Taking Theory Seriously in Management Research

1
Taking Theory Seriously in Management Research

• Professor Gerard P. Hodgkinson
• AIM Senior Fellow and Director of the Centre for
  Organizational Strategy, Learning Change, Leeds
  University Business School
• Presented at the ESRC Seminar Series Advancing
  Research in the Business and Management Field,
  Seminar No 3 - Advancing Theory in Management
  Research, University of Sheffield Management
  School, 20 July 2007

2
Relevant Background (convergent viewpoints)

• Editor-in-Chief, British Journal of Management
  (Jan 1999 December 2006)
• Active editorial board member of several other
  leading USA and European journals (Academy of
  Management Review, Journal of Occupational and
  Organizational Psychology, Journal of
  Organizational Behavior, Organization Science)
• Refereed bids and evaluated completed projects
  for ESRC

3
Relevant Background (convergent viewpoints)

• Member of ESRC Research Grants Board (RGB) 2002
  2006
• Active member of professional development
  workshops giving feedback to doctoral students,
  both here in the UK (BAM) and overseas (MOC
  Division of the Academy of Management)
• Own experience as an active researcher, including
  a number of successful bids to ESRC (PI,
  co-applicant, and Senior AIM Fellow)

4
Common Features of Top Quality Grant Proposals in
Responsive Mode (i.e. serious candidates for
funding)

• non-trivial issues addressed
• in a timely fashion
• well grounded in state-of-the-art literature
• clear theoretical foundations with potential to
  contribute to theoretical advancement virtually
  mandatory for larger amounts of money (even for
  applied projects)
• using rigorous methods appropriate to the
  research questions
• clear and appropriate dissemination plans
• value for money (appropriate level of funding
  relative to the research problem, with costs
  carefully justified)

5
Common Features of Top Quality Article
Submissions (i.e. serious candidates for
publication)

• non-trivial issues addressed
• in a timely fashion
• well grounded in state-of-the-art literature
• clear theoretical foundations with a degree of
  theoretical advancement mandatory for virtually
  all top tier journals (even applied ones)
• using rigorous methods appropriate to the
  research questions

6
Schematic overview of the competitive position of
selected US journals
ASQ
AMR
Org Sci
AMJ JAP SMJ
Mod Extent of new theory Hi
Sloan Man Rev
Low/zero Empirical content
High
7
What is theory and why does it matter? (Some
basic propositions)

• Theory is a basic tool of sensemaking (we are all
  theorists) (cf. Kelly, 1955 Heider, 1958 Weick,
  1995)
• In our capacity as professional applied
  researchers we are at one and the same time both
  knowledge producers and knowledge users
• This is equally true of those engaged primarily
  or wholly in research and those engaged
  predominantly or wholly in practice (cf. Ryan,
  2003)

8
Identity comes from knowledge

• Across professions, identity does not derive from
  practice activities (what you do) but from the
  theory and research base (what you know) and how
  that is applied (how you use what you know)
• Training must emphasize knowledge generation over
  practical experience
• Practice does not wait for knowledge
• Source Anne Marie Ryans (2003) Presidential
  speech to SIOP

9
Taxonomy of knowledge production (Anderson,
Herriot Hodgkinson, 2001)
L RIGOR H
H
Popularist science
Pragmatic science
RELEVANCE
Puerile science
Pedantic science
L
10
Theories, problems and methods are inextricably
intertwined
PROBLEM
THEORY
METHOD
11
Some common basic features of strong (effective)
theories

• Carefully defined concepts
• Judiciously assembled, selectively, in a
  logical, systematic fashion (elegance and
  parsimony)
• Bring rigour to bear on the analysis of problems
  (both basic and applied)
• Strong theory is therefore a key ingredient in
  the development of robust solutions

12
Major problem

• Not all theories are carefully thought through
  (i.e. lack of rigour)
• Many proposals lack good theory
• Many submitted articles lack good theory

13
Some common features of weak (ineffective)
theories

• Concepts are ill-defined (lacking in precision)
• Concepts are assembled in a logically
  inconsistent fashion (incoherence)
• Too many (or too few) concepts (and linkages)
  often with redundancy of terms
• In consequence, such theories are of little value
  for practice or science

14
What is relevance?

• Social construct
• Means different things to different groups at
  different points in time (a bit like democracy)
• Relevant for whom? (differentiate stakeholder
  groups and subgroups)
• Objectives/agendas, values and time horizons vary
  
• This implies the role of theory might also vary
  across stakeholder groups
• Need to differentiate types of strong theory?
  (e.g. descriptive vs. prescriptive vs. predictive)

15
Strong theory (within the world of pragmatic
science)

• Meets the needs of multiple stakeholders on both
  sides of the practitioner-academic divide
• Enumerated in the form of clear, testable
  propositions
• Offers clear insights for those seeking to take
  action
• Endures the rigours of practice and scientific
  progress (descriptive and prescriptive relevance)

16
Some examples of strong theories and associated
concepts

• The Big five and the five factor model of human
  personality
• Social learning theory
• Social identity theory
• Attribution theory
• Schema theory, mental models and cognitive maps
• Dual-process theory

17
Dominant approaches to theory development in
business and management

• Straightforward importation and application from
  adjacent social science disciplines (e.g.
  economics, sociology, psychology) to account for
  BM related phenomena (e.g. Big Five composition
  to account for team performance)
• Hypothetico-deductive theorization within the
  relevant BM subfield (but typically borrowing
  conceptual elements from adjacent fields e.g.
  resource-based view and positioning schools in
  strategy both traceable to industrial-organizati
  on economics, latterly augmented by MOC
  perspectives each traceable to applied
  cognitive, social and organizational psychology)

18
Dominant approaches to theory development in
business and management

• Hypothetico-inductive theorization (but typically
  borrowing conceptual elements from adjacent
  fields often not done very well this side of
  the Atlantic, with some notable exceptions, e.g.
  Balogun Johnson)
• NB mixed method approaches combining the above
  elements to varying degrees (e.g. S-as-P in
  strategic management)

19
Is there a UK crisis of theory production and
theory testing in business and management?

• Much of UK academic BM research is
  a-theoretical, driven by problems far too close
  to practice (i.e. Popularist Science Anderson et
  al., 2001)
• Many of our concepts and theories are imported
  from other disciplines, mainly advanced in North
  America (much of which is Pedantic Science
  Anderson et al., 2001)
• Grounded theory in the UK is now the standard
  fare of most BM PhD programs and in that context
  rapidly becoming short hand for theoretically
  ill-informed and methodologically
  under-developed (i.e. Puerile Science Anderson
  et al., 2001)

20
Conclusions

• We need better training in the art of theory
  building and research conceptualization
• PhD level
• Faculty level
• But how might we best respond to this challenge?