> Such reference to luck is rare in management research. A review of the use of luck in leading management journals suggests that only 2% of articles mention the word. Business media and educators need to acknowledge that we have a lot of offer to help practitioners to make fewer mistakes in business and everyday life, but there is little we can teach about how to become exceptionally successful.
What bullshit. In research, we have a zillion different words for chance or luck or stochasticity or randomness. There's a whole language for it. Citing the lack of one of the least precise terms as evidence that there's a gap that needs acknowledging is ridiculous, and the author surely knows it. I get that he's trying to sell his book, but come on.
I was skeptical it was a simple search for „luck” and he doesnt link to the review but only his book.
I bought the book and found the source to the original study[1]. It actually looks like they searched for luck articles, altough in this paper he goes and talks about how different words are used for luck. I dont have time to examine further
[1] Good Night, and Good Luck: Chengwei Liu & Mark De Rond 2016
What bullshit. In research, we have a zillion different words for chance or luck or stochasticity or randomness. There's a whole language for it. Citing the lack of one of the least precise terms as evidence that there's a gap that needs acknowledging is ridiculous, and the author surely knows it. I get that he's trying to sell his book, but come on.