Editorial notes in leading management journals have urged scholars to address Grand Challenges (GC) as an opportunity for producing knowledge that matters for society. This review explores whether current conceptualizations of GC support a productive path for management and organizational scholarship by guiding empirical inquiry, facilitating cumulative theory development, and informing practice. We systematically examine scholarly articles, calls for papers, and editorial notes published in management journals for consistency in how researchers use and define the concept of GC and the scope of associated phenomena and attributes. We find three prominent conceptual architectures in use: discursive, family resemblance, and phenomenon driven. The variety and incoherence of current uses of the GC concept and the lack of efforts to improve its analytical competence lead us to suggest its retirement. Instead, we propose building on the enthusiasm around GC research and using GC as a term to define research principles that collectively help align research efforts and improve theoretical development and practice. The principles we propose capture a genuine origin story for management research on GC.

中文翻译：

---

重大挑战研究的未来：放弃充满希望的概念并认可研究原则

主要管理期刊的编辑注释敦促学者们将“大挑战”(GC) 视为产生对社会重要的知识的机会。这篇综述探讨了当前 GC 的概念化是否通过指导实证调查、促进累积理论发展和通知实践来支持管理和组织奖学金的生产路径。我们系统地检查管理期刊上发表的学术文章、论文征集和编辑说明，以确保研究人员在如何使用和定义 GC 的概念以及相关现象和属性的范围方面保持一致。我们发现使用了三种突出的概念架构：话语、家族相似性和现象驱动。GC 概念当前用途的多样性和不连贯性以及缺乏提高其分析能力的努力导致我们建议其退休。相反，我们建议建立在围绕 GC 研究的热情之上，并使用 GC 作为一个术语来定义研究原则，这些原则共同帮助协调研究工作并改进理论发展和实践。我们提出的原则捕捉了 GC 管理研究的真实起源故事。