Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres

Understanding the colonial roots of Indian management thought: An

agenda to decolonise and theorise for Indian contexts
Abhoy K. Ojha *, Ramya Tarakad Venkateswaran
a
Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Management, Indian Institute of Management Bangalore, Bannerghatta Road, Karnataka, India
b
Strategic Management Group, Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Diamond Harbour Road, JOKA P.O., Kolkata 700104. India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Despite several calls to develop indigenous theories to contribute to Indian management knowledge, there has
Arthashastra been limited success. There is no well-developed alternate Indian paradigm in management that can sustain a
Decolonisation rigorous research programme and be relevant to practice. We argue that the intellectual colonisation of Indian
Eurocentrism
academia due to the prevailing Eurocentrism (and US-centrism) and the use of English as a language for research
Indigenous knowledge
India
and dissemination of knowledge are two key reasons underlying this failure. We demonstrate this by illustrating
US-centrism the near absence of scholarly work on Kautilya’s Arthashastra despite its wide acceptance in popular writings in
India and its use in management practice. Finally, we suggest strategies to achieve intellectual decolonisation or
intellectual freedom to enable scholars to engage with Indian issues and phenomena using indigenous knowledge
perspectives and to contribute to an indigenous paradigm that might provide unique insights into managing the
Indian way.

1. Introduction possibility of making Type I and Type II errors.” (Doktor et al., 1991:
363)
There have been several calls to develop indigenous theories of
Almost two decades later, the editors of another journal commented:
business and management, but extant research efforts have not been
fruitful in arriving at a management paradigm that is relevant to India “Surprisingly, despite its growing diversity, published research in the
and can sustain a rigorous research programme while informing prac­ major entrepreneurship journals remains focused on phenomena
tice. Most studies in the Indian context, whether by scholars from India whose genesis was largely in the United States—with theoretical
or outside, have applied existing US-centric1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 theories due to foundations also generated in Western philosophical and research
the inherent US-centricity of scholarship in business and management traditions.” (Bruton, Zahra, & Cai, 2018: 352)
(Barkema, Chen, George, Luo & Tsui, 2015; Bruton & Lau, 2008; Doktor,
Venkateswaran and Ojha (2017) called out similar issues in strategy
Tung, & Von Glinow, 1991; Rašković, Dikova, & McDougall-Covin,
research, arguing that the dominant theoretical perspectives are not
2020; Tung, 2005). Cautioning against the tendency to assume the
truly universal. Hoskisson, Wright, Filatotchev, and Peng (2013)
universality of US-centric theories, Doktor et al. (1991) argued:
nuanced their popular extension of US-centric theories for emerging
“(A)s management researchers construct theory, they are, in fact, economies that further extended the generalisation. We believe that
attempting to build a model that describes, predicts, and helps them these minor tweaks to US-centric research frameworks are incapable of
to understand the world that they perceive about them… If North providing an adequate understanding of phenomena in contexts that
America is their domain, then it is but North America to which their might be fundamentally different from the US context. In the context of
theory may be applied, and application of that theory beyond the India, US-centric frameworks are inadequate in explaining several as­
boundaries of the North American domain greatly enhances the pects of business and management—for example, differences in (i) levels
of hierarchy, (ii) incentive systems, (iii) strategy formulation and most

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A.K. Ojha), [email protected] (R. Tarakad Venkateswaran).
1
We use the terms ‘Eurocentric’ and ‘US-centric’ interchangeably, largely using the former when referring to colonial influences before India’s independence, and
the latter when referring to neo-colonial influences after independence.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.067
Received 20 February 2021; Received in revised form 20 May 2022; Accepted 26 May 2022
Available online 2 June 2022
0148-2963/© 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

importantly implementation of strategies, (iv) consumer behaviour and contribute to business and management knowledge in India (Starzl &
positioning of products, and (v) the role of personal relationships and Dhir, 1986). We demonstrate the neglect of this treatise in the main­
networks in the conduct of business. These aspects can be better un­ stream academic research that is available in the English language as an
derstood and explained by using indigenous theories that are grounded example of the marginalisation of indigenous knowledge in academic
in the real voices and experiences of the subjects rather than through circles in India, despite it being a highly popular text that is widely
minor adaptations to US-centric perspectives may be adequate for the acclaimed in Indian business practices and politics, and in popular In­
US context. dian culture. Building on Gandhi (1938), Dei (2006), Quijano (2007),
Unlike in the natural sciences, where the theoretical perspectives are Kohn and McBride (2011), Schmidt (2011), and others, we argue for
inherently universal (Rosenberg, 2012), researchers working in the so­ strategies to challenge intellectual colonisation and to create hybridity
cial sciences, including business and management, need to recognise the (Frenkel & Shenhav, 2006) and pluriversality (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018)
importance of subjective meaning (Taylor, 1971) and local rationalities to re-centre the knowledge around India based on indigenous theories
(Lukes, 2000) in developing contextually relevant theories. Hence, it while continuing to be open to influences from other paradigms.
seems quite reasonable to expect efforts to develop contextually relevant In this paper, we examine the harm caused by intellectual coloni­
theoretical frameworks (Bruton & Lau, 2008; Doktor et al., 1991; Poulis sation in India because of British rule and its after-effects, and the
& Poulis, 2018) for India. Similar to Nkomo (2011), we are also con­ damage due to the application of US-centric theories of business and
cerned by the disconnect between the theories and the lived experience management. We acknowledge that while we critically examine the is­
of the people in the local context, the near absence of contextually rich sues of our interest by deconstructing and reconstructing alternate
and locally relevant theories, and the inability to develop such theories. possibilities, we ourselves are negotiating our roles as ‘outsiders’ in a
Scholars who are deeply embedded in the local context and who are also system in which we are to some extent ‘insiders’, given our educational
part of the global academic community should be able to undertake training and current affiliations (Bhattacharya, 2013). Further, while
context-specific theory-building that genuinely engages with the our focus is on the impact of external colonisation, we are aware of the
context, informs rigorous, globally acceptable scholarship, and is truly role of what might be described as ‘internal’ colonisation (Kapoor, 2007)
relevant to local practice (Alcadipani, Khan, Gantman, & Nkomo, 2012). that might prevent certain segments of marginalised society in India
We borrow the term ‘amnesia’ from Devy (1992), a highly regarded from having an equal say in the process of evolving an indigenous
Gandhian scholar, to explain how colonisation had a demoralising in­ paradigm. Additionally, similar to Mbembe (2016), we are conscious of
fluence that was pervasive and entrenched. The deep-rooted effect of possible ‘retrogression’ that might have negative consequences, and are
coloniality was an incurable sense of inferiority among Indian scholars alert to Hamann, Luiz, Ramaboa, Khan, Dhlamini, and Nilsson’s (2020)
that prevented them from becoming aware of or being able to recognise caution against possible scapegoating and valorising biases. Our effort in
knowledge that was indigenous to the Indian context. Building on these this paper is to create complementary hybrid spaces and pluriversality
thoughts, we argue that the efforts to develop contextually rich and that might allow a body of knowledge that has so far been neglected in
locally relevant business and management theories have been hampered Indian academia to have a fair chance to participate in the dialogical
by the lingering influence of the intellectual colonisation of Indian engagements that have been dominated by Eurocentric discourses until
academia. Given the immense value of post-colonial perspectives in now. Our endeavour is to produce an emic account and to push back the
reinvigorating the discipline (Banerjee & Prasad, 2008; Westwood, etic accounts that prevail when trying to improve research in India (for
2006; Westwood & Jack, 2007), we offer an analysis that will help instance, Khatri, Varma, & Budhwar, 2017). While we do not claim to
provide an understanding of the historical roots of intellectual coloni­ provide a fully evolved paradigm, we do suggest strategies to initiate the
sation in India, particularly in business and management, and suggest process of decolonisation of the Indian mind to attain intellectual
strategies for intellectual decolonisation. freedom and to create space for indigenous traditions that might lead to
We notice that in at least two non-European countries that have the paradigm that we seek.
relatively strong research programmes in business and management,
scholars were able to draw on a rich tradition of knowledge and learning 2. Intellectual colonisation in India
in their respective societies. Japan, based on traditional Japanese wis­
dom (Hayashi, 2002; Keys & Miller, 1984), and, more recently, China, We argue that despite the apparent political and economic freedom
based on Confucian philosophy (Boyd, 2018; Chen, 2014), have devel­ in the country, India has been unable to chart its own future because it
oped indigenous frameworks that are consistent with their cultural and has not achieved intellectual freedom, that is, it remains intellectually
philosophical heritage even as they learned from Eurocentric theories. colonised. The issue of intellectual colonisation was highlighted by
In contrast, there has been little impact of indigenous perspectives from Mahatma Gandhi in an article published immediately after India’s
India on business and management research, even though social values independence:
and managerial practices in India are quite different from those in
“Though we are politically free, we are barely free from the subtle
Europe (Hofstede, 1980; Sinha, 1984; Sinha & Sinha, 1990). In an
domination of the West… It is to be hoped that no one contends that,
extensive review of five decades of India-focused international business
because we seem to be politically free from foreign domination, the
and management research in 17 leading journals, Mukherjee, Kumar,
mere fact gives us freedom from the more subtle influence of the
Mukherjee, and Goyal (2022) noted the dearth of conceptual studies
foreign language and foreign thought.”2
using the Indian context, because most studies tended to replicate
Western concepts, constructs, and theories in the Indian setting. There At the heart of intellectual colonisation is the ‘cultural bomb’ that is
have been only a few sporadic efforts to examine Indian ways of man­ unleashed by the colonisers, which disconnects the colonised from their
aging, and Mukherjee et al. (2022) urge researchers to engage in more heritage (Ngugi,1994).
context-sensitive theorising, consistent with Padalkar and Gopinath’s
“[The impact of] a cultural bomb is to annihilate a people’s belief in
(2015) conclusion that there is a lack of context-sensitive theorising in
their names, in their languages, in their environment, in their heri­
India.
tage of struggle, in their unity, in their capacities and ultimately in
We believe that the two key and related reasons for the lack of
themselves. It makes them see their past as one wasteland of non-
indigenous theorisation are intellectual colonisation and excessive reli­
achievement and it makes them want to distance themselves from
ance on English as a language of research and knowledge dissemination.
As an illustration, we discuss the case of the Arthashastra written by
Kautilya (also known as Chanakya), an Indian scholarly treatise on po­
litical, strategic, and international affairs that has significant potential to 2
Mahatma Gandhi in Harijan, 2–11-1947, p. 392.

701
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

that wasteland. It makes them want to identify with that which is house as freely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my feet by
furthest removed from themselves… with other peoples’ languages any.”3
rather than their own.” (Ngugi,1994: 3)
Outside the small pockets of elite society that are strongly influenced
Many colonisers, particularly European colonisers, and their apolo­ by European traditions, Indian society and the business world are still
gists have argued that colonisation was required to modernise the peo­ largely informed by the indigenous knowledge systems that are
ple of the colonised societies. Ironically, even Marx (1853) supported embedded in Indian society (Mohnot, Pratap, & Saha, 2021; Ven­
the imperial interventions in India on similar grounds. However, Memmi kateswaran, Vadivelu, & Krishnan, 2021) but are neglected by the ac­
(2003) strongly refutes any such assertions, arguing that colonisers ademic elite. In his book Hind Swaraj, Gandhi was not parochial and
never had any positive intentions for the societies that they colonised, drew on many traditions—including European traditions that he oppo­
and if at all something positive was done, it was with the intention of sed—to make his argument for complete freedom or Purna Swaraj,
serving the needs of the colonisers. Intellectual colonisation has a deeper suggesting that cross-cultural dialogue should be encouraged (Kohn &
effect than that of political and economic colonisation. It “colonises McBride, 2011). Along similar lines, Nehru (2004) also argued for
minds in addition to bodies and it releases forces within the colonised continuity:
societies to alter their cultural priorities once for all… the West is now
“A blind reverence for the past is bad and so also is a contempt for it,
everywhere, within the West and outside; in structures and in minds”
for no future can be founded on either of these. The present and the
(Nandy, 1983: 11). Along similar lines, deSouza (2017) referred to the
future inevitably grow out of the past and bear its stamp, and to
“enslavement of the mind” and the replacement of the “real mind” by the
forget this is to build without foundations and to cut off the roots of
“shadow mind”.
national growth.” Nehru (2004: 33)
The process of political, economic, and intellectual decolonisation
had varied trajectories in different contexts. Japan, which was not Consistent with these views, we argue for the need to develop
colonised, could rapidly build a modern economy by borrowing ideas indigenous knowledge that is based not on modified Eurocentric
from the West and integrating them into its traditional systems without knowledge, but on knowledge that provides a voice to the local subject
facing the challenge of intellectual colonisation (Duara, 2004). On the and the indigenous scholar. However, even in the early 1900 s, when
other hand, China—which was politically and economically colonised Gandhi and Nehru emphasised the need to draw on Indian heritage to
by Japan briefly—did not have to deal with intellectual colonisation for modernise, not everyone agreed. M. N. Roy, who was strongly influ­
too long because it was able to go back to its traditions. Unlike Japan and enced by Marx, argued vehemently against borrowing from Indian tra­
China, India was economically, politically, and intellectually colonised. ditions (Kohn & McBride, 2011). We quite clearly side with Gandhi and
The British colonisers consciously weakened and destroyed India’s Nehru rather than Roy on the need to build on the Indian heritage with
traditional knowledge systems and imposed English as a medium of all its blemishes, rather than abandon it. Rajni Kothari, in his intro­
education. These imperial interventions created an academic elite duction to Alvares (1991), argued for non-European societies to develop
whose interests were aligned with those of the colonisers. This elite their indigenous paradigms to solve their own problems and to
either lost touch with, or worse, learnt to detest or mistrust indigenous contribute to hybridity (Frenkel & Shehnav, 2006) and pluriversality
knowledge systems (Devy, 1992; Gandhi, 1938; Nehru, 2004). After (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018) in global thought, which might allow the
independence, many from this same elite occupied leadership positions former colonisers to borrow and deal with the problems they encounter
in a system of knowledge and education that was suitable for the colo­ due to a misguided pursuit of modernity and progress.
nisers. Rather than change the system, they continued the legacy, partly
because of self-interest, but more importantly because of intellectual
2.1. Societal identities in India during and after colonisation
colonisation (Devy, 1992; Memmi, 2003; Ngugi,1994).
The hegemony of the Eurocentric tradition, now carried forward by
Underlying the phenomenon of intellectual colonisation is the
the native Indians, does not allow scholars to see outside those frames,
transformation of societal identities. A society and its identity get
and their entrenchment in leadership positions in the higher education
defined by discursive conversations that are often influenced by those
system hinders those who adopt alternate frames. Many Indian aca­
who control the nature of the discourse. Since the early days of European
demics who are at the ‘periphery’ and outside the ‘centre’ of Eurocentric
colonisation, the societal identity of India has been strongly influenced
knowledge work hard to gain access to the dominant ‘centre’ and win
by Eurocentric perspectives and reactions to them. Rudolph (2009)
the and approval of the gatekeepers at this ‘centre’. Nandy (1983)
suggested that over time, there have been four variants of Indian civi­
referred to these scholars as gladiators who act to impress the Caesars,
lisational identity (see Table 1). The first, the Orientalist variant, was
the academic gatekeepers of knowledge in the Eurocentric ‘centre’, not
shaped largely by officials of the British East India Company during the
realising that in the end, death (that is, intellectual death) is the only
eighteenth and early nineteenth century. They presented a rather
outcome for those on the ‘periphery’ who seek approval from the
romantic image of an evolved society. However, even in this portrayal,
‘centre’. We argue that unless deep-rooted colonial influences are
there was an implicit attempt to suggest that Indian society was ‘exotic’,
addressed, scholars who are interested in India will face such an intel­
but not ‘modern’. The descriptions soon changed as the imperialists took
lectual death and will be unable to develop indigenous knowledge that
control of the discourse, leading to the emergence of the Anglicist
adequately addresses the issues in the Indian context.
variant. The holders of this view made no pretence of presenting India as
In the context of Africa, Mbembe (2016) argued that intellectual
an evolved society. They quite clearly presented India as a degraded and
freedom is not about returning a society to its pre-colonial state. Rather,
pagan society that required interventions to promote modernity.
it is more about ensuring that the debates on Africa are grounded in the
There were many, both in India and Britain, who did not accept the
real lived experiences of the people of Africa. Echoing similar senti­
Anglicist perspective. Scholars tried to argue for an Indian societal
ments, Mahatma Gandhi, during the early days of his participation in the
identity that was more rooted in India than in Europe. Over time, these
independence movement in India, had written:
narratives created a Liberal nationalist variant that contributed to the
“I do not want my house to be walled in on all sides and my windows image of India as a pluralist and tolerant society that sheltered multiple
to be stuffed. I want the cultures of all lands to be blown about my civilisational streams. The fourth, the Hindu nationalist variant, which
also emerged as a response to the Anglicist variant, has been contesting

3
Mahatma Gandhi in Young India, 1–6-1921, p. 170.

702
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

Table 1
Societal Identities in India During Colonisation and After.
Variant Presentation of social identity Influencers Exemplar scholarship

Orientalist A romantic image of an evolved society. Officials of the British East India Company during the William Jones (1771) A grammar of the Persian
Exotic, but not modern. eighteenth and early nineteenth century. Language.
William Jones (1784)
A discourse on the institution of a society for enquiring
into the history, civil and natural, the antiquities, arts,
sciences, and literature of Asia.

Anglicist A degraded and pagan society lacking in Officials of the British East India company after early James Mill (1817) History of India.
modernity. nineteenth century, supported by some Indian who had
received British education Charles E. Trevelyan (1938) On the Education of the
People of India.
Liberal A pluralist and tolerant society that sheltered Indians who were rooted in India but also able to M. K. Gandhi (1909) Hind Swaraj.
nationalist multiple civilisational streams. participate in the Eurocentric discourse to get the best J. Nehru (1936)
of both. Toward Freedom.
R. Tagore (1917)
Nationalism.
Hindu A Hindu civilisation, with religious Indians who had a desire to revive pre-colonial society M. S. Golwalkar (1939) We or Our Nation Defined.
nationalist overtones, with a desire to rid Indian society rooted in Indian traditions V. D. Savarkar (1928)
of ‘external’ influences. Hindutva: Who is a Hindu?

for space in India with the Liberal nationalist variant since then. Pro­ The Charter Act of 1813 was the first significant move in this di­
ponents of this last variant view Indian society as an expression of Hindu rection, as the British Government took responsibility for the education
civilisation, which has religious overtones, with attempts to rid Indian of Indian subjects. The Orientalists, who were dominant then, advocated
society of ‘external’ influences from the colonisers. For us, this creates a the continuation of the indigenous system of education. However, once
dilemma, because we do want to re-connect to the heritage of India, the Anglicist perspective prevailed within the British administration, the
which is quite inextricably linked to Indic civilisation, without empha­ need to modernise the colonies by spreading English education informed
sising the chauvinistic aspects. After reflection, we believe that it is by European Enlightenment had a major impact on interventions in
possible to re-connect with the pre-colonial heritage of India to gain education in India. Macaulay’s Minute on Indian Education,4 which is
from the positives without necessarily inviting the negatives. often referred to as the document that defined the intent of the colo­
We argue that these four societal identities have had an impact on nisers, was a product of the Anglicist mindset that took upon itself the
the knowledge and education systems in India. We focus largely on the ‘white man’s burden’ to change the world. It took a few decades for at
impact of the Anglicist view in imposing an alien knowledge and edu­ least a few prominent Indians to realise “the damage done to their
cation system on India. We then argue that since independence, the psyche and the grave distortion inflicted on their understanding by
Liberal nationalist response to intellectual colonisation has not been colonialism” before any organised efforts to reverse the effects were
radical enough to allow the re-centring of knowledge around India. We even attempted (Gohain, 2011: 24).
argue for a more forceful opposition to the Eurocentric knowledge sys­ A related change was that the medium of instruction was changed to
tems that are based on Gandhi’s aim of achieving Purna Swaraj. This English. This was implemented by restricting all government funds to
view was also expressed by Nehru (2004): only those schools in which knowledge was imparted in English. In
1837, the language of the courts was changed to English, and in 1844, it
“The Indian people, freed from the terrible sense of oppression and
was decided that all government jobs would be available only to those
frustration, will grow in stature again and lose their narrow
who had a working knowledge of English. The Woods Despatch of 1854,
nationalism and exclusiveness. Proud of their Indian heritage, they
while attempting to increase access to education, further entrenched the
will open their minds and hearts to other peoples and other nations,
role of Eurocentric knowledge and education by ensuring that all higher
and become citizens of this wide and fascinating world, marching
education was imparted in English, even though regional languages
onwards with others in that ancient quest in which their forefathers
were permitted for the school-level education. Since English became the
were the pioneers.” Nehru (2004: 41)
language of higher education and the government, and the medium of
We emphasise the need to re-centre Indian knowledge in the Indian education in many schools in urban centres, it hurt the cause of edu­
context instead of continuing to depend on Eurocentric knowledge cation and the literacy of large sections of the population, and created a
paradigms to guide the future, while continuing to be open to perspec­ situation in which the next few generations, particularly those from the
tives from other parts of the world. elite, were alienated from the traditional knowledge that was available
in the regional languages.
Quite naturally, most Indians, particularly those who already had
2.2. The imposition of Eurocentric education and English language in
contact with the colonisers, accepted Eurocentric knowledge and the
India
English language as passports to a better career and life. The changes
had significant supporters from among some prominent progressive-
According to Sundaram (1959), respect for learning and pursuit of
knowledge was well-established in India. The education system in India,
though different from that in Britain, resulted in literacy levels that were
comparable to those in Europe in the early 1800 s. Dharampal (2000) 4
Macaulay’s Minute on Indian Education refers to a note written by Thomas
provided a detailed account of the indigenous education systems in India
Macaulay when he served as an official for the Governor General of the British
in the eighteenth century, which provided education through patha­ East India Company in the 1830s. It emphasised the need to create "a class of
shalas, madrassas, and gurukuls. However, rather than improve on the persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals
existing systems, the colonisers deliberately damaged the indigenous and in intellect", which subsequently influenced the dismantling of traditional
systems of education by imposing Eurocentric knowledge and education knowledge and education systems and the imposition of British education and
systems to suit their colonial designs. English language in India.

703
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

minded Indians. Raja Ram Mohan Roy, one of the founders of the periphery’ and, like before, they found willing collaborators in India.
Brahmo Samaj, welcomed the colonial initiatives. Similarly, the reformer This impacted academic curricula, teaching methods, and most impor­
Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, founder of Aligarh Muslim University, also tantly, the choice of English as the language of instruction. The initial
welcomed these initiatives. Both represent examples of Indian agency in cohort of faculty of the two IIMs were sent to US universities to acquire
the colonisation of the Indian mind. We do not suggest that they were knowledge about US-centric management to start this process. This
wilfully destroying the indigenous knowledge traditions or were aware process was sustained by the continued dominance of US-trained faculty
of the long-term implications of the causes that they championed. But in the later hires. Srinivas (2008) suggested that there was some initial
we do assert that they had a role, however inadvertent or indirect, in the resistance, and there were attempts to demonstrate the ineffectiveness of
colonisation of the mind (Memmi, 2003) in India. Many years later, western management practice in India and some attempts to develop
lamenting on the effect of the interventions by the colonisers, Mahatma indigenous knowledge. However, this did not last for long. The pressures
Gandhi was quoted as saying, “I say without fear of my figures being on academics to be part of a global discourse on “modernity” led them to
challenged successfully, that today India is more illiterate than it was neglect efforts to develop indigenous management knowledge. The
fifty or a hundred years ago” (Dharampal, 2000: 6). dominant impact of the IIMs, which are now 20 in number, has steered
management knowledge and education in India towards the US-centric
2.3. Continued intellectual colonisation after political and economic approach. In recent times, global rankings and accreditation by US-
freedom centric agencies have only increased the pressure to conform to US
norms to become so-called world-class institutions (Kothiyal, Bell, &
According to Bandyopadhyay (2009), whether we have really aver­ Clarke, 2018).
ted Gandhi’s apprehension that India might end up with ‘English rule Srinivas (2008) and Kothiyal et al. (2018) focused their critique of
without the Englishmen’ needs to be examined, because many from the neo-colonial influences on Indian business and management education
same elite that collaborated with the colonists retained their positions on two issues: (i) the persistence of English as the language of scholarly
when the British left India (Grewal, 2016). Prominent members of In­ working and teaching, and (ii) the mimicry of US research norms. First,
dian society who adhered to the Liberal nationalist identity attempted to the English language as the dominant language of management
provide direction. Despite some differences among them (for example, discourse in international forums has a negative impact on scholars in all
Gandhi was deeply rooted in Indian tradition, while Nehru was more non-Anglophone countries, including Japan, China, and Europe. How­
open to European influence, and Tagore straddled both traditions), they ever, the impact in those countries is less damaging than that in India.
were very well-grounded in the Indian ethos and were well-versed with While scholars in these countries remain connected to their own society
developments in post-Enlightenment Europe to be able to chart a future and conduct research in their local language even as they share their
that adequately balanced elements from the heritage and the modern scholarly work for global audiences in English, scholars in India are
influences that might prepare the country for the twentieth century and disconnected from their own society because of their facility with En­
later. Unfortunately, the reins of the country gradually slipped into the glish and a corresponding lack of scholarly knowledge in the languages
hands of the next generation of the Liberal nationalists, who were not as of India. They quite effortlessly get ‘sucked’ into US-centric discourses
rooted in the Indian ethos as the early Liberal nationalists were. They and are unable to perceive their disconnect with their own local context.
continued the colonial Eurocentric legacy with limited tinkering instead Second, the pressure to mimic US-centric research norms is also uni­
of treading a truly independent path. As a result, Eurocentric knowledge versal. Kodeih and Greenwood (2013) presented the struggles of a
took centre stage once again, and academic pursuits in India attempted business school in France, which attempted to adapt to US-centric
to mimic those of the metropole or Eurocentric centres. pressures while trying to retain its local identity and relevance. We
Over time, the discourse itself was delinked from the aspirations of believe that business schools in India have experienced similar pres­
the Indian masses, unfortunately taking a tilt towards the very Anglicist sures, but unfortunately, they have been unable to retain local relevance
perspective that the Liberal nationalists had opposed. The modernity in the face of the neo-colonial influences. US-centric academic associa­
project that had been followed since independence, with all its positive tions, journals, and conferences act as agents that continue to impose
intentions, had deepened the colonisation of the mind rather than their hegemony on all non-US management education (Murphy & Zhu,
challenged it (deSouza, 2017). Therefore, the country was left in a state 2012). The US hegemony is so strong that it is a matter of prestige to be
of ‘suspension’, with very little capacity to reconnect to the pre-colonial affiliated to academic associations in the US, to present work in US
past and was in no position to catch up to the Eurocentric development conferences, and to publish in US journals, even for academics outside
model that it attempted to imitate (Guha, 1997). the US (Bruton et al., 2018; Meriläinen, Tienari, Thomas, & Davies,
2008; Tung, 2005). Local organisations, journals, and conferences are
2.4. Neo-colonialism: Imposition of US-centric management education pressurised to seek approval from the ‘centre’ by seeking affiliations of
their academic bodies with those in the US, by having members from the
The concept of a business school emerged in the late 1800 s in the US. US on the editorial and review boards of journals, and by having con­
It largely remained an American idea till the mid-1900 s. It was ference chairs and keynote speakers from the US (Kothiyal et al., 2018).
‘exported’ to Europe as part of the reconstruction of the continent after The programmes offered by business schools in India are forced to mimic
the devastation of World War II. London Business School and INSEAD those offered in the US through rankings (Ojha, 2005) and accreditation
are examples of schools that were established with US support. The (Ojha, 2017), and act as local agents who plant and replicate US-centric
concept was also imposed on India as part of US efforts to integrate the research paradigms and methods that alienate potential scholars who
country into the global capitalist economy. The Ford Foundation sup­ might be able to contribute to indigenous knowledge creation (Srinivas,
ported the establishment of the first Indian Institute of Management 2012).
(IIM) in Kolkata in 1959 in partnership with Sloan School of Manage­
ment and a second IIM in Ahmedabad in 1960 in partnership with 2.5. An illustration: Marginalisation of Kautilya’s Arthashastra
Harvard Business School. The IIMs, like the Indian Institutes of Tech­
nology (IITs), were kept outside the university system, ostensibly for The marginalisation of Indian knowledge due to colonial influences
ease of implementation, but this also facilitated neo-colonisation can be illustrated by the conspicuous absence of discussions in academic
without scrutiny from those outside the elite groups. The intent, circles about texts and entire bodies of indigenous knowledge that have
almost like the intent of the Anglicists more than a century ago, was to relevance for today. While we focus on Kautilya’s Arthashastra in this
transfer management knowledge and pedagogy ‘from the technologi­ paper, other examples of neglected classics include Shookraneeti’s the­
cally advanced, affluent core to the economically poor, underdeveloped ories of political science, Bhartrihari’s Neetishatakam about governance,

704
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

works on ethics such as Thiruvalluvar’s Thirukkural, Purananooru of the present.

Tamil Sangam literature, and Kamandakas’s Neetisara about elements of While we are not in a position to dismiss the concerns that have been
polity and statecraft. The Arthashastra, which is a compendium of clas­ expressed in the past, we believe that it is unfair to suppress a
sical practical knowledge, is a collation of 15 books. The English perspective on the mere possibilities of something going wrong. Scholars
translation by Shamasastry (1915) has over 600 pages of text. It is a should be able to give an indigenous perspective a fair chance, even if
treatise that covers a wide range of topics that are primarily relevant for they ultimately do not accept it. We are aware that the original work was
a king or ruler but have implications for management knowledge in written in Sanskrit, and based on most accounts, the author was a
contemporary times. We believe that it is a treasure trove of indigenous Brahmin, and there is evidence that the text implicitly accepted the
knowledge that continues to widely influence the world of practice in varna-based social hierarchy that is criticised today. However, scholars
government and business in India. However, it is nearly absent in seem to ‘judge’ Kautilya and his work by today’s standards and fail to
business and management research. We believe that scholars and re­ contextualise the knowledge into the historical and cultural milieu to
searchers are likely to be better informed about the Indian phenomena which it belonged. Scholars make accommodations for traditional
that they examine after they study this great piece of traditional schol­ scholarly contributors from Europe but are not willing to make the same
arly work. accommodations for those outside Europe. For example, Aristotle, a
In the context of business and management, there have been at­ contemporary of Kautilya, was from the elite of the Greek society who
tempts to draw on the Arthashastra to provide insights for leadership accepted a three-tier society, including slavery. Aristotle’s views about
(Sekhar, 2001; Sihag, 2004), organisation behaviour (Rajeev, 2007), women would be inappropriate by contemporary norms. However,
accounting (Murthy & Rooney, 2018) and organisation design (Sihag, modern academics acknowledge Aristotle’s contributions to knowledge,
2004), organisational controls and incentive systems (Sihag, 2007), while they are not comfortable with acknowledging Kautilya’s contri­
ethics (Gopinath, 1998; Kumar & Rao, 1996; Sekhar, 2001), and butions (Baggini, 2018). Similarly, the field of business and manage­
corporate governance (Alexander & Buckingham, 2011). ment has been open to the contributions of Max Weber despite strong
Boesche (2017) suggested that unlike traditional literatures from criticism about the racist views that are inherent in his writings (Zim­
Japan and China that are getting academic attention, the Arthashastra is merman, 2006).
not quite acknowledged in the US. More worrying is that Mitra and We believe that if we can contextualise the knowledge in the
Leibig (2017) found an absence of any references to the Arthashastra in Arthashastra, we might be able to acknowledge that this scholarly work
academic circles in India. Banerjee (2012) argued that despite this, the could perhaps offer a basis to understand much of the social and eco­
Arthashastra has had a prominent place in Indian society. There have nomic issues prevalent in India, even if the academic circles have
been several books drawing on the Arthashastra in the popular press, neglected it. We believe that a contemporary interpretation of this
with Rangarajan’s (1992) “The Arthashastra by Kautilya”, being one of classic has the potential to offer the foundation of a paradigm that can
the better researched and written books in English that make the treatise inform research in business and management in India and might also
more accessible. In addition, there are newspaper articles that refer to provide insights that are relevant to other societies. At its core, the text
the Arthashastra, and several prominent commentators use the pseu­ focuses on guidelines for the pursuit of wealth (artha) but emphasises the
donym of Kautilya to indicate an affiliation with the name to signify need to balance this with the pursuit of ethics or moral behaviour
intellectual insight. There is probably a lot more literature based on the (dharma) and worldly pleasures (kama), even as the leader works to
Arthashastra in the different regional languages of India. However, ac­ obtain the goodwill of society (Rangarajan, 1992). The treatise offers the
ademics in India who publish in English do not seem to be able to pro­ foundational blocks of a paradigm that is similar to the stakeholder
vide a similar place to Kautilya or the Arthashastra in their pursuit of perspective (Freeman, 1984) and is indigenously relevant and contex­
knowledge. tually sensitive. We are aware that during the pre-paradigmatic stage, all
What could explain this paradox? According to Mishra (1989), aca­ scholars might not be persuaded to adopt a perspective that is based on
demic interest in the study of the Arthashastra was very strong during the the Arthashastra, but we believe that with sufficient efforts, a fully
struggle for independence. However, after obtaining political freedom, evolved paradigm that is locally relevant will emerge. Metaphorically,
the urgency to draw on the country’s heritage declined. Unaware of the we would like to see our efforts as the early stages of radical innovation,
role of intellectual colonization, intellectuals adopted Western models to when the innovation appears to be inferior to the established technology
catch with the rest. Mitra and Liebig (2017) attributed this neglect of the based on the prevailing norms. The hope is that over time, when the
Arthashastra to the struggle that the social sciences faced in trying to paradigm finds a foothold, it will in turn change the norms of acceptance
negotiate space in universities, which seem to focus primarily on the of ‘good’ theory in India and will be established as the provider of
natural and applied sciences. This tension between the social sciences contextually rich and locally sensitive knowledge.
and the natural sciences in India is an extension of the debates between
these sciences after the ‘scientific’ revolution and positivist approaches 3. Strategies for intellectual freedom
(Rosenberg, 2012), further illustrating that the Indian academic context
has become another playground for the continuation of Eurocentric Several scholars have suggested strategies to achieve intellectual
discourses. The stream of postcolonial studies that aimed to reconstruct freedom (Burney, 2012a, 2012b; Dei, 2006; Kohn & McBride, 2011;
the ignored and repressed history of the ‘subalterns’, and consequently, Mignolo & Walsh, 2018; Quijano, 2007; Schmidt, 2011). Consistent with
to oppose what might be seen as colonial hegemony could have revived the arguments of Gandhi in his appeal for Purna Swaraj, Dei (2006)
interest in the Arthashastra. However, they also neglected it because suggests:
within Indian society, the treatise is probably seen as representing an
“The anti-colonial challenges any form of economic, cultural, polit­
elite or ‘Brahmanical’ view that is available in Sanskrit, which is to be
ical and spiritual dominance… An anti-colonial perspective is about
opposed just as much as the Eurocentric views are to be resisted. Further,
developing an awareness/consciousness of the varied conditions
many have argued that Indian academics should refrain from re-
under which domination and oppression operate. Such a perspective
connecting with the pre-colonial heritage because of concerns of po­
seeks to subvert the dominant relations of knowledge production
tential fascism, majoritarianism, and xenophobia (Bose, 1998; Chakra­
that sustain hierarchies and systems of power.” (Dei, 2006: 5)
varti, 1998). Presenting a critique of these arguments, Mukherjee (2010)
suggested that by emphasising or highlighting only the possible down­ In other words, strategies for intellectual freedom should focus on
sides of re-connecting with the past, these scholars seem to suggest that “claiming the power of local subjects’ intellectual agency” (Dei, 2006:
the Indic tradition has a place in history or in a museum but has little or 11). It includes challenging the colonial representations of the past and
no ability to contribute to the thoughts that might be relevant for the asserting the relevance of the pre-colonial knowledge for today, re-

705
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

interpreting the present, and laying the foundations for true intellectual that he valued. However, it is quite clear that demystification is not
freedom in the future (Quijano, 2007). These endeavours might require enough. It needs an alternative to facilitate reversal. Reversal refers to
a deeper rethinking of the pursuit of knowledge because “(i)ndigeniza­ “attempts to undermine power relations by valorizing the cultural
tion is not only about empowering local subjects … It is also about markers that the colonial system has denigrated as inferior” (Kohn &
affirming the rights of a people to retain their “indigeneity” in the face of McBride, 2011: 1430). Gandhi depicted spirituality and the lack of
so-called modernity and modernization” (Dei, 2006: 14). Similarly, desire for material wealth that are inherent in Indian civilisation as
there is a need to ‘write back’ to the colonisers to create a counter- positive rather than negative as was portrayed by the colonisers5 to offer
discourse (Burney, 2012b) and pursue possible ‘reverse colonisation’ alternate criteria to define civilisation. While demystification and
so that former coloniser nations are encouraged to re-interpret their own reversal help replace Eurocentric perspectives with an indigenous
past by considering new knowledge from the former colonies (Burney, perspective in elite discourses, this process also has political implica­
2012a). tions. This tactic, if conducted in regional languages, might help in the
According to deSouza (2017), there have been five general strategies mobilisation and participation of the common public in the discourse
of resistance to intellectual colonisation in India. The inspired eclectic from which they had been excluded (Kohn & McBride, 2011). Hence, if
strategy, which can be associated with the Liberal nationalist identity handled well, the masses can be engaged in the discourse to exert
before independence, utilised the colonial encounter to recognise the pressure on the academia to provide space for indigenous knowledge
strength of Indian traditions while drawing on the strengths of what the (Schmidt, 2011).
colonisers had to offer. Tagore’s Viswa Bharati is an illustration of this In the next section, we provide suggestions on how to reduce, if not
strategy. The incrementalist strategy, which can be associated with the erase, ‘amnesia’ to re-connect with the plural knowledge heritage of
Liberal nationalist identity after independence, recognised weaknesses India. Some of our suggestions might appear to be drastic, but they are
in the Indian systems as well as strengths in the Eurocentric perspectives based on our view that incrementalism has not worked in the face of
to build alternative knowledge systems. However, its adherents were not global pressures, and that a concerted effort is required to shake the
able to resist Eurocentric knowledge imposition because over time, they foundations of the current system to create the possibility of change. We
were themselves intellectually colonised and alienated from Indian so­ feel confident that having re-centred knowledge around India, Indian
ciety (Bandyopadhyay, 2009), which again “created the ground for a academia will remain open to external influences not only from Europe
subsequent recolonization” (deSouza, 2017: 146). The subaltern stra­ or the US, but from any source that facilitates the survival of hybridity
tegies focused on the voice of those marginalised in Indian society, while and pluriversality in our knowledge systems and society.
the nativist strategies focused on the voice of the more privileged who
highlighted the glory of the pre-colonial past. Both these strategies 4. Implications for business and management knowledge in
rejected Eurocentric knowledge. While these two strategies created India
space for indigenous knowledge in small pockets, they were not suc­
cessful in finding a foothold in the mainstream of Indian academia or in We have concluded thus far that Eurocentric and US-centric knowl­
the Eurocentric ‘centre’. The fifth strategy is counter discourse, which edge and the English language have contributed to the lack of devel­
can be associated with the work of Alvares (1991) in India and many opment of indigenous knowledge in India. We have also concluded that
others such as Aníbal Quijano in Latin America. This strategy simulta­ efforts to achieve intellectual freedom need to be more fundamental
neously highlights the shortcomings—including environmental and so­ than they have been so far. The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 of
cial harm—of the modernity project and the strength of the knowledge the Government of India is a step in this direction. This policy clearly
of the former colonies in providing guidance for a more harmonious and emphasises the need for education in India across a wide variety of
sustainable world (Quijano, 2007). disciplines to reconnect with the knowledge heritage of India. Further, it
Invoking the idea of discursive institutionalism, as suggested by emphasises the need to promote primary education in regional lan­
Schmidt (2011), it can be argued that the sentient agents who pursued guages to allow the youth to learn effectively and to retain the ability to
intellectual decolonisation using the incrementalist strategy were un­ connect with indigenous thought and culture. The policy highlights the
able to alter the institutional arrangements that were entrenched in need to revive and develop the classical and regional Indian languages
Eurocentric paradigms, because they were probably overwhelmed by and to train scholars to access the vast treasures of ‘hidden’ knowledge
the power of the institutionalised structures that favoured Eurocentrism. and make them available for contemporary use. It underlines the need to
Meanwhile, those who followed subaltern and native strategies spent develop textbooks and literature—which are largely available in English
their energies vehemently opposing each other and did not find a voice currently—in regional languages to make them more accessible to the
in the mainstream discourse. Thus, these efforts to achieve intellectual non-Anglicised masses. Finally, the policy offers incentives to higher
freedom were not effective ultimately. We believe that the way forward educational institutions to provide education through bilingual pro­
for India is to develop a radical alternative consisting of inspired eclectic grammes. In short, the two major sources of intellectual colonisation
strategies that were successful before independence, and counter- that are the focus of this paper have been recognised in the policy
discourse strategies, which have met with success in South America. document, and provisions to overcome them have been initiated. It is
Such an alternative would truly lead to original and indigenous con­ now up to the educational institutions to build on these possibilities to
ceptualisation. Since the key actors in society in India who can facilitate create momentum for intellectual freedom. In other words, the ball is in
the change are yet to recognise the crisis and since there is limited scope the court of the researchers and authors, and others similar to us, to seize
for an exogenous crisis, the change will have to be championed by the opportunity to create space for the development and sustenance of
sentient agents participating in different discursive spheres to create a indigenous theories that are informed by the rich knowledge traditions
momentum for change. of India, which might re-centre knowledge around India.
Kohn and McBride (2011) described a two-stage process based on The process of demystification within business schools will have to
Gandhian values that involves demystification and reversal to achieve be driven by those in leadership positions in business schools and by
intellectual decolonisation. Demystification “involves showing that the faculty, with the involvement of prominent opinion-makers from in­
West is not superior in absolute terms but rather it is superior only in dustry. The first step towards demystification would be to have honest
terms of the criteria that it sets for itself” (Kohn & McBride, 2011: 1430). discussions to acknowledge and realise the extent of the damage caused
In response to a journalist’s question, ‘What do you think of Western
civilization?’, Gandhi is supposed to have answered, ‘I think it would be
a good idea’. In doing so, he was practising demystification (Duara, 5
Max Weber’s criticism of Indian society and his belief that India cannot
2004) by suggesting that the West did not meet the criteria of civilisation achieve modernity are based on this view.

706
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

by intellectual colonisation and to mobilise the need for change. salvaging them through modifications. The works of Amiya Kumar
Prominent people in academia and practice need to clearly state that ‘the Bagchi highlighting the damaging effects of imperialism and colonialism
US-centric emperor has no clothes’ when it comes to understanding on the Indian economy during the British colonial period, the historical
business and management issues in India, and stand up to be counted writings of Dwijendra Tripathi and Harish Damodaran highlighting the
among the those who really care for indigenous knowledge and genius of Indian entrepreneurship before, during, and after colonial rule,
contextual practice rather than admitting to the deficiencies of US- and Gita Piramal’s accounts of successful business houses should be
centric practices in private but proclaiming support in public (Kuran, shared with faculty. This will serve two purposes. It will allow academics
1997). If feasible, these discussions can be encouraged in the regional and the public to lose their sense of inferiority related to India’s past
languages of India so that members of the business community and ac­ heritage, based on which they believe that there is nothing that it can
ademics who are less articulate in English can participate. Second, the contribute to inform the present. It will also provide access to the
outcomes of these discussions need to be widely publicised among knowledge, some of it well-codified and others culled from documen­
managers and the general public so that they are in a better position to tation and literature prepared for other purposes, that will provide the
demand more from academics to contextualise their research. With the basis for the development of indigenous theories.
awareness that prominent members of industry and academia have Second, business schools should be encouraged to change incentive
questioned US-centric knowledge, managers and the public will also feel systems and career progression requirements that move away from US-
more confident to highlight the flaws in the apparent best practices centric scholarship models towards India-centric scholarship models.
instead of accepting such practices meekly. We hope these exchanges, They should stop glorifying US-centric research, and should provide
preferably conducted in regional languages, will provide an opportunity little or no incentive for scholars from India who publish US-centric
to generate public pressure to develop and build indigenous theories and perspectives, particularly those who co-author papers while merely
to identify contextually relevant research topics. performing the role of providing ‘data’ or legitimating distorted theo­
risation for Indian contexts. They should start favouring Indian journals
4.1. Implications for business and management research while incentivising well-established scholars to help raise the standards
of the journals, which have suffered due to the neglect caused by in­
We were initially encouraged by the recommendation for ‘ambicul­ tellectual colonisation. They should also include papers or books that are
tural’ scholarship as suggested by Chen (2014). However, as discussed published in the classical, native, and regional languages as part of the
earlier, we believe that such incremental approaches have not worked in evaluation process.
the past and will not work in the future in India. The US-centric man­ Third, to cement the process of demystification, we suggest that In­
agement education offered in the English language is too deep-rooted, dian business schools should avoid obtaining accreditation from US-
and many Indian scholars and others interested in India are too de­ centric bodies, which are neo-colonial entities that subtly promote US-
tached from the Indian ethos to be able to achieve what Chinese (or centric norms in non-US contexts. It can be widely publicised that un­
Japanese) scholars have achieved. Ironically, as Indian scholars in India, like accreditation in the field of medicine, for example, which is based
we ourselves have felt discouraged from pursuing ‘unfashionable’ on a solid body of more universally accepted knowledge, business school
research topics due to the perceived non-approval from US-centric accreditation is based on US-centric norms that have had to be modified
scholars who are the gatekeepers of global knowledge. We are aware several times to remain relevant within the US and make them accept­
that we are not the first ones attempting to suggest strategies to develop able outside the US. Similarly, business school rankings that favour US-
indigenous theories. However, we believe that with the understanding centric schools should be challenged. India-centric accreditation and
of the colonial influences that prevented past success, and as ‘internal’ rankings need to be encouraged, and well-respected business schools
actors who understand the current dynamics, we are in a better position should provide prominence to these rankings in their publicity material
to suggest specific steps to start the process of demystification and and on their websites, and downplay US-centric affiliations. The
reversal. importance of journals that are promoted by accreditation and ranking
Fig. 1 illustrates the three stages from US-centric paradigm domi­ entities needs to be challenged. They are also instruments of neo-
nance to hybridity and pluriversality in the knowledge space in business colonialism that entrench US-centric theories and marginalise other
and management. In Stage 1, which reflects the current situation, the ways of researching and theorising.
US-centric paradigm dominates, providing little space for indigenous Fourth, editors and reviewers of journals and other outlets of
knowledge to be applied or even to develop in the pre-paradigmatic research in India should explicitly assess papers based on their contri­
phase. Demystification will help remove the ‘halo’ around US-centric butions and implications for Indian business and management, and In­
theories, creating space for indigenous knowledge to be accepted and dian business schools should assess faculty by their ability to publish
to evolve into a paradigm, as shown in Stage 2. In Stage 3, reversal will context-specific research rather than US-centric research.
allow indigenous knowledge to develop a more cohesive paradigm that
can address the spaces from which the US-centric paradigm has been 4.1.2. Reversal
pushed back due to demystification. In this stage, the indigenous First, the IIMs and other prominent institutions should be at the
knowledge paradigm occupies the central space while continuing to forefront of establishing centres that develop knowledge about the or­
engage with the US-centric paradigm as well as paradigms from other thodox and heterodox darshanas and other such philosophies to make
societies and cultures. the rich discussions, dialogues, and debates on the philosophy of
knowledge accessible to contemporary scholars. Many in academia are
4.1.1. Demystification unaware of the richness of the ontological and epistemological discus­
First, faculty members at business schools in India should be sions in the darshanas because they did not get exposed to them in the
encouraged to change the focus of their research. When using US-centric colonial education system in India or in their studies outside the country.
theories, their focus should be on falsification rather than verification, Further, they should be exposed to the works of Kautilya, Shookraneeti,
with the confidence to discard theories that do not meet the norms of Bhartrihari, Thiruvalluvar, and Kamandaka, among many others, to lay
falsification. In other words, rather than conducting research using US- the foundations of the process of reversal. Devy (1992) also suggested
centric perspectives and seeking to adapt them to Indian contexts, or that we could search for repressed or lost knowledge in the traditional
even worse, explaining the lack of support for these theories as limita­ knowledge systems.
tions of the Indian business and management systems, the focus of Second, there should be support and incentives for faculty guides and
demystification research should be on ‘debunking’ the universal claims doctoral students who pursue research on local business and societal
of US-centric theories and rejecting them when falsified rather than challenges using indigenous concepts and frameworks, stronger

707
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

Fig. 1. Intellectual Decolonisation: From US-centric Paradigm Dominance to Hybridity and Pluriversality.

incentives for publication in India-centric journals and conference pro­ sources of contemporary knowledge.
ceedings, and further encouragement and intellectual community sup­ Fourth, there should be an increased emphasis on qualitative
port to publish in regional languages so that the subjects of the study and research methods that are more suitable to the developmental of pre-
the larger population can read and appreciate these publications. paradigmatic theories relative to quantitative methods that are more
Third, Indian management research journals should welcome suitable for established paradigms. A reading of the ontological and
research in a variety of classical, native, and regional languages in epistemological discussions in the darshanas can reveal the limitations of
addition to English. Journals should invite articles in a variety of for­ the positivistic research methods—which are still very suitable for the
mats, which could include, for example, commentaries, debates, di­ natural sciences—when applied to the social sciences (Rosenberg,
alogues, and other formats that are popular in local scholarly traditions, 2012), and can provide insights to develop superior research methods
instead of being limited to the text-only format that is sanctioned by the suitable for the context. Alternate research methods inspired by the
Eurocentric traditions. India has rich oral and visual research traditions darshanas have the potential to contribute to developing an indigenous
that could be captured as multimedia content, and the latest digital paradigm in India and to bridge some gaps in Eurocentric and US-centric
technologies could be employed for unstructured data representation research.
and analysis. Rigor is expected to be a concern in the pre-paradigmatic
stage.6 Scholars interested in India might need to take the lead in 4.2. Implications for business and management education
curating online platforms with crowd-sourced content that will break
the stranglehold of the Eurocentric gatekeepers who control knowledge We now focus on the process of dissemination of knowledge to de-
and information related to India. Just like Wikipedia was able to replace centre US-centric knowledge and re-centre knowledge based on an
Encyclopaedia Britannica as a more current and reliable source of in­ emerging indigenous paradigm.
formation on a wide range of topics, Indian academics can disrupt the
dominance of hegemonic Eurocentric journals with other legitimate 4.2.1. Demystification
The efforts to demystify business and management research will
have a long-term influence on business and management education.
6 However, there must be some immediate and direct changes to sustain
We believe that once an India-centric paradigm emerges, it will be able to
the transition. First, doctoral programmes in Indian business schools
define parameters of rigor, which might be different from those used in the US,
but are able to stand up to the scrutiny of peers. Metaphorically, we draw tend to mimic U.S. doctoral training and socialise students into believing
parallels to disruptive innovation. In the early stages, disruptive innovations are only in positivistic, often quantitative, research, which is incompatible
always seen as inferior to the legacy technology based on the parameters used with the efforts to revive indigenous knowledge at this stage. They
to evaluate them. However, once the innovation gets accepted, it contributes to should be encouraged to critique the research methods by relying on
the emergence of new parameters that are used until the next disruption. insights from the darshanas to highlight the limitations of these methods

708
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

for the social sciences. a language that would allow the scholar to access original scholarship in
Second, doctoral students need to be encouraged to read and critique that language. They might, however, be provided training in English, if
the original works of prominent scholars to understand the Eurocentric necessary, to enable them to communicate their thoughts to others,
context of their evolution. For example, reading Max Weber critically similar to how people from other non-English speaking countries are
would help students understand the racial prejudices that are inherent in trained. This also implies the need to ensure that earlier stages of pre-
his writings. A critical reading of Adam Smith would expose students to doctoral education have adequate incentives for students to develop
the cautionary statements about capitalism that are neglected in current fluency in regional languages or classical Indian languages rather than
theorising. Students could also be made aware that the data used by just English. Fourth, in a few years, courses designed around India-based
Fredrick Taylor to promote ‘scientific management’ was doctored to suit theories, such as “The Nurturant Leadership Theory” proposed by Sinha
the theory. Collectively, this exposure should encourage doctoral stu­ (1984), and other indigenous theories that might emerge from the cur­
dents to appreciate the messiness of theory development instead of rent efforts could be included as part of the curriculum.
simply accepting the neat frameworks that are presented to them in the Masters-level education should focus more on building skills such as
derived works. critical and reflexive thinking instead of accepting pseudo-universal US-
Third, in their first year of coursework, doctoral students must be centric toolboxes without any questions. First, the history of Indian
encouraged to become aware of and reflect on their own positions as business and trade and international trade should be included as a core
scholars in a post-colonial context and to evolve their individual stra­ requirement. Second, students should be prescribed books and research
tegies for decolonised knowledge creation. Many enter the doctoral papers that are based on indigenous frameworks or that actively use
programme with the experience of real-world challenges, and when these frameworks for understanding some situations instead of using
looking for solutions, they are often disillusioned by the US-centric in­ Indian editions of US books that retain US-centric theories and merely
puts that are provided to them. Doctoral programmes should encourage use Indian examples to support them. Third, the proportion of Indian
students to pursue their ideas without necessarily adopting US-centric cases for class discussions should increase, and there should be less
frameworks, and to undertake grounded research and create opportu­ reliance on US cases, and more cases of Japanese and Korean companies
nities for indigenous theories. should be included. Fourth, pedagogies could be revisited to be cultur­
Masters-level education would require comprehensive curriculum ally more suitable for Indian students rather than aping those of the US.
revisions to defocus from the sweeping generalisations that are made For instance, class participation in case studies is highly suitable in US
from US-based cases and examples. First, the lack of universality of US- classrooms, especially for male students, but not in contexts where the
centric management tools and frameworks must be explained. For average student might be culturally less vocal or have confidence levels
example, the failures of US firms in India, presumably using universal that are already low due to ‘cultural amnesia’. Management education
best practices, and the success of Japanese, Korean, and even Chinese might need to rely on a greater degree of experiential learning and
companies in India should be highlighted to suggest that there are encourage the seeking of authentic insights from phenomena until such
alternate models of business and management. Second, the ethical time that research can produce more India-based theories.
failures of US models (Ghosal, 2005) must be included in courses, and We realise the transition that we seek through the processes of
the discourse must discourage the evangelisation of MNCs for the rest of demystification and reversal will not be easy because quite under­
the world to emulate. Third, as part of the de-mystification process, standably, not all stakeholders will immediately accept the need for
students can be made aware of the devious methods used by prominent change. For example, many faculty members who might genuinely
business stalwarts (such as Thomas Edison’s tactics in his competition believe in US-centric knowledge and do not accept some of the concerns
with Nikola Tesla) instead of providing sanitised versions of their great we have raised might either offer strong resistance or quit their jobs and
deeds. Fourth, the negative impact of British colonial rule should be join schools that continue to adhere to US-centric norms, thereby
taught to dispel the myth that all that is good in India is the legacy of creating a shortage of faculty in the short run in schools that try to lead
colonial rule. the transition. Similarly, significant parts of the industry might still have
a need to hire those with US-centric knowledge, possibly because of the
4.2.2. Reversal belief that the knowledge relevant to India can be taught on the job.
We agree with Kothiyal et al.’s suggestion (2018) that doctoral Students might have a desire to obtain ‘world-class’ education. Many
programmes should draw on local knowledge, philosophical traditions, students who wish to pursue higher education or to take up a job abroad
and belief systems, and should focus on place, ecology, and values. Such might hesitate to accept the changes we have suggested. Further, the
‘indigenous’ approaches to management research seek to empower the aspirations and emotions of parents and family might become an
people who have survived imperialism and colonialism, and who impediment.
recognise their right to take control of their own forms of knowledge, Based on our own experiences, we believe that people who attempt
languages, and cultures. First, we argue that rather than train students in to bring about this transition will face several challenges. In our attempt
narrow Eurocentric ontological and epistemological traditions, which to dispassionately look into India’s past heritage and try to derive
are being challenged within Europe and the US, they should be exposed sources of indigenous knowledge, we discovered that reconnecting with
to the plurality of knowledge traditions in India to help the re-centring of Indian heritage is inextricably linked with understanding the Indic
knowledge in India. Rather than focussing exclusively on Eurocentric civilisation. Although as scholars, we might subscribe to critical,
scholarship, doctoral programmes should focus on Indian darshanas and decolonial, post-colonial, or multi-paradigmatic perspectives that cele­
other such knowledge traditions while making the students aware that brate pluriversality, we run the risk of being simplistically branded as
similar perspectives have also evolved in Europe and maybe other parts Hindu nationalists, or even worse, being accused of being opportunistic.
of the world. The implication of such a perceived identity is that it might either
Second, ground-up exercises involving ‘cultural resource mapping’ quickly alienate us or fiercely include us into different polarised world
could possibly help surface some of the lost knowledge, and a combi­ views to which we might not necessarily subscribe. In a recent event,
nation of approaches such as ‘appreciative inquiry’ and collective while attempting to propose alternative pedagogies based on Indian
visioning could generate ideas for indigenous theories. Third, business classical arts, we faced criticism for reviving Sanskritic and Brahminical
schools should be encouraged to seek new faculty members and doctoral traditions. The critics would not accept the fact that the pieces of art to
students from under-represented segments of society that might still be which we were referring were sculptures or statues that had no in­
connected to traditional knowledge. Further, rather than seek fluency in scriptions or that had inscriptions in the regional language, but were
English as a requirement for admission into doctoral programmes, they certainly not the creation of Brahmins. One of the authors, who was part
should seek fluency in a regional or classical Indian language, preferably of a team in a leading business school that is trying to articulate its long-

709
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

term strategic vision, experienced significant resistance and struggle emergence of an indigenous paradigm that re-centres knowledge on
while trying to convince key stakeholders not to subscribe to the business and management in India. Staying true to the Liberal nation­
dominant US-centric paradigm, and to instead allow space for indige­ alist identity, these scholars should work towards knowledge spaces that
nous paradigms. Further, many academics, including us, who are are plural and hybrid such that the indigenous paradigm is open to
convinced by the need to decolonise might face other challenges due to engagements with paradigms that are developed in other contexts. If
our own colonial education. For example, similar to most academics in successful, such an indigenous paradigm will contribute to the attain­
India, we participate in the English discourse and lack the proficiency in ment of Purna Swaraj as envisioned by Gandhi and articulated in the
the classical, native, or regional languages of India, which limits our ‘Declaration of Independence’ that was officially promulgated on 26
understanding of indigenous knowledge. Unfortunately, we must rely on January 1930.
translations and commentaries in English even as we oppose the
continuation of English as a language of research and knowledge Funding
dissemination. The second disconnect is that given our prior training, we
began this journey by viewing indigenous knowledge through Euro­ This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
centric lenses before recognising the shortcomings of this approach and agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
making conscious efforts to overcome the shortcomings. Some of these
challenges can, however, be partly overcome by collaborating with
those who are still embedded in the Indian traditions. A third and related CRediT authorship contribution statement
challenge is that even those individuals who are embedded in these
traditional knowledge systems are themselves going through the process Abhoy K. Ojha: Conceptualization, Resources, Visualization,
of decolonisation and experiencing the flux of multiple narratives Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Ramya Tarakad
simultaneously, making collaboration not as easy as it could have been Venkateswaran: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing –
without colonial influences. review & editing.

5. Conclusion
Declaration of Competing Interest
We examined the reasons for the lack of indigenous knowledge in
India, particularly in business and management. We attributed this to The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
the deep-seated effects of the colonisation of the Indian mind, which interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
took root during the long period of British colonial rule in India, and the the work reported in this paper.
subsequent dominance of intellectual discourse by those who continue
to be shackled by Eurocentric or US-centric perspectives, despite several Acknowledgement
decades of political freedom. We agree with Devy (1992) that the
demoralising effect of colonisation led to a nearly incurable inferiority We gratefully acknowledge the inputs received at the Paper Devel­
complex that caused ‘amnesia’ and an inability to identify indigenous opment Workshop and Colloquium on Decolonising Management and
traditional knowledge that may very well be alive in contemporary Organisational Knowledge held at Durban, South Africa, from 05 to 06
practice. We suggested that continued colonisation through the capture November 2019. We are thankful to Anupama Kondayya, Biswatosh
of higher learning institutions and research space in the country by Saha and Devi Vijay for constructive reviews and Anila Varghese for
scholars who are intellectually colonised is at the heart of the inability to copy-editing the manuscript. We thank the anonymous reviewers and
achieve intellectual freedom. This hegemony further debilitates the the Special Issue Editors for helping to strengthen our contribution over
ability of the few who are rooted in Indian perspectives and have the multiple revisions.
desire to develop more contextually relevant and rich perspectives to
meaningfully contribute to indigenous knowledge creation and References
dissemination. We then highlighted how US-centric management
knowledge and education were imposed on India, which was aided by Alcadipani, R., Khan, F. R., Gantman, E., & Nkomo, S. (2012). Southern voices in
management and organization knowledge. Organization, 19, 131–143.
the colonisation of the mind during the British rule and the acceptance
Alexander, J. M., & Buckingham, J. (2011). Common good leadership in business
of English as the language of higher education, business, and govern­ management: An ethical model from the Indian tradition. Business Ethics: A European
ment even after independence. We used the case of the Arthashastra to Review, 20(4), 317–327.
illustrate the marginalisation of indigenous knowledge in India. We Alvares, C. (1991). Decolonizing history: Technology and culture in India, China and the West
1492 to the present day. The Other India Press.
highlighted how it is ironical that the Arthashastra is so well- Baggini, J. (2018). How the world thinks: A global history of philosophy. Granta Books.
acknowledged and used in business, government, and society, but is Bandyopadhyay, S. (2009). Decolonization in South Asia, Meanings of freedom in post-
neglected in academic circles. independence West Bengal, 1947–52. Routledge.
Banerjee, P. (2012). Chanakya/Kautilya: History, philosophy, theatre and the twentieth-
We argued for the decolonisation of the knowledge space in India to century political. History of the Present: A Journal of Critical History, 2(1), 24–51.
provide a fair opportunity for those who are pursuing indigenous and Banerjee, S. B., & Prasad, A. (2008). Introduction to the special issue on critical
culturally sensitive knowledge to be able to participate in the discourse. reflections on management and organizations: A postcolonial perspective. Critical
Perspectives on International Business, 4(2/3), 90–98.
Finally, we suggested some possible steps to initiate the process of Barkema, H. G., Chen, X. P., George, G., Luo, Y., & Tsui, A. S. (2015). West meets East:
decolonisation of the Indian mind to achieve intellectual freedom, New concepts and theories. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2), 460–479.
particularly in the domain of business and management knowledge. We Bhattacharya, K. (2013). Performing gender as “Third-World Other’’ in higher education:
De/colonizing transnational feminist possibilities. Creative Approaches to Research, 6,
believe that these steps are relevant not only for Indian scholarship, but 30–47.
also for global scholarship at large to benefit from a real understanding Boesche, R. (2017). The first great political realist: Kautilya and his Arthashastra. Harper
of the context and to prevent research in various fields of management Collins.
Bose, S. (1998). Nation, reason and religion: India’s independence in international
from moving backward. We essentially encourage researchers, educa­
perspective. Economic and Political Weekly, 33(31), 2090–2097.
tors, and practitioners to be true to their own experience, and to call a Boyd, B. K. (2018). Paradigm development in Chinese management research: The role of
spade a spade when required through the demystification of the US- research methodology. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 35, 805–827.
centric paradigms and a reversal towards indigenous systems. Collec­ Bruton, G. D., & Lau, C. M. (2008). Asian management research: Status today and future
outlook. Journal of Management Studies, 45(3), 636–659.
tively, like-minded practitioners and scholars would be able to facilitate Bruton, G. D., Zahra, S. A., & Cai, L. (2018). Examining entrepreneurship through
intellectual decolonisation and overcome ‘amnesia’ to contribute to the indigenous lenses. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(3), 351–361.

710
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

Burney, S. (2012a). Conceptual frameworks in postcolonial theory. Counterpoints, Mukherjee, D., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., & Goyal, K. (2022). Mapping five decades of
Pedagogy of the Other: Edward Said, Postcolonial Theory, and Strategies for Critique, international business and management research on India: A bibliometric analysis
417: 173–193. and future directions. Journal of Business Research, 145, 864–891.
Burney, S. (2012b). Resistance and counter-discourse. Counterpoints, Pedagogy of the Murphy, J., & Zhu, J. (2012). Neo-colonialism in the academy? Anglo-American
Other: Edward Said, Postcolonial Theory, and Strategies for Critique, 417: 105–116. domination in management journals. Organization, 19(6), 915–927.
Chakravarti, U. (1998). Saffronizing the past: Of myths, histories and right-wing agendas. Murthy, V., & Rooney, J. (2018). The role of management accounting in ancient India:
Economic and Political Weekly, 33(5), 225–232. Evidence from the Arthasastra. Journal of Business Ethics, 152, 323–341.
Chen, M. (2014). Becoming ambicultural: A personal quest, and aspiration for Nandy, A. (1983). The intimate enemy. Oxford University Press.
organizations. Academy of Management Review, 39(2), 119–137. Nehru, J. (2004). The importance of the national idea: Changes necessary in India. In
Dei, G. J. S. (2006). Mapping the terrain – Towards a new politics of resistance. In P. Duara (Ed.), Decolonization: Perspectives from now and then (pp. 32–41). Routledge.
G. J. S. Dei, & A. Kempf (Eds.), Anti-colonialism and education (pp. 1–23). Sense Ngugi, wa Thiong’o (1994). Decolonising the mind. Zimbabwe Publishing House.
Publishers. Nkomo, S. M. (2011). A postcolonial and anti-colonial reading of ‘African’ leadership and
deSouza, P. R. (2017). The recolonization of the Indian mind. Revista Crítica de Ciências management in organization studies. Organization, 18(3), 365–386.
Sociais, 114, 137–160. Ojha, A. K. (2005). Management education in India. Decision, 32(2), 19–33.
Devy, G. N. (1992). After amnesia: Tradition and change in Indian criticism. Orient Ojha, A. K. (2017). Management education in India. In M. Thakur, & R. R. Babu (Eds.),
Longman. Management Education in India: Perspectives and Practices (pp. 55–77). Springer.
Dharampal (2000). The beautiful tree. Other India Press. Padalkar, M., & Gopinath, S. (2015). Do Indian management practices drive global
Doktor, R., Tung, R. L., & Von Glinow, M. A. (1991). Future directions for management research agenda? Journal of Indian Business Research, 7(2), 108–139.
theory development. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 362–365. Poulis, K., & Poulis, E. (2018). International business as disciplinary tautology: An
Duara, P. (2004). Introduction: The decolonization of Asia and Africa in the twentieth ontological perspective. Academy of Management Perspectives, 32(4), 517–531.
century. In P. Duara (Ed.), Decolonization: Perspectives from now and then (pp. 1–18). Quijano, A. (2007). Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cultural Studies, 21(2),
Routledge. 168–178.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman. Rajeev, P. (2007). Wisdom from ancient Indian philosophy for the corporate world.
Frenkel, M., & Shenhav, Y. (2006). From binarism back to hybridity: A postcolonial International Management Review, 3(1), 72–81.
reading of management and organization studies. Organization Studies, 27(6), Rangarajan, L. N. (1992). Arthashastra by Kautilya. Penguin Books.
855–876. Rašković, M., Dikova, D., & McDougall-Covin, T. P. (2020). International business with
Gandhi, M. K. (1938). Hind swaraj or Indian home rule. Navajivan Publishing House. Central and Eastern Europe: From tyranny of history to revisited laboratories of
Ghosal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. learning. Journal of Business Research, 108, 417–420.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91. Rosenberg, A. (2012). Philosophy of social science. Westview Press.
Gohain, H. (2011). Two roads to decolonisation. Economic and Political Weekly, 46(31), Rudolph, S. H. (2009). Four variants of Indian civilization. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.),
23–26. Civilizations in world politics: Plural and pluralist perspectives (pp. 139–155). Routledge.
Gopinath, C. (1998). Alternative approaches to indigenous management in India. Schmidt, V. A. (2011). Speaking of change: Why discourse is key to the dynamics of
Management International Review, 38(3), 257–275. policy transformation. Critical Policy Studies, 5(2), 106–126.
Grewal, I. (2016). The masculinities of post-colonial governance: Bureaucratic memoirs Sekhar, R. C. (2001). Trends in ethics and styles of leadership in India. Business Ethics: A
of the Indian civil service. Modern Asian Studies, 50(2), 602–635. European Review, 10(4), 360–363.
Guha, R. (1997). Dominance without hegemony. Harvard University Press. Shamasastry, R. (1915). Translation of Arthashastra by Kautilya. Government Press.
Hamann, R., Luiz, J., Ramaboa, K., Khan, F., Dhlamini, X., & Nilsson, W. (2020). Neither Sihag, B. S. (2004). Kautilya on the scope and methodology of accounting, organizational
colony nor enclave: Calling for dialogical contextualism in management and design, and the role of ethics in ancient India. Accounting Historians Journal, 31(2),
organization studies. Organization Theory, 1, 1–21. 125–148.
Hayashi, M. (2002). A historical review of Japanese management theories: The search for Sihag, B. S. (2007). Kautilya on moral and material incentives and effort. History of
a general theory of Japanese management. Asian Business and Management, 1, Political Economy, 39(2), 263–292.
189–207. Sinha, D., & Sinha, J. B. P. (1990). Role of social values in Indian organizations.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories International Journal of Psychology, 25, 705–714.
apply abroad? Organizational Dynamics, 9(1), 42–63. Sinha, J. B. P. (1984). A model of effective leadership styles in India. International Studies
Hoskisson, R. E., Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., & Peng, M. W. (2013). Emerging of Management and Organization, 14(2/3), 86–98.
multinationals from mid-range economies: The influence of institutions and factor Srinivas, N. (2008). Mimicry and revival: The transfer and transformation of
markets. Journal of Management Studies, 50(7), 1295–1321. management knowledge to India, 1959–1990. International Studies of Management
Kapoor, D. (2007). Subaltern social movement learning and the decolonization of space and Organization, 38(4), 38–57.
in India. International Education, 37(1), 10–41. Srinivas, N. (2012). Epistemic and performative quests for authentic management in
Keys, J. B., & Miller, T. R. (1984). The Japanese management theory jungle. Academy of India. Organization, 19(2), 145–158.
Management Review, 9(2), 342–353. Starzl, T. W., & Dhir, K. S. (1986). Strategic planning 2300 years ago: The strategy of
Khatri, N., Varma, A., & Budhwar, P. (2017). Commonly observed shortcomings in Kautilya. Management International Review, 26(4), 70–77.
manuscripts submitted to management journals. IIMB Management Review, 29(3), Sundaram, M. S. (1959). A century of British education in India 1857–1957. Journal of
203–209. the Royal Society of Arts, 107(5035), 491–507.
Kodeih, F., & Greenwood, R. (2013). Responding to institutional complexity: The role of Taylor, C. (1971). Interpretation and the sciences of man. The Review of Metaphysics, 25
identity. Organization Studies, 35(1), 7–39. (1), 3–51.
Kohn, M., & McBride, K. (2011). Political theories of decolonization: Postcolonialism and the Tung, R. L. (2005). Reflections on engendering a sustainable community within the
problem of foundations. Oxford University Press. Academy. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), 239–244.
Kothiyal, N., Bell, E., & Clarke, C. (2018). Moving beyond mimicry: Developing hybrid Venkateswaran, R. T., & Ojha, A. (2017). Strategic management research on emerging
spaces in Indian business schools. Academy of Management Learning and Education, economies: Cultural imperialism in universalizing research paradigms. Critical
17, 137–154. Perspectives on International Business, 13(3), 204–225.
Kumar, N. S., & Rao, U. S. (1996). Guidelines for value based management in Kautilya’s Venkateswaran, R. T., Vadivelu, S., & Krishnan, S. (2021). Long-term orientation of
Arthashastra. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 415–423. South Asian leadership and organizational competitiveness and survival of Sasken
Kuran, T. (1997). Private truths, public lies. Harvard University Press. Technologies Limited. South Asian Journal of Business Studies. https://doi.org/
Lukes, S. (2000). Different cultures, different rationalities? History of the Human Sciences, 10.1108/SAJBS-11-2019-0208
13(1), 3–18. Westwood, R. I. (2006). International business and management studies as an orientalist
Marx, K. (1853). The British rule in India. New York Herald Tribune. https://www.marxist discourse: A postcolonial critique. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 2(2),
s.org/archive/marx/works/1853/06/25.htm. 91–113.
Mbembe, A. J. (2016). Decolonizing the university: New directions. Arts & Humanities in Westwood, R. I., & Jack, G. (2007). Manifesto for a post-colonial international business
Higher Education, 15(1), 29–45. and management studies. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 3(3),
Memmi, A. (2003). The colonizer and the colonised. Earthscan Publication. 246–265.
Meriläinen, S., Tienari, J., Thomas, R., & Davies, A. (2008). Hegemonic academic Zimmerman, A. (2006). Decolonizing Weber. Postcolonial Studies, 9(1), 53–79.
practices: Experiences of publishing from the periphery. Organization, 15(4),
584–597.
Abhoy K. Ojha is a Professor in the area of Organizational Behavior and Human Resources
Mignolo, W. D., & Walsh, C. E. (2018). On decoloniality. Duke University Press.
Management. He obtained his PhD in Organizational Analysis from the University of
Mishra, S. C. (1989). A historiographical critique of the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya. Annals of
Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. Prior to joining IIMB, he was an Assistant Professor at Lau­
the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 70(1/4), 145–162.
rentian University, Sudbury, Canada. His research interest is in Organization Theory,
Mitra, S. K., & Liebig, M. (2017). Kautilya’s Arthashastra: An intellectual portrait: The
particularly Institutional Theory. He also has an interest in Philosophy of Social Sciences
classical roots of modern politics in India. Rupa Publications.
and teaches a course on the subject to the doctoral students. His more current and evolving
Mohnot, J., Pratap, S., & Saha, B. (2021). Governance of Marwari capital: Daily living as
interest is in decoloniality as it applies to India. He has published in Indian and interna­
a decolonial ‘matrix-of-praxis’ intermeshing commercial, religious and familial
tional journals and is quite active as reviewer and presenter at conferences. His email id is
spheres. Organization, 28(5), 741–772.
[email protected].
Mukherjee, M. (2010). Transcending identity: Gandhi, nonviolence, and the pursuit of a
“different” freedom in modern India. The American Historical Review, 115(2),
453–473. Ramya T. Venkateswaran is an Associate Professor at Indian Institute of Management
Calcutta. She joined academia after completing more than a decade of corporate work

711
A.K. Ojha and R. Tarakad Venkateswaran Journal of Business Research 149 (2022) 700–712

experience in India and teaches courses on Strategic Management, Strategy Execution and Business, and Journal of Business Research, and presented her research work at several in­
International Business. Her research interests are in the areas of culture in international ternational conferences. She is a three-time winner of Best Reviewer awards at the Academy
business where she has adopted eclectic perspectives. She has published in Asia Pacific of Management and won a Best Instructor Award at the X-Culture project in 2018 among
Business Review, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Critical Perspectives on International instructors from 37 countries. Her email id is [email protected].

712