There is no doubt that many of the greatest scientific breakthroughs have been made possible through interdisciplinary research. From the mapping of the genome to understanding the global map of terrorism, it is clear that science benefits from multiple perspectives that require expertise from different disciplines. As noted in the recent report by the Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research (2004) of the National Academy of Sciences: “Interdisciplinary research (IDR) can be one of the most productive and inspiring of human pursuits – one that provides a format for conversations and connections that lead to new knowledge”, (p. 16). Also aptly put by Karl Popper (1963), arguably one of the most influential philosophers of science in the twentieth century: “We are not students of some subject matter, but students of problems. And problems may cut right across the borders of any subject matter or discipline” (p. 88). Many of the problems that are studied in organizational behavior are of no exception, whether it is understanding the complex question of human motivation, group dynamics, or globalization. The value – if not the necessity – of interdisciplinary perspectives is indisputable. Organizational behavior, with its penchant for multiple perspectives, be it from sociology, psychology, economics, or related disciplines, is well positioned to continue to push its interdisciplinary envelope. Yet much is to be done to fully capitalize upon the differences that invariably bring the most creative research products. As noted in a recent editorial in Science: “In the years to come, innovators will need to jettison the security of familiar tools, ideas and specialties as they forge new partnerships” (Kafatos and Eisner, 2004, p. 1257).