Management theories developed in the United States and Europe have dominated management and organizational studies. As a result, scholars often overlook subtle cultural and ideological differences in other settings as they treat the theories from the United States and Europe as universal. All too often, as they attempt to apply these theories, scholars ignore critical research questions relevant to groups of people outside the United States and Europe. To overcome this shortcoming, Filatotchev, Ireland, and Stahl (in this issue) propose an open systems perspective that draws on multiple universal theories. Instead, we argue that such a solution does not address the fundamental problem of theories framed within the United States and European perspective. Using more of these theories does not solve this problem and may even exacerbate it. We argue, rather than simply placing bandages on existing theories, scholars should develop indigenous theory based on the distinctiveness of local contexts. The use of indigenous theory can also spur innovations in research methods, enhancing the rigor and relevance of findings.

中文翻译：

---

土著理论的使用、滥用和未来

美国和欧洲发展起来的管理理论主导了管理和组织研究。因此，学者们在将来自美国和欧洲的理论视为普遍存在时，往往会忽视其他环境中微妙的文化和意识形态差异。很多时候，当他们试图应用这些理论时，学者们忽略了与美国和欧洲以外的人群相关的关键研究问题。为了克服这个缺点，Filatotchev、Ireland 和 Stahl（在本期中）提出了一种利用多种普遍理论的开放系统视角。相反，我们认为这样的解决方案并没有解决美国和欧洲观点框架内的理论的根本问题。使用更多这些理论并不能解决这个问题，甚至可能会加剧它。我们争吵，学者们不应简单地对现有理论进行束缚，而应根据当地环境的独特性发展本土理论。本土理论的使用还可以促进研究方法的创新，提高研究结果的严谨性和相关性。