■ Research Paper Misunderstanding Metatheorizing Mark G. Edwards Business School, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia Australia Metatheorizing is an important but generally poorly understood genre of social science inquiry that has particular relevance to systems research. In this paper, I define and present the major characteristics of metatheoretical research, discuss why it is neglected as a form of research and how it is often misunderstood and inadequately represented in the systems and management science literature. I illustrate the discussion with some examples of misunder- standing of metatheorizing from the systems science literature. I also make some recommen- dations for how researchers can improve their own metatheorizing and so, hopefully, help this important form of research become more widely acknowledged and critically appreciated. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Keywords metatheorizing; creative holism; Chaordic systems thinking; George Ritzer; integrative pluralism INTRODUCTION In an oft-quoted paragraph from his influential work, ‘The General Theory of Employment, Inter- est and Money’, economist John Maynard Keynes said that The ideas of economists and political philoso- phers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood … Indeed the world is run by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences are usually the slaves of some defunct economist . . . It is ideas, not vested interests, which are dangerous for good or evil (Keynes, 1936). For good and for bad, big ideas and metatheories shape the world. A vigorous and useful science of the metatheoretical, one that is requisite to the demands of contemporary global challenges, will play an increasingly important role in the develop- ment of 21st century systems science. Unfortu- nately, however, the importance of metatheorizing is matched by the misconception and lack of under- standing that surrounds this genre of social science inquiry. In this paper, I review some definitions of metatheorizing, discuss why it is neglected as a form of research and how it is often misunderstood and inadequately represented in the systems theory literature. I also propose some areas where meta- theorizing needs to improve its own game and how it might develop as an important field of re- search for addressing significant global challenges. I will use examples from the systems research liter- ature to illustrate how metatheorizing can be misconstrued and poorly formulated. * Correspondence to: Mark G. Edwards, Business School, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Hwy, Crawley, Perth, Western Australia, 6009 Australia. E-mail: mark.edwards@uwa.edu.au Received 26 February 2013 Accepted 11 June 2013 Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Systems Research and Behavioral Science Syst. Res (2013) Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/sres.2203