)claims, in what is considered to be a standard text on management studies, that “we, whopossess knowledge related to management studies, have been taught what has occurred in thepast, and in the same way, what will occur in the future, and we use this information to helporganizations be managed more efficiently.” Individuals who have acquired knowledge
related to management studies are expected to contribute to the efficient management oforganizations. If, as claimed by Daft, knowledge related to management studies can make an
actual contribution, practitioners possessing this knowledge make greater contributions totheir organizations than other employees, and consequently should be rewarded more. Here
we focus on promotion and monetary remuneration as two typical organizational rewards,

7

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

which lead us to Hypotheses 2.1 and 2.2.

Hypothesis 2.1

If other conditions are the same, the greater the volume ofknowledge possessed related to management studies, the higher an employee’s position in theorganization.
Hypothesis 2.2

If other conditions are the same, the greater the volume ofknowledge possessed related to management studies, the higher an employee’s annual salaryin the organization.

III. RESEARCH METHOD
Survey design
A web survey was conducted by a research company between December 6 and 10,
2012. The survey respondents were pre-registered monitors of the research company whosatisfied the following conditions: full-time employee, university graduate or equivalent(including having graduated from a vocational college or junior college), and aged between
20 and 65 years at the time the survey was conducted. Responses were requested from 2,818
monitors and received from 1,489 (response rate: 52.8%). Also, of the 1,489 responses
collected, the researchers excluded those clearly unsuitable for the sample, such as those who
continuously responded with the same value for a specific problem. Consequently, the size ofthe sample available for analysis was 1,034 respondents.
The average age of the sample population was 44.24 years (standard deviation, 10.0)
and 24.85% were women. With regard to company size, 21.3% were employed in a company
with fewer than 10 employees, 21.9% in a company with between 10 and 99 employees,
26.3% in a company with between 100 and 999 employees, and 30% in a company with1,000 employees or more. Examining the respondents’ positions within their company, 46.3%

8

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

were at a managerial level, 10.6% at foreperson level, 10.3% at unit head level, 13.0% at
section head level, 5.6% at department head level, and 14.3% were at a higher positional
level. Regarding academic background, 23.5% graduated from vocational or junior colleges,
66.7% had obtained a university undergraduate degree, 8.4% a master’s degree, and 1.4% adoctoral degree.

Measurement scale and quantity of descriptive statistics
The quantity of knowledge related to management studies. To select items suitable
for measuring the quantity of knowledge related to management studies, and following
Scapens (1991), a literature study of management studies textbooks (either originally inJapanese or translated into Japanese) was conducted. The specific procedure was as follows.
First, on March 13, 2012, the Kobe University Library for Social Sciences’ search system
OPAC was employed to extract publications fulfilling the following conditions: “BSH:management studies”7), “Published after 2009,” and “Published in Japanese.” The Kobe
University Library for Social Sciences was selected as the library to extract the publications
for two reasons: first, it houses one of the most pre-eminent collections of social sciencebooks in the country; and second, librarians take steps to ensure that there is academic
variation when purchasing textbooks for the library, and therefore any arbitrariness on thepart of the researchers could be excluded. A total of 84 publications satisfied the search
conditions. Of these, research books, mooks (magazine books), those focusing on a different
field, those without an index, and manuals focused on a specific field were excluded,
resulting in a selection of 28 textbooks8). The indexes of these textbooks were reproduced asa spreadsheet; the top 40 index items according to frequency of mentions were extracted by
the author9).
For items measuring the quantity of knowledge, extracted concepts were factor

9Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

analyzed. The results of the factor analysis and descriptive statistics are shown in Table 1.
Two factors were extracted from the factor analysis. The items loaded onto the first factor
were primarily researcher-generated concepts, such as “resource-based view” and “bounded
rationality.” Items in this group are difficult to understand for practitioners, but there is little
room for ambiguity because they are precisely defined. In contrast, items loaded onto thesecond factor, such as “business strategy,” “empowerment,” and “individualism” can beunderstood to some degree through intuition by those who do not understand their strict
academic definitions. As these terms can be understood through intuition, they are prone toambiguity. Based on this interpretation, the first factor was named “understanding ofacademic terms” (reliability coefficient, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.976), and the second factor“understanding of practical terms” (reliability coefficient α = 0.968).
The mean value for the degree of understanding of academic terms was relatively low
at 2.00, compared with 2.60 for understanding of practical terms. This difference may be
because the former is more difficult to understand than the latter. Rogers (1995) stated thatdifficulty in understanding and using a certain innovation was accompanied by delays in the
diffusion of this innovation. Possibly, the same phenomenon occurs for the diffusion ofknowledge related to management studies.

-----------------------------------------------Insert Table 1 and about here------------------------------------------------

Mass media channels. For mass media channels, the following items were measured.
For books, the total number of business, economics, and education books respondents readover a period of one month was analyzed. The mean value was 0.57 publications, with a10

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

standard deviation of 1.18. For website views, the total number of regularly viewed businessand economics websites as well as blog mailing lists was analyzed. The mean value was 0.78
sites, with a standard deviation of 2.55. For magazines, the total number of business andeconomic magazines as well as academic journals was analyzed. The mean value was 0.28
publications, with a standard deviation of 1.07. For TV, the time spent in one day viewing
business and economic programs was converted into minutes and analyzed. The mean value
was 39.98 minutes, with a standard deviation of 68.06. For newspapers, the presence in eachhome and company of a subscription to Nikkei Shimbun10), Nikkei Industrial News, Nikkei
MJ (a distribution newspaper), Nikkei Veritas, national newspapers (the Yomiuri Shimbun,
Asahi Shimbun, Mainichi Shimbun, and Sankei Shimbun), local papers, as well as
professional and industry publications were used as dummy variables (1. subscribe, 0. do not
subscribe).
Interpersonal communication channels. For interpersonal communication channels,
respondents were asked about the number of official meetings they participated in within thecompany, the number of times they participated in company training in one month, and thenumber of unofficial consultations they had about work in one month. The mean value for
official communication was 4.18 times, with a standard deviation of 6.93, while the meanvalue for unofficial communication was 4.07 times, with a standard deviation of 9.98.
Beliefs about work. An original item was used to ascertain respondents’ beliefs about
work. Respondents were asked which of Mintzberg’s (2005) three concepts—craft, art, andscience—they valued. The factor analysis yielded partially different factors for priorintentions11). Items loaded onto the first factor were related to valuing decision making basedon objective analysis and logical thinking; specifically, “Decisions about something should bebased on the results of an objective analysis” and “It is necessary to think logically about
things for work.” This is considered to correspond to Mintzberg’s (2005) “science,” and was

11Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

thus named the science type (reliability coefficient α = 0.796). Items loaded onto the second
factor were related to valuing decision making based on their own experience and intuition;
specifically, “Decisions about something should be based on your own experience” and “It isbetter to use your own intuition when deciding something.” This factor was named the “selfreferencing type” (reliability coefficient α = 0.701). The items loaded onto the third factor
were related to decision making without specific grounds, such as “It is better to avoid
working based on empirical rules as much as possible” and “Scientific knowledge is no use
whatsoever for work.” Therefore, the third factor was named the “non-referencing type”(reliability coefficient α = 0.686). These factors differed partially in terms of prior intention,although this was not considered a problem in terms of verifying the hypotheses. Thus, it was
decided that the results of the factor analysis could be used for the analysis.
Career maturity. Based on the scale developed by Sakayanagi (1999), career
maturity was measured from items relating to “career concern” and “career planning.” A twofactor structure was obtained from the factor analysis, as was anticipated in advance12).
“Career concern” comprised five items, including “I have established a concrete plan to live
the way I want” and “I have my own targets about how I want to live my life in the future.”
The reliability coefficient α was 0.902. “Career planning” also comprised five items,
including “I listen attentively to conversations that I can refer to for how to live my life” and“I positively try to collect information that will be useful to me for designing and living mylife.” The reliability coefficient α was 0.906.
Other. In addition to the above, respondents were asked about their individual profile
information, annual income, and present position. These were anticipated to be results
variables. For their position, respondents were asked to select from the following levels:
manager, foreperson, unit head, section head, department head, or a higher position. The
percentages for each category were 46.2%, 10.6%, 13.0%, 5.6%, and 14.3%, respectively.

12

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

Their average annual income was 5.613 million yen, with a standard deviation was 643.3.

RESULTS
Table 2 shows the correlation matrix of dependent variables. Tables 3 and 4 show theresults of the analysis conducted to verify the hypotheses. Table 3 shows the results of theregression analysis to verify Hypotheses 1.1 to 1.5. The dependent variables were therespective levels of understanding academic and practical terms. The control variables were,age, gender, final academic background, university faculty, type of company the respondentworks in, company size, work position, and the work they are engaged in. Some items inTable 3 have been omitted because of space constraints. As there are categorical variables andordered variables with ages omitted, they were estimated based on the fixed effects model
into which the dummy variables had been inserted. However, rather than individual estimatesfor control variables, these were verified through the random effects model in the
Hierarchical Linear Model to confirm the robustness of results. The results are discussed
below. Only those variables with a statistical significance of 5% in either of the models wereconsidered to have demonstrated significant effects.

----------------------------------------------------Insert Tables 2, 3 and 4 about here-----------------------------------------------------

Results for mass media channel variables relating to Hypothesis 1.1 are as follows.
For the level of understanding of the practical terms and academic terms, significant positiveeffects were found for the number of times books were read per month, monthly
subscriptions to the Nikkei Shimbun, and monthly subscriptions to Nikkei Sangyo Shimbun.

13

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

However, no significant effects were observed for variables related to the Internet, magazines,
and newspapers other than Nikkei publications. The length of time spent watching businessand economics TV programs had a positive impact on understanding of academic terms, andwhile this result was limited to a specific mass media channel, it does support Hypothesis 1.1.
Robust results for the official and unofficial communication variables in Hypotheses 1.2 and1.3 could not be obtained. As it cannot be asserted that these variables produced significant
effects, Hypotheses 1.2 and 1.3 were not supported. This suggests that the main channel fortransmitting knowledge related to management studies is mass media, and that the role of theinterpersonal communication channel is limited.
Next, we consider individual characteristics that regulate the diffusion of knowledge.
If we analyze Table 3, we see that, contrary to Hypothesis 1.4, being a science typenegatively impacts understanding of practical terms. In addition, it also does not significantly
impact understanding of academic terms. Conversely, being a non-referencing type, or
someone whose decision making is not based on a particular point of reference, does have asignificant effect on understanding of practical terms. Based on these findings, Hypothesis
1.4 was not supported.
Finally, we consider the effects of career maturity. Table 3 shows that career planning
has a positive effect on each of the dependent variables. As forecasted by Hypothesis 1.5,
career planning facilitates preparing measures independently and proactively to respond
appropriately to career problems, as well as to make career choices and promotes theacquisition of knowledge related to management studies. As a result, it has a positive effecton the quantity of knowledge a person possesses.
Table 4 shows the results of the regression analysis to verify Hypotheses 2.1 and 2.2.
The dependent variables were work position and annual salary (after being converted tologarithms). As work position is an ordinal variable, estimates were made using an ordered14Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

probit model. Because work position was the dependent variable, it was excluded as a control
variable but otherwise the control variables were the same used in the previous regression
analysis. Also, as with the previous regression analysis, a hierarchical linear regression model
was used to verify the robustness of the results. Table 4 shows that the level of understandingof academic terms had a significant positive effect on work position, although no othersignificant effects were observed. This finding supports Hypothesis 2.1, but not Hypothesis
2.2. With regard to Hypothesis 2.1, an understanding of practical terms was not seen to have asignificant effect on work position, and therefore we must be aware that the scope of thisresult is limited.

DISCUSSION
Summary and discussion
In this research, which was based on awareness that the relevance of management
theories in Japan needed consideration, we searched for factors promoting the diffusion ofknowledge related to management studies among practitioners in Japan, and we ascertained
the benefits of possessing this knowledge. There were four main findings.
First, the main channel for the diffusion of knowledge related to management studies
is mass media—namely books, television, and economic newspapers. Furthermore, theeffects of official and unofficial interpersonal communication channels are not that significant.
Mass communication researchers note that after new knowledge and products have beendiffused to opinion leaders through mass media, this group diffuses the information to thegeneral public through official and unofficial communication channels. This is known as thetwo-step flow of communication (Lazarsfeld et al., 1944). If this communication flow also
occurs for the diffusion of knowledge related to management studies, then the findings
described above indirectly suggest that, in 2013, we are not yet at the stage where early15

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

adopters in possession of knowledge related to management studies are diffusing thisknowledge to a large number of practitioners.
Second, being a science type impedes the diffusion of knowledge related to
management studies. Conversely, being a non-referencing type, in other words not having
specific grounds for decision making, is more likely to result in the diffusion of knowledge
related to management studies. What is the reason that science-oriented people do not absorb
knowledge related to management studies, despite their strong belief in science? A possible
explanation is that there is a supply–demand gap between the knowledge provided bymanagement studies and that by science-type practitioners. It is possible that while theknowledge provided to practitioners by management theorists is primarily declarativeknowledge (What is known?), science-type practitioners want procedural knowledge (Howshould it be done?). This supply–demand gap may prevent them from acquiring knowledge
related to management studies. In contrast, it is thought that non-referencing types, who do
not have specific grounds for decision making, do not excessively dwell on using their own
past experiences or knowledge, and therefore more actively absorb declarative knowledge.
Third, career maturity is one factor explaining the intake of scientific knowledge.
Guest (2007) noted that a person adopts certain knowledge when it is perceived as useful forsolving a work- or career-related problem. However, of the two career maturity factors, it was
found that career concern did not have a significant effect on the intake of knowledge related
to management studies. Only career planning had a significant effect. This suggests that
employing knowledge related to management studies to solve problems means that not only
must career be considered but it is also necessary to prepare measures independently andproactively to solve career problems as well as make career choices.
Fourth, possessing knowledge related to management studies is beneficial in terms ofpromotion. This finding suggests the possibility that practitioners who have studied

16

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

management studies use this knowledge to contribute to their organization, and theirorganization rewards them through promotion (but not through annual salaries).

Implications and directions of future research
The following three points are proposed as the implications of this research.
The first concerns media in which the findings of management studies research are
published. Publishing research in an academic journal after completing the peer-review
process ensures that researchers provide scientific-level knowledge that their researchfindings are made available to society, and that other researchers may freely refer to theirfindings for their own research (Merton, 1942). In this sense, the importance of academic
journals cannot be doubted. On the other hand, the results of this research suggest that
researchers must be aware that, as of 2013, these academic journals were not transmitting
knowledge related to management studies to practitioners.
Second is an implication for practitioners, namely that studying management studies
will, to a certain extent, have a positive effect on early promotion. However, they should beaware that the choice of media is important when it comes to acquiring knowledge related to
management studies. Also, practitioners must consider that their beliefs about work, whether
conscious or subconscious, may interfere with the acquisition of knowledge related to
management studies. In particular, it is possible that having a strong science orientation may
act at a subconscious level to prevent practitioners from gaining possibly beneficial
knowledge.
Third is that absorbing knowledge related to management studies may be beneficial interms of the bipolarization of the businessperson. According to Rogers (1995), compared toothers, many early adopters of innovation possess a wealth of resources and a high position,and moreover it is possible that they acquire an even more superior position than others by

17

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

adopting innovations. In other words, the diffusion of innovation involves a mechanism that
expands the gap between individuals (Rogers, 1995). The same phenomenon may occur inthe diffusion of knowledge related to management studies. Individuals with high careerconcern and access to a variety of mass media channels are likely to acquire a large quantityof information from it. Moreover, especially in the case of fields of management studies thatuse difficult academic terms, people who already possess a certain level of knowledge arelikely to have a greater absorptive capacity for knowledge (Cohen & Levinthal, 1990),
expanding the gap between these two groups even further. Therefore, if the findings of thisresearch are correct, then the quantity of management studies knowledge is one factor
determining promotion. Possibly, the knowledge gap that helps determine promotion will in
the long term continuously expand the promotion gap between people.
Although we have drawn these implications, the survey design employed for thisresearch made it impossible to clarify in detail the diffusion stages and communication flow
for knowledge related to management studies. There is a need to analyze the diffusion ofknowledge related to management studies in future research. Also, it will be necessary to use
a longitudinal survey to confirm the robustness of the findings on the practical benefits ofpossessing knowledge related to management studies, and moreover to further investigate
whether these benefits are produced because the knowledge stems from management studies,rather than from, for example, economics, sociology, or philosophy.

18

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

REFERENCES
Argyris, C. 1996. Actionable knowledge: Design causality in the service of consequential
theory. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32: 390–406.
Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, J. K. 1988. Transfer of training: A review and directions for future
research. Personnel psychology, 41: 63–105.
Bloom, N., Eifert, B., Mahajan, A., McKenzie, D., & Roberts, J. (2013). Does management
matter? Evidence from India. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128: 1–51.
Carter, J. R., & Irons, M. D. 1991. Are economists different, and if so, why? The Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 5: 171–177.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on
Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 128–152.
Daft, R. L. 2012. Organization theory and design (11th ed.). Cengage learning.
De Tocqueville, A. 1842. De la démocratie en Amérique. Ch. Gosselin.
Follet, M. P. 1918. The new state: Group organization the solution of popular government.
Penn State Press.
Frank, R. H., Gilovich, T., & Regan, D. T. 1993. Does studying economics inhibit
cooperation? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7: 159–171.
Guest, D. E. 2007. Don’t shoot the messenger: A wake-up call for academics. Academy ofManagement Journal, 50: 1020–1026.
Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.
Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. 1970. Personal Influence, The part played by people in the flowof mass communications. Transaction Publishers.
King, S. 1989. Sex differences in a causal model of career maturity. Journal of Counseling &Development, 68: 208–215.

19

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

Latham, G. P. 2007. A Speculative Perspective on the Transfer of Behavioral Science
Findings to the Workplace: “The Times They are A-Changin’.” Academy ofManagement Journal, 50: 1027–1032.
Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. 1944. The people’s choice: how the voter makes
up his mind in a presidential campaign. Duell Sloan and Pearce.
Mansfield, E. 1972. Contribution of R&D to economic growth in the United States. Science,
175: 477–486.
Marwell, G., & Ames, R. E. 1981. Economists free ride, does anyone else?: Experiments on
the provision of public goods, IV. Journal of Public Economics, 15: 295–310.
Merton, R. K. 1942. Science and technology in a democratic order. Journal of legal andpolitical sociology, 1: 115–126.
Mintzberg, H. (2005). Managers, not MBAs: A hard look at the soft practice of managing
and management development. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Nisbett, R. E., & Borgida, E. 1975. Attribution and the psychology of prediction. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 932.
Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. 2006. Hard facts, dangerous half-truths, and total nonsense:
Profiting from evidence-based management. Harvard Business Press.
Rogers, E. M. 1995. Diffusion of innovations. Simon and Schuster.
Rousseau, D. M. 2007. A sticky, leveraging, and scalable strategy for high-quality
connections between organizational practice and science. Academy of Management
Journal, 50: 1037–1042.
Rousseau, D. M. 2012a. Envisioning evidence-based management. In Rousseau, D. M. (Eds.),
Handbook of evidence-based management, Oxford University Press, New York.

20

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

Rousseau, D. M. 2012b. Organizational Behavior’s Contributions to Evidence-based
Management. In Rousseau, D. M. (Eds.), Handbook of evidence-based management,
Oxford University Press, New York.
Sakayanagi, T. 1999. Seijin kyaria seijuku shakudo (ACMS) no shinraisei to datousei no
kentou. Bulletin of Aichi University of Education Educational Sciences (in japanese),
48: 115–122.
Scapens, R. W. 1991. Management Accounting: A Review of Recent Developments (2nd ed.,p. 251). Palgrave Macmillan.
Simon, H. A. 1996. The sciences of the artificial. MIT press.
Simon, H. A. 1997. Administrative Behavior (4th ed.). Free Press.
Sveikauskas, L. 1981. Technological inputs and multifactor productivity growth. The Review
of Economics and Statistics, 63: 275–282.
Taylor, F. W. 1913. Scientific management. Routledge.

21

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

FOOTNOTES
1)

In addition to the EBMgt argument, the following is being debated. Following a discussionof problems for holders of MBAs, Mintzberg (2005) expressed doubts about the relevance ofmanagement theories as science, and insisted on a regression from science to elements otherthan science (experience and intuition). Also, the Academy of Management Review publishedby the Academy of Management in the United States, published a special feature in 2007
entitled “On the Research-Practice Gap in Human Resource Management,” while by 1999,
the MIS Quarterly, the leading journal in the field of management information theory, hadalready published a special feature entitled “Rigor and Relevance in MIS Research.” A debate
has developed on the usefulness and precision of research in this field.
2)

Broadly, management studies include disciplines such as accounting, marketing, andfinance. However, in this article, its narrower meaning is used. Specifically, within areas ofresearch used by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science when it is providing researchand other costs, management studies is not a branch, but a detailed item (detailed item no.
3901).
3)

Rousseau and other EBMgt advocates claim that although management theorists should

create both declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge, they focus their energies on theformer. However, to simplify the discussion in this article, it is assumed that knowledge
related to management studies is only declarative knowledge.
4)

Rogers (1995) divided early adopters into a further two categories. The first are called

innovators, which refers to individuals and individual entities that are the first to acquire
information on new products as well as other knowledge within the social system. The
second are early adopters, namely individuals and individual entities who are not as fast as
innovators, but who grasp information faster than most people. To simplify the discussion inthis paper, we only adopt the category of early adopters and not the two sub-divisions.

22Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

5)This point can be called an unchanging target of management studies which has persisted

since the dawn of management studies. For example, Taylor (2013) repeatedly described atarget of scientific management to be the elimination of inefficiencies within an organization.
7)“BSH” is an abbreviation of “Basic Subject Headings,” which is a classification defined by

the Japan Library Association.
8)

In the event that an updated edition of the same book had been published after 2009, theupdated edition was selected. For translated works, the time standard used was the time of
publication of the Japanese translation, not that of the original work.
9)

For the index items, items other than items on concepts related to management studies were

excluded. For example, proper nouns were omitted, such as names of people (Michael Porter,etc.), names of companies (DuPont, etc.), and names of items (T-type Ford). In addition,
terms in common use, such as “Company Limited” and “leadership” were judged as
unnecessary from the viewpoint of measuring knowledge related to management studies, andtherefore were omitted.
10)

Nikkei Shimbun is an abbreviation of "Nihon Keizai Shimbun," which is the largest

newspaper in Japan, by circulation. This is a Japanese-language daily newspaper with a
special emphasis on business and economic news.
11)

The estimation method was the maximum likelihood method and promax rotation. The

ratio of factor correlation was 0.11 between the science type and self-referencing type, −0.57
between the self-referencing type and non-referencing type, and 0.11 between the science
type and non-referencing type. The Tucker-Lewis index was 0.936. For measurement, a fivepoint Likert scale from “1. Not at all,” through “3. Somewhat,” and finally “5．To a great
extent” was employed.
12)

The estimation method was the maximum likelihood method and promax rotation. The

ratio of factor correlation was 0.70. The Tucker-Lewis index was 0.912. For measurement, a23

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

five-point Likert scale from “1. Not at all,” through “3. Somewhat,” and finally “5. To a great
extent” was employed.

24

TABLE 1
Factor analysis and descriptive statistics of knowledge related to management studies
Understanding Understanding
standardof academicof practicalmean
mediandeviation
terms
terms
Resource-based view
−.22
1.76
1.08
1
.98
Five forces model
−.24
1.70
1.05
1
.95
Bounded rationality
−.08
1.86
1.11
1
.89
Management process
−.05
1.90
1.13
1
.88
school
−.05
1.94
1.19
1
.83
Theory X・Theory Y
Motivation.03
1.96
1.18
1
.80
hygiene theory
Contingency theory
−.02
1.8
1.14
1
.79
Task management
.09
1.99
1.19
1
.73
Positioning approach
.13
1.94
1.16
1
.69
Cost-leadership strategy
.17
2.13
1.25
2
.68
Scientific management
.23
2.11
1.23
2
.65
Transaction cost theory
.19
2.04
1.19
2
.64
Marketing mix
.14
2.12
1.26
2
.62
Need hierarchy theory
.21
2.11
1.29
2
.62
Formal organization
.22
2.17
1.26
2
.60
Informal organization
.27
2.11
1.22
2
.55
Principles of management
.32
2.17
1.21
2
.55
Core competence
.24
2.04
1.27
1
.46
Differential price-rate
.37
2.24
1.26
2
.42
plan
Business strategy
−.17
2.85
1.34
3
.92
Empowerment
−.18
2.87
1.41
3
.92
Individualism
−.19
2.98
1.23
3
.87
Differentiation strategy
−.08
2.74
1.38
3
.86
Bureaucracy
−.15
2.88
1.34
3
.85
Organization structure
.01
2.63
1.29
3
.81
Strategic decision making
.09
2.53
1.33
3
.77
Focus strategy
.08
2.52
1.32
3
.75
Competitive advantage
.16
2.53
1.34
3
.69
Job enlargement
.09
2.55
1.31
3
.69
Economic man
.15
2.46
1.25
3
.68
Limited liability
.12
2.59
1.4
3
.68
Growth vector matrix
.17
2.43
1.28
3
.65
Motivation factors
.15
2.55
1.32
3
.65
Job enrichment
.29
2.4
1.26
3
.54
Management control
.30
2.35
1.27
2
.52
Separation of ownership
.31
2.37
1.35
2
.50
from management
Human relation
2.38
1.27
2
Knowledge management
2.29
1.34
2
Tacit knowledge
2.17
1.28
2
25

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

Open System
2.32
1.32
2
Factor loading sum of
11.39
11.04
squareRatio of factor
32%31%contributionn = 1,034. The estimation method was the maximum likelihood method and promax rotation.
The inter factor correlation was 0.75. Questions involving multiple factor loadings were
excluded from the analysis and only descriptive statistics were described. The Tucker-Lewis
Index was 0.947. For measurement, an irregular Likert scale was used: “0. I have not heard ofit.” “1. I don’t understand it all,” through “3. I somewhat understand it,” and finally “5．I
understand it to a great extent” was employed. When calculating the descriptive statistics andperforming the factor analysis, 0 was converted to 1.

26

No. of times books readNo. of times websites
viewedNo. of times magazines
read
Length of time spent
watching TV
Nikkei Shimbun
subscription
Nikkei Sangyo Shimbum
subscription
Nikkei MJ subscription
Nikkei Veritas
subscription
Subscriptions to national
newspapers
Subscriptions to local
newspapers
Subscriptions toprofessional andindustry publications
Frequency of unofficial
communication
Frequency of official
communication
Science typeSelf-referencing typeNon-referencing type
Career concern
Career planning

TABLE 2 Correlation matrix of dependent variables
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9) (10) (11)

(1)

(1)
1

(2)

.43

1

(3)

.50

.44

1

(4)

.41

.45

.39

1

(5)

.32

.29

.33

.29

1

(6)

.11

.24

.23

.19

.32

1

(7)

.09

.13

.13

.14

.20

.31

1

(8)

.17

.14

.18

.12

.16

.15

.25

1

(9)

.16

.13

.19

.15

.09

.11

.04

.05

1

(10) .01

.02

.01

.03

-.03

.02

-.01

.00

-.12

1

(11) .15

.15

.15

.13

.20

.27

.13

.17

.10

.06

1

(12) .33

.29

.32

.25

.25

.20

.15

.14

.09

.05

.18

1

(13) .30

.28

.25

.22

.27

.16

.11

.14

.10

.03

.17

.54

1

(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)

.15
.00
-.08
.16
.17

.03
-.05
-.06
.13
.19

.03
.01
-.07
.14
.17

.01
-.01
-.05
.03
.09

.00
.02
.01
.02
.04

-.01
-.01
-.04
-.02
-.02

-.05-.01
.01
-.04
-.01

.03
.02
-.07
.03
.030

.06
-.01
-.02
.03
.02

.04
-.03
-.02
.04
.04

.06
-.03
-.06
.13
.14

.12
-.02
-.01
.14
.13

.03
-.01
-.06
.35
.36

27

(12)

(13)

(14)

(15)

(16)

(17)

1
.23
-.41
.50
.27

1
-.05
.14
.14

1
-.29
-.09

1
.66

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefitsn = 1,034. Spearman's Rank correlation coefficient is used.

28

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

TABLE 3: Results of the regression analysis (１)Dependent variables:
Dependent variables:
Understanding of academic terms
Understanding of practical terms
OLS
Hierarchical
OLS
HierarchicalLinear Model
Linear Modelcoefficient t value
coefficient t value
coefficient t value
Coefficient t value
0.78
2.79 **
0.72
2.87 **
0.77
2.46 *
0.74
2.64
0.13
4.46 ***
0.14
4.74 ***
0.14
4.28 ***
0.15
4.58
0.02
1.78
0.03
2.23 *
0.02
1.86
0.03
2.17
−0.04 −1.11
−0.03
−0.92
−0.08
-2.08 *
−0.07
-1.94
0.00
1.79
0.00
2.05 *
0.001
2.34 *
0.001
2.47
0.25
3.76 ***
0.30
4.67 ***
0.21
2.89 **
0.31
4.27
0.27
2.21 *
0.27
2.27 *
0.27
2.02 *
0.29
2.17−0.08 −0.46
−0.16
−0.94
−0.05
-0.28
−0.16
-0.77
−0.08 −0.30
−0.13
−0.49
−0.27
-0.89
−0.23
-0.75
−0.11 −1.91 *−0.13−2.21 *
0.07
1.03
0.05
0.84
−0.09 −1.48
−0.08
−1.34
−0.10
-1.39
−0.09
-1.35

Items
(Intercept)**
No. of times books read***No. of times websites viewed*
No. of times magazines read
Length of time spent watching TV*
Nikkei Shimbun subscription***
Nikkei Sangyo Shimbum subscription*
Nikkei MJ subscription
Nikkei Veritas subscription
Subscriptions to national newspapers
Subscriptions to local newspapers
Subscriptions to professional and
0.01
0.09
0.00
0.02
0.05
0.34
0.01
0.07
industry publications
Frequency of unofficial
0.01
1.89 *
0.01
2.61 **
0.00
0.96
0.01
1.77
communication
Frequency of official communication
0.01
1.52
0.01
2.30 *
0.01
1.10
0.01
1.96
Science type−0.09 −2.10 *−0.09−2.06 *
−0.00
-0.03
0.01
0.12
Self-referencing type
0.01
0.11
0.01
0.15
−0.05
-0.96
−0.04
-0.79
Non-referencing type
0.06
1.38
0.05
1.09
0.18
4.39 ***
0.17
4.29 ***
Career concern−0.03 −0.57
−0.06
−1.08
0.06
1.08
0.03
0.56
Career planning
0.20
4.43 ***
0.20
4.43 ***
0.17
3.38 ***
0.18
3.54 ***
2
Adjusted R
80.79%
90.46%
F values
7.443 ***
6.869 ***
n = 1,034. VIF was below five in each model. Control variables are not shown. The OLS values are the estimated values when the control
variables were controlled by the dummy variables. The Hierarchical Linear Model values are the estimated values when the control variables that29

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

became the category variables were controlled by random effects. Both are shown as their robustness was confirmed. Values in bold type arethose with a significance level of 5% in both models.
*p <.05**p <.01***p <.001

30

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefits

Items(Intercept)
Understanding of practical terms
Understanding of academic terms
No. of times books readNo. of times websites viewed
No. of times magazines read
Length of time spent watching TV
Nikkei Shimbun subscription
Nikkei Sangyo Shimbum subscription
Nikkei MJ subscription
Nikkei Veritas subscription
Subscriptions to national newspapers
Subscriptions to local newspapers
Subscriptions to professional andindustry publications
Frequency of unofficial
communication
Frequency of official communication
Science typeSelf-referencing typeNon-referencing type
Career concern
Career planning
Adjusted coefficient of determination
McFadden’s R2
F valesChi-square value

TABLE 4: Results of the of regression analysis (2)Dependent variables: Promotion
Dependent variables: Annual income
Ordered probit model
Hierarchical Linear Model
OLS
Hierarchical Linear Modelcoefficientt valuecoefficientt valuecoefficient t value
coefficientt value
4.72
22.15 ***
5.32
25.66 ***
−0.09
−0.73
−0.06
−0.48
0.04
1.09
0.04
1.00
0.00
0.12
0.05
1.38
0.29
2.63 ***
0.41
3.57 ***
0.02
0.28
−0.04
−0.58
−0.03
−1.24
−0.03
−1.20
−0.01
−0.33
0.00
0.11
0.00
0.18
0.00
0.19
0.02
0.25
0.05
0.62
0.05
1.86 *
0.06
2.07 *
0.00
0.34
0.00
0.81
0.00
1.14
0.00
0.41
0.24
1.52
0.27
1.69 .
0.15
2.93 **
0.26
4.99 ***
−0.06
−0.20
−0.13
−0.45
−0.11
−1.22
−0.06
−0.62
0.09
0.23
0.04
0.11
−0.07
−0.57
−0.14
−1.03
−0.59
−1.02
−0.20
−0.33
−0.19
−0.94
−0.24
−1.10
0.10
0.76
0.02
0.15
0.01
0.31
0.01
0.22
0.23
1.55
0.15
0.99
−0.08
−1.61
−0.08
−1.54
0.11

0.41

0.04

0.13

−0.01

−0.11

0.08

0.84

0.02

2.28 *

0.01

2.13 *

−0.00

−1.25

0.00

0.27

0.01
−0.03
−0.05
−0.01
−0.01
0.22

1.39
−0.27
−0.45
−0.08
−0.05
1.92

0.02
−0.07
0.00
−0.13
−0.11
0.19

1.48
−0.71
0.01
−1.53
−0.83
1.61

0.01
−0.02
−0.00
0.03
0.04
−0.02

3.27 **
−0.48
−0.07
0.86
0.97
−0.70
33.92%

0.02
−0.01
−0.02
−0.03
−0.00
−0.00

6.32 ***
−0.28
−0.64
−0.76
−0.05
−0.09

16.31%
9.337 ***
2653.5 ***31

Diffusion of knowledge related to Management studies and Practical Benefitsn = 1,034. For the “annual salary” dependent variable, the value after conversion to a logarithm was used to reduce the influence of outlier
values. VIF was below five for both models. Control variables are not shown. For the estimates from the ordered logit and OLS, the estimatesvalues displayed are for when the control variables that became the categories variables were controlled by the dummy variables. For the
Hierarchical Linear Model, the estimated values are for when the control variables that became the category variables were controlled by random
effects. Both are shown as the robustness of each was confirmed. Values in bold type are those with a significance level of 5% in both models
when annual salary was the dependent variable.
*p <.05**p <.01***p <.00132