A confluence of somewhat heated exchanges recently in the small sub-discipline of management and organizational history (MOH) renders this handbook very topical. Some scholars believe we are insufficiently conscious of our method, historiography, and of our ‘truth claims’. On the other hand, others are genuinely concerned that more and more recent work is about how we should or might do history rather than actually doing historical work. Attempting to bridge these positions and guided by the work of Mark Bevir, the orientation in this volume is that there is a reasonably objective reality that might be observed and recorded by historians using archives and other primary source materials. Resultant historical knowledge cannot be justified as more or less true by reference to methods or by confirmation or refutation of propositions by appeals to independent facts, but rather by comparing rival accounts against criteria of accuracy, comprehensiveness, consistency, progressiveness, fruitfulness, and openness.