Management theories are built on Walrasian assumption of the continued availability of general equilibrium. Deviations from equilibrium are deemed temporary, and most firms are expected to promptly return to equilibrium. But what happens when general equilibrium is inaccessible due to climate change, war, or pandemic induced disruptions? Studying how equilibrium manifests as a destination, a constraint, or a comprise in management theories, we advance an understanding of how environmental disruptions push firms farther from equilibrium. They undermine market’s capacity for self-regulation, limit information dissemination, and misdirect tâtonnement. These challenges are addressed by post-Walrasian remedies that include multiple equilibria, non-price mechanisms of coordination, and complex adaptive systems. We explain that post-Walrasian models of destination, constraint, and compromise theories not only offer a means to repurpose management theories to address escalating disruptions but also embed them with social motives that are equivalent to economic goals. They make public good integral to firms and markets.