The author proposes to look at the work of M. Kalecki through the lens of the history of economic thought informed by the methodology of economics, by applying to this aim a meta-economic model suggested by U. Mäki, enhanced with additional features. On the basis of the review of the main works of Kalecki, he finds that we cannot ascribe to his works virtually any of the factors proposed by Mäki as explanation of orthodox economic modelling failure. If it is so, the question may be asked why a more correct economic modelling based on the Kalecki’s theory and post-Keynesian theories has not been recognized as successful. It seems that the mainstream economics is an informal institution, yet strengthened by formal rules, which is unforgiving to heterodox economists. Kalecki seems to have been a paradigmatic case of a successful academic heterodox economist, author of significant innovations in the analyses of capitalism, socialism, and the intermediate regimes, all of which were ultimately rejected by the dominant social forces of the day, signalling ‘modelling failure’ in all academic and policy-institutional contexts. If that is indeed the case, then Mäki’s model fails to provide an explanation of modelling failure in economics.