Management and emancipation – two opposing ideas: The Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies

Purpose – The purpose of this conceptual-theoretical review article is to examine two claims made by critical management studies (CMS): that CMS is emancipatory and that it has critical theory (CT) as its origin and prime theoretical base. Design/methodology/approach – Two theories are contrasted: CT and CMS. The paper analyses one of CMS' newest key publications: the Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies in great detail focusing on epidemiology and philosophy. Findings – The main finding is that CMS is a critical representation of mainstream MS. CT focuses on emancipation while CMS provides a system-conforming interpretation of traditional MS that rarely presents alternatives to mainstream MS. Research limitations/implications – The key implication is that CMS assists mainstream MS as a corrective but, in general, does not enhance emancipation. Practical implications – The paper assists researchers in the field of management studies (MS) and its “critical” offspring of CMS in understanding the role CMS plays for traditional MS. Social implications – It makes scholars aware that research conducted from within CMS provides system-conforming solution to issues such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) and environmental issues. CMS scholarship is not a critical evaluation of, for example, CSR and environmental issues directed towards emancipation from present structures of managerial domination. Originality/value – The value of the paper is threefold: for the first time, CMS has been measured against its own claims; the article provides clarity on three issues: MS, CMS and CT; and it assists research in the area of CMS and CT because it shows that the former is about improving mainstream MS while the latter is about emancipation.