Things should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler: integrating management and physiology.

Abstract

Heaphy and Dutton’s (2008) article is to be lauded for attempting two difficult yet valuable things. The first is to re-embody the study of management, and the second is to try to initiate an interdisciplinary conversation. These are important objectives, which the authors have pursued tenaciously. Their paper might, however, make a stronger case for the incorporation of physiology in management research had the authors produced stronger empirical evidence and used more precise terminology. In this dialogue I examine the evidence presented “that positive social interactions at work have beneficial physiological effects” (2008: 137), as well as the explanations of physiological processes put forth by the authors. I fear that both of these imply an overly simplistic understanding of the complexity of physiological systems and an attempt to fit the evidence to a particular theoretical viewpoint. In light of this, I make some recommendations for future research.