Theory: Conceptual Engagement or Ornament?

Abstract

The growing expansion of empirical methods, increasing pressures for academic productivity, and the intensive use of artificial intelligence tools have redefined the role of theory in management research. Although scientific output continues to display theoretical frameworks, deep conceptual engagement has been progressively replaced by superficial uses of theory as rhetorical ornamentation. This essay problematizes this transformation, arguing that theory risks losing its structuring function when it is mobilized merely to comply with editorial norms, while empirical findings accumulate disconnected from conceptual reflection. We revisit critiques that denounce this distancing and show how the popularization of AI systems, by facilitating textual recombination, may reinforce minimalist practices of theoretical legitimation. We contrast this scenario with scientific traditions that allow the publication of empirical findings prior to the formulation of comprehensive theories and discuss why such openness remains limited in management studies. We propose that thinking outside the box entails recognizing the legitimacy of studies not yet theoretically anchored, encouraging more robust conceptual syntheses, and fostering a scientific culture that values both reflection and discovery.