Professor Jim Walsh played a significant role in the development of work on individual, group, and collective cognition in organizations. Interested in managerial mistakes, Walsh wanted to know if executives’ worldviews could blind them to their decision environments. He was also interested in learning how the cognitive capabilities of both leadership teams and the organization itself could be harnessed for the good of organizations. In a 1988 Academy of Management Journal article, Walsh traced how these belief structures might or might not blind executives to their decision environments. He also considered how these belief structures may or may not combine to shape team decision-making. Therefore, he wrote a theoretical paper about these possibilities, which was published in the Journal of Management in 1986. He followed up that article with an empirical effort to measure and trace the impact of “negotiated belief structures” on decision-making (Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes published his findings in 1988). His thoughts then turned to the organization as a whole. He wrote a seminal paper on organizational memory, one that identified the nature of information selection, retention, and retrieval processes in organizations – for the good or ill of those organizations. That work was published in the Academy of Management Review in 1991. When interest in cognition in organizations started to grow, Walsh became a founding officer of the Academy of Management’s Managerial and Organizational Cognition Interest Group in 1990 and helped to lead that pioneering group of scholars for the first three years of its existence. Tying all of the insights and experiences together, he wrote what became something of a field-defining scholarly paper in 1995. Titled “Managerial Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane,” it was published in Organization Science. Today the Managerial and Organizational Cognition Division of the Academy of Management is home to more than 1,200 scholars worldwide. Citing his foundational scholarship and early leadership, the Division honored Jim with its Distinguished Scholar Award in 2020.

The fields of social movements and organizations had very little overlap until Professors Jerry Davis and Mayer Zald convened a pair of conferences at Michigan Ross in 2001 and 2002 that brought together top scholars from both domains and forged research collaborations that yielded a 2005 Cambridge University Press volume and a 2008 special issue of Administrative Science Quarterly. Zald had previously published a piece on the topic in 1977, as had Davis in 1994. Today, this is a widely recognized and fruitful research domain that arose just in time to explain the increasingly prevalent interplay between corporations and social movements, including boycotts, corporate political activism, and employee social movements.

The 1996 book Competing for the Future by the late Professor C.K. Prahalad and his colleague, Gary Hamel from the London Business School, was unique in that it tied together several of Hamel and Prahalad's leading ideas into book format. The book introduces the concept of "core competencies," which emphasizes that organizations should focus on leveraging their inherent strengths and unique capabilities, and "strategic intent," which focuses on setting an ambitious, long-run vision for a firm's future. This emphasis on future thinking was a particularly notable aspect of the book. In general, the book advocated for a proactive approach to strategy where businesses actively envision and shape the trajectory of their respective industries instead of merely reacting to existing competitors and market dynamics in the short run. This emphasis on dynamics -- in particular, envisioning the future and then mobilizing strategy to compete in shaping it -- had important managerial implications for business thinking in the 1990s.  It suggested that companies needed to transition from a short-term, reactive mindset to a more forward-thinking, visionary stance; this would allow companies not just to survive but dominate in future market landscapes. Overall, this book had a notable impact on business practice; Time Magazine named it one of "The 25 Most Influential Business Management Books."

In the early 1990s, Professor Garry Brewer became dean of the U-M School of Natural Resources and the Environment. He approached Dean Joe White of the Michigan Business School with the concept of a dual-degree program to prepare future business leaders with an integrated education in both earth and management sciences. The concept took shape first in 1993 in the form of a graduate dual-degree program (originally called the Corporate Environmental Management Program) under the leadership of Professor Stuart Hart and then the Erb Institute after a generous grant from Fred and Barbara Erb in 1996 and a series of additional donations from other visionary donors. The dual-degree program was then incorporated into the Erb Institute and bolstered by the scholarly research of three newly endowed professorships. Nearly 30 years later, the Erb Institute has expanded dramatically to become a full-fledged, endowed institute with three chaired professors, an undergraduate Erb Fellows Program, more than 200 graduate and undergraduate students, and more than 750 alumni across 17 countries. In addition, the institute has an active agenda of scholarly and applied research and works to facilitate business engagement through business roundtables and global conference partnerships. Today, the Erb Institute is generally recognized as the leading business sustainability institute for research, teaching, and business engagement.

Professor Charles Laselle Jamison, a pioneering figure in the sphere of business management, spent most of his career at the Michigan Business School. Recognizing the importance of the evolving field of management education in 1936, Jamison proposed an organization dedicated to the support of high-quality research, teaching, and practice in the field. His vision led to the official launch of the Academy of Management in 1941. For this instrumental role, he became known as the "Father of the Academy of Management." With the onset of World War II, the Academy's operations were put on hold. However, they were revived in 1947 thanks to Jamison's tireless commitment. Since then, the Academy of Management has become an internationally recognized association for management and organization scholars.

Later in his career, Jamison would cement his legacy as a pioneer in the field of strategic management by publishing his 1953 textbook on business policy. The textbook was one of the first on the subject and showcased his invaluable contribution to the field.

From 2000 to 2005, Professors C.K. Prahalad and M.S. Krishnan co-authored several papers on concepts related to how the emergence of digital technologies was transforming business models. From 2005 to 2008, they co-authored the book New Age of Innovation, which introduced the concept of N=1;R=G business model framework. The basic argument was that given the new capabilities emerging from digital technologies, the structure of business models was in the midst of a transformation across industries. They claimed that business models will shift from mass production of products or services to businesses co-creating personalized experiences for one customer at a time. They called this N=1 business model, i.e., businesses will operate on a sample size (N) of one. They argued that to orchestrate this personalized experience for one customer at a time, businesses will not own all resources but will connect with resource partners across the globe (Resources=Global or R=G), and these partners could be big organizations, small businesses, entrepreneurs, or even individuals. They called this business model N=1;R=G. They argued that digital technology was at the center of enabling these capabilities, and no industry will be immune to this change. They presented more than 80 examples in the book. The rest of the book was on the capabilities companies needed to build inside their organizations to compete as an N=1 business. Their primary thesis identified the significant role of software in orchestrating the personalized N=1 experience in an ecosystem of partners and the criticality of the right capabilities in the information architecture and social architecture of companies to thrive in this competition of N=1;R=G ecosystem business models.

In the book Build, Borrow, or Buy: Solving the Growth Dilemma the late Professor Will Mitchell and his co-author Laurence Capron developed a groundbreaking framework showing how firms can dynamically manage their resource portfolios and choose an appropriate growth strategy in turbulent market environments fraught with institutional, technological, and economic challenges. This comprehensive framework integrates the capability-based perspective with the principles of transaction cost economics. The intellectual origins of the capability-based perspective are deeply rooted in the foundational work in the strategy field carried out at the University of Michigan around 1980. Mitchell's foundational framework has not only shaped the research agendas of scholars interested in central questions in corporate strategy but also influenced practitioners who are faced with the perpetual strategic conundrum of how best to grow their firms.

Every innovation or new product development team faces a fundamental tension: When does one transition from the ideation to the execution phase? Too early a transition risks missing a great yet unrealized idea, and too late a transition risks being unable to bring the product to market on time. This significant and ubiquitous tension poses a challenge for researchers because of the nuanced nature of imagination and creativity and the need to combine that with creating an actual item based on one’s designs. In “Ideation-Execution Transition in Product Development: An Experimental Analysis” (Management Science, 2018) by Michigan Ross Professors Stephen Leider and William Lovejoy, as well as their colleague Evgeny Kagan from the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School, the authors use a novel experimental design to reveal some expected outcomes (later transitions do not change mean performance but increase variance and risk significantly) and some unexpected ones (it is not so much the timing of the transition that drives mean performance, but rather who has decision rights). Specifically, designers should not make the transition decision; the timing should be an exogenously imposed constraint. This external requirement significantly changes designers’ behaviors and results.

Professor Dudley Maynard Phelps, who was part of the Michigan Business School faculty from 1924-67, studied and wrote about the distinct marketing environments and challenges in markets as diverse as Latin America, Western Europe, and the former Soviet Union, including work for the U.S. State Department. He received recognition for this work from the International Marketing Institute and was president of the American Marketing Association. In the 1980s, Professor Vern Terpstra continued this work and authored the most widely used text on international marketing and other books on the cultural environment of international business, and also published highly impactful research on country-of-origin effects with his PhD student C. Min Han. Terpstra was president of the Academy of International Business in 1970 and was invited to teach at several universities.

Professor Joel Slemrod has worked on an agenda to broaden the scope of tax analysis to address several issues that standard economics models of taxation ignore. He has written several articles analyzing and addressing the blind spots of standard economics models and has co-authored a book titled Tax Systems, which outlines the implications of these blind spots. The influence of his work is demonstrated by the recent policy attention given to tax enforcement in the United States and other countries, such as an increase in funding appropriated to the IRS to reduce evasion of high-income individuals and corporations, as well as innovative administrative policy developments through the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act and the OECD Pillars One and Two, which subjects a group of large multinational companies to a global minimum corporate tax of 15%. Slemrod's work has received over 35,000 citations, numerous awards and accolades, and a No. 1 ranking among public finance economists per the Research Papers In Economics site.

Sensory marketing is a relatively new and growing field of marketing that Professor Aradhna Krishna pioneered in the early 2000s. Krishna saw that there were disparate fields of study on senses, but there was no cohesion between these fields. She brought all these sub-fields together under the umbrella of sensory marketing and organized the first conference on it in 2008. She then wrote two books and dozens of scholarly articles on the subject to make the field grow. And the field did grow both in academia and in practice -- enough for Harvard Business Review to do a lead Ideawatch article on it featuring Krishna as the world's foremost expert on the topic. Krishna has defined "sensory marketing" as marketing that engages the consumers' senses and affects their perception, judgment, and behavior. Krishna continues to publish important, scholarly articles on the topic. She also started the Sensory Marketing Lab at Michigan Ross, which attracts PhD students and post-docs from around the world.

The Preparation Initiative was created by Professor Emeritus Frank Yates in 2005. Yates was a champion of diversity in higher education and believed all students should have access to Michigan Ross, regardless of their preparation. The Preparation Initiative is a thriving community designed to foster the excellence and success of undergraduate business students from economically distressed backgrounds or from racial or ethnic groups historically underrepresented in business leadership. Since its inception, the Preparation Initiative has supported hundreds of students in their pursuit of a business education and now also offers mentoring opportunities for alums of the program.

The paper "Value of Information in Capacitated Supply Chains" by Professor Roman Kapuscinski and his co-authors was published in Management Science in 1999. This paper contributed significantly to the understanding of how information sharing impacts the performance of supply chains. Specifically, this paper turned on its head the notion that information would be most valuable in settings where capacity is tight, when the uncertainty of demand is huge, and when the costs of unsatisfying demand are very high. The paper uses careful, rigorous analyses to reveal when information is most valuable and how the value depends on many interrelated factors. Providing an innovative analytical model, Kapuscinski and his colleagues demonstrated when and how the sharing of demand information could remarkably enhance inventory management and order fulfillment for capacity-constrained supply chains. The subsequent literature in operations management has heavily referenced this pioneering work, leading to the development of practical strategies for improving supply chain efficiency through information sharing. Further studies have explored different facets of information sharing in diverse supply chain settings and have considered more complex forms of information, extending the paper's impact in many directions within operations.