概念基础:战略管理研究中的理论选择

IF 4.1 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS Management Decision Pub Date : 2024-05-29 DOI:10.1108/md-08-2023-1423
Tianyu Hou, Julie Juan Li
{"title":"概念基础:战略管理研究中的理论选择","authors":"Tianyu Hou, Julie Juan Li","doi":"10.1108/md-08-2023-1423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>Theories are crucial for addressing research questions and advancing the boundaries of knowledge. However, in the field of strategic management, the existence of diverse schools of thought from various disciplines, including economics, politics, and sociology, poses significant challenges for researchers seeking to develop theories for argumentation and theorization. In this study, we have conceptualized a novel approach to selecting an appropriate theory for addressing specific research questions.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Thought experiment, disciplined imagination, and a conceptual examination of a diverse set of theories.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Because the central focus in the field of strategic management revolves around how firms achieve sustainable high performance, a research question should initially clarify the fundamental phenomenological issues it aims to address. Subsequently, the process of problematization should identify the ontological assumptions and premises that establish a connection between the research question and existing theories. Finally, the identification and abstraction of rhetorical concepts derived from these assumptions and premises lead to theory selection criteria, namely connectedness, reliability, parsimoniousness, and falsifiability.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>Although we believe that our model for theory selection is generalizable to a wide range of management disciplines, we have primarily focused on its application in the field of strategic management. Future work could validate and further explore the applicability and effectiveness of this model in selecting appropriate theories for conceptual development in other domains.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>While many researchers have proposed methods for writing theoretical papers, few have provided suggestions specifically focused on theory selection. This paper stands out as one of the few that not only attempts to address this gap but successfully develops a comprehensive model for theory selection.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":18046,"journal":{"name":"Management Decision","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conceptual underpinnings: theory selection in strategic management research\",\"authors\":\"Tianyu Hou, Julie Juan Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/md-08-2023-1423\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>Theories are crucial for addressing research questions and advancing the boundaries of knowledge. However, in the field of strategic management, the existence of diverse schools of thought from various disciplines, including economics, politics, and sociology, poses significant challenges for researchers seeking to develop theories for argumentation and theorization. In this study, we have conceptualized a novel approach to selecting an appropriate theory for addressing specific research questions.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>Thought experiment, disciplined imagination, and a conceptual examination of a diverse set of theories.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>Because the central focus in the field of strategic management revolves around how firms achieve sustainable high performance, a research question should initially clarify the fundamental phenomenological issues it aims to address. Subsequently, the process of problematization should identify the ontological assumptions and premises that establish a connection between the research question and existing theories. Finally, the identification and abstraction of rhetorical concepts derived from these assumptions and premises lead to theory selection criteria, namely connectedness, reliability, parsimoniousness, and falsifiability.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\\n<p>Although we believe that our model for theory selection is generalizable to a wide range of management disciplines, we have primarily focused on its application in the field of strategic management. Future work could validate and further explore the applicability and effectiveness of this model in selecting appropriate theories for conceptual development in other domains.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>While many researchers have proposed methods for writing theoretical papers, few have provided suggestions specifically focused on theory selection. This paper stands out as one of the few that not only attempts to address this gap but successfully develops a comprehensive model for theory selection.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":18046,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Management Decision\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Management Decision\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/md-08-2023-1423\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management Decision","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/md-08-2023-1423","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 理论对于解决研究问题和拓展知识边界至关重要。然而,在战略管理领域,经济学、政治学和社会学等不同学科存在着不同的思想流派,这为研究人员寻求发展理论进行论证和理论化带来了巨大挑战。在本研究中,我们构思了一种新颖的方法,用于选择合适的理论来解决特定的研究问题。研究结果由于战略管理领域的核心重点是围绕企业如何实现可持续的高绩效,因此研究问题应首先明确其旨在解决的基本现象学问题。随后,问题化过程应确定本体论假设和前提,以建立研究问题与现有理论之间的联系。最后,从这些假设和前提中识别并抽象出修辞学概念,从而得出理论选择标准,即关联性、可靠性、简约性和可证伪性。研究局限/启示虽然我们认为我们的理论选择模型可以推广到广泛的管理学科,但我们主要关注其在战略管理领域的应用。未来的工作可以验证并进一步探索该模型在其他领域选择合适的理论进行概念发展的适用性和有效性。 原创性/价值虽然许多研究人员都提出了撰写理论论文的方法,但很少有研究人员专门针对理论选择提出建议。本文是为数不多的不仅试图弥补这一不足,而且成功建立了理论选择综合模型的论文之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Conceptual underpinnings: theory selection in strategic management research

Purpose

Theories are crucial for addressing research questions and advancing the boundaries of knowledge. However, in the field of strategic management, the existence of diverse schools of thought from various disciplines, including economics, politics, and sociology, poses significant challenges for researchers seeking to develop theories for argumentation and theorization. In this study, we have conceptualized a novel approach to selecting an appropriate theory for addressing specific research questions.

Design/methodology/approach

Thought experiment, disciplined imagination, and a conceptual examination of a diverse set of theories.

Findings

Because the central focus in the field of strategic management revolves around how firms achieve sustainable high performance, a research question should initially clarify the fundamental phenomenological issues it aims to address. Subsequently, the process of problematization should identify the ontological assumptions and premises that establish a connection between the research question and existing theories. Finally, the identification and abstraction of rhetorical concepts derived from these assumptions and premises lead to theory selection criteria, namely connectedness, reliability, parsimoniousness, and falsifiability.

Research limitations/implications

Although we believe that our model for theory selection is generalizable to a wide range of management disciplines, we have primarily focused on its application in the field of strategic management. Future work could validate and further explore the applicability and effectiveness of this model in selecting appropriate theories for conceptual development in other domains.

Originality/value

While many researchers have proposed methods for writing theoretical papers, few have provided suggestions specifically focused on theory selection. This paper stands out as one of the few that not only attempts to address this gap but successfully develops a comprehensive model for theory selection.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
126
期刊介绍: ■In-depth studies of major issues ■Operations management ■Financial management ■Motivation ■Entrepreneurship ■Problem solving and proactivity ■Serious management argument ■Strategy and policy issues ■Tactics for turning around company crises Management Decision, considered by many to be the best publication in its field, consistently offers thoughtful and provocative insights into current management practice. As such, its high calibre contributions from leading management philosophers and practitioners make it an invaluable resource in the aggressive and demanding trading climate of the Twenty-First Century.
期刊最新文献
Compassion, value creation and digital learning orientation in social entrepreneurs The impact of supply chain revamping announcements on shareholder value Prioritizing factors for generative artificial intelligence-based innovation adoption in hospitality industry Exploring the role of heuristics in buyer–supplier relationship dynamics Understanding behavioral strategy: a historical evolutionary perspective in “Management Decision”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1