Ideal science should conform to certain criteria or goals, among them the goals of universalism and commonality. Realization of these goals may be limited, however, through the dividing up of researchers in terms of geographical borders. In this study the general hypothesis is tested that there is a segmentation of the society of management researchers into a North American (US) and a European (E) segment, a segmentation which is furthered by differences in incentive schemes and in paradigms. Four leading management journals from North America and from Europe, respectively, and the 242 articles they contained published in 1993 were selected to represent the different geographical segments. The results provide: support for the existence of two such segments; support for differences in incentive schemes influencing the articles; support for their being paradigm differences between the two segments; and support for a paradigm effect being stronger in US-journals than in E-journals, US-authors are more willing, however, to conform to the E-paradigm than vice versa. We argue for methodological pragmatism in order to reduce the presumed counter-productive effects of paradigmatic rigidity.