The validity of theory development in any epistemic domain is moderated by the researcher’s depth of the contextual knowledge of the given domain, and the characteristics of the researchers involved in developing it, including their philosophical orientation and cultural affiliation. The literature on management in Africa reveals writings with an amalgam of authorship in terms of philosophical backgrounds and cultural affiliations. On one hand are publications by insiders, mostly written from emic perspectives, and by authors whose cultural affiliation is imbedded in the community being studied. On the other hand, are publications by outsiders, mostly written from etic perspectives, by authors whose cultural affiliations are external to the communities being studied. Between the two types of publications, it is the writings of the latter that have dominated the African management discourse. In spite of the distortions that they often portray, their views are widely cited and taken as true in the management literature, while the writings of indigenous African scholars play second fiddle to the latter. The metaphor in the title of this paper raises the need to scrutinize the authority of those who write about African management. The taxonomic analysis presented shows why an awareness of author backgrounds is so essential for determining the authenticity of the extant writings on management in Africa. It calls for a more nuanced understanding of management theories as they relate to Africa, and their reconceptualization from a truly indigenous African praxis.
