Basic HTML-Version
personalquarterly 04 / 12
6
Schwerpunkt
_Interview
PERSONALquarterly:
What is evidence-based Management (EBMgt)
from your point of view?
Sara Rynes:
There are two already-published definitions that are
likely to dominate discussions of EBMtg during the next few
years, so I won’t add my own. The first of these is the one pro-
vided by Rob B. Briner, David Denyer, and Denise M. Rousseau
(2009, S. 19):
“Evidence-based management is about making decisions
through the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of four
sources of information: practitioner expertise and judgment,
evidence from the local context, a critical evaluation of the
best available research evidence, and the perspectives of those
people who might be affected by the decision.”
The second is the one that Denise Rousseau recently provided in
the introductory chapter of “The Oxford Handbook of Evidence-
Based Management” (2012, S. 3): “Evidence-based management
is an evolution in the practice of management. It is a knowledge-
intensive, capacity-building way to think, act, organize, and
lead. Its practice incorporates (1) use of scientific principles in
decisions and management processes, (2) systematic attention
to organizational facts, (3) advancements in practitioner judg-
ment through critical thinking and decision aids that reduce
bias and enable fuller use of information, and (4) ethical con-
siderations including effects on stakeholders.”
PERSONALquarterly:
What are the major differences between these
two approaches?
Sara Rynes:
The definitions are largely compatible, but they do
have some differences in emphasis. First, the Briner et al.
definition seems to emphasize research “findings” while Rous-
seau’s definition focuses more on scientific “principles” and
decision processes. Secondly, Rousseau introduces the notion
of “ethics” when referring to the perspectives and effects of
those affected by a decision, which seems to introduce greater
complexity into that aspect of EBMgt.
The third difference is that Rousseau’s definition makes spe-
cific reference to “advancements in practitioner judgment
through critical thinking and decision aids that reduce bias
and enable fuller use of information.” This modification seems
to me to represent an improvement over the Briner et al. dimen-
Die Gräben zwischen Managementforschung
und Personalpraxis schließen
Das E-Mail-Interview mit
Prof. Sara Rynes
führten Prof. Torsten Biemann (Universität zu Köln) und Prof. Heiko Weckmüller (FOM, Bonn)
sion of “practitioner expertise and judgment” in that it injects
formal, conscious processes and procedures that have been
shown to improve decision outcomes.
Regardless of which definition you choose, the dimension that
would probably represent the biggest departure in most orga-
nizations is the use of research-supported principles or the best
available research evidence. Although organizations generally
make use of practitioner experience and judgment, the opin-
ions of affected parties, and to a lesser extent, local data, few
practitioners use evidence produced by academic researchers.
Rather, managers tend to use consultants and (especially) the
opinions of peers far more often than academic research during
decision making (e.g., Rynes/Colbert/Brown, 2002 or Tenhiälä
et al., 2012).
PERSONALquarterly:
Why is EBMgt important?
Sara Rynes:
EBMgt has drawn inspiration from the Evidence-
Based Medicine (EBMed) movement, and EBMgt is important
for reasons that are highly similar to those that have created
enthusiasm for EBMed. In medicine, failure to use the best
available evidence results in inaccurate diagnoses, ineffective
treatments, accidents, errors, and death. Looking at the history
of medicine, some ineffective (and even harmful) treatments
were practiced due to a lack of research evidence, such as
bloodletting and the use of straightjackets. However, other in-
effective or even disastrous practices occurred because doctors
refused to apply the evidence at hand. For example, 19th centu-
ry Austrian doctors failed to wash their hands before delivering
babies despite Ignaz Semmelweiss’ data showing a clear linka-
ge between hand washing and reduced deaths in childbirth.
Instead of using his findings, Semmelweis’s colleagues had
him fired and sent to an asylum, where he ironically died of
septicemia (Ayres, 2007).
There are direct analogies from EBMed to EBMgt. For example,
in some cases there isn’t very compelling empirical evidence
about effective management techniques but in others, the evi-
dence exists but is either not believed, or believed but not im-
plemented. As is the case in medicine, when known evidence
is not applied, negative outcomes result for companies via re-
duced productivity and employee commitment, for employees