Heugens, Pursey and Mol, Michael J.. (2005) So you call that research? : mending methodological biases in strategy and organization departments of top business schools. Strategic Organization, Vol.3 (No.1). pp. 117-128. ISSN 1476-1270

Preview

PDF WRAP_Mol_Heugens_Mol_-_R3.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader Download (208Kb)

Abstract

We believe that all strategy and organization (SO) scholars should be able to decide for themselves whether to specialize in certain parts of the knowledge cycle or adopt a broader, multi-method view on the scientific process. In a situation of ―methodological pluralism‖, individuals might choose to contribute to the construction of new administrative theories by means of qualitative works like case studies, ethnographies, biographies, or grounded theory studies (e.g., see Denzin and Lincoln, 2000). Others could then specialize in testing these theories by means of experiments, surveys, or longitudinal econometric studies (e.g., see Lewis-Beck, 1987-2004). Again others could combine both approaches in Herculean attempts to conduct high-impact, integrative research with the potential to change the way we understand the field as a whole.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > HF Commerce L Education > LB Theory and practice of education
Divisions:	Faculty of Social Sciences > Warwick Business School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Business schools -- Curricula, Strategic planning -- Study and teaching, Strategic planning -- Research -- Methodology
Journal or Publication Title:	Strategic Organization
Publisher:	Sage Publications Ltd
ISSN:	1476-1270
Date:	2005
Volume:	Vol.3
Number:	No.1
Page Range:	pp. 117-128
Identification Number:	10.1177/1476127005050030
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Access rights to Published version:	Restricted or Subscription Access
References:	Baum, J. A. C., Greenwood, R., and Jennings, P. D. 2003. Welcome to strategic organization – SO! Strategic Organization, 1(1): 5-8. Campbell, D. T. 1975. Degrees of freedom and the case study. Comparative Political Studies, 8(1), 178-191. Campbell, D. T., and Stanley, J. C. 1966. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally. Denzin, N. K., and Lincoln, Y. S. 2000. The Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Dillman, D. A. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley. Durkheim, E. 1951/1897. Suicide: A Study in Sociology. New York: The Free Press. Eckstein, H. 1975. Case study and theory in political science. In: F. J. Greenstein, and N. W. Polsby (Eds.) Handbook of Political Science (Vol. 7). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 79—137. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532—550. Flyvbjerg, B. 2004. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. In: C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, and D. Silverman (Eds.) Qualitative Research Practice. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 420—434. Gerring, J. 2004. What is a case study and what is it good for? American Political Science Review, 98(2), 341-354. Kuhn, T. S. 1970 The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lewis-Beck, M. S. (Ed.) 1987-2004. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences (a Sage University Paper Series). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Moldoveanu, M. C., and Baum, J. A. C. 2002. Contemporary debates in organizational epistemology. In: J. A. C. Baum (Ed.). The Blackwell Companion to Organizations. Oxford: Blackwell, 733—751. Ostrom, E. 1998. A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action (Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1997). American Political Science Review, 92(1), 1—22. Sigelman, L. 2004. Report of the editor of the American Political Science Review, 2002-2003. PS: Political Science and Politics, 37(January): 113—117. Van de Ven, A. H. 2002. Presidential address: Strategic directions for the Academy of Management: This academy is for you! Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 171—184.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/4485

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item