Search results

Theory testing is part of sociological analysis and the procedural aspects of problem solving are bounded, to a certain extent, by an “explicit set of operations” (Dubin, 1969). Broadly stated, validation assessment is judged to be satisfactory if the researcher interprets the theoretical constructs of the paradigm correctly, if he has used adequate methods to test the paradigm, and if the results are interpreted correctly (Whitsett and Winslow, 1967: 413). Unfortunately, most attempts at theory testing merely serve to highlight the discrepancy between what the researcher is obliged to do and what occurs in practice. On this basis, the research situation invariably leads to the prolongation of controversies in the social sciences. Importantly, if the prolongment of a controversy is taken as the gauge of the prevalence of interpretative and testing errors, then controversies are deserving of close scrutiny for the lessons they provide concerning the ways in which “the breakdown of a paradigm” (Kuhn, 1962) is inhibited. In making the assumption that a lengthy (and sometimes heated) controversy would provide a more varied lesson content, it follows that the means is provided for approaching the issue of theory testing from the standpoint of the inadequacy of the repeated tests of certain theories.

This study applies asymmetric rather than conventional symmetric analysis to advance theory in occupational psychology. The study applies systematic case-based analyses to model complex relations among conditions (i.e., configurations of high and low scores for variables) in terms of set memberships of managers. The study uses Boolean algebra to identify configurations (i.e., recipes) reflecting complex conditions sufficient for the occurrence of outcomes of interest (e.g., high versus low financial job stress, job strain, and job satisfaction). The study applies complexity theory tenets to offer a nuanced perspective concerning the occurrence of contrarian cases – for example, in identifying different cases (e.g., managers) with high membership scores in a variable (e.g., core self-evaluation) who have low job satisfaction scores and when different cases with low membership scores in the same variable have high job satisfaction. In a large-scale empirical study of managers (n = 928) in four (contextual) segments of the farm industry in New Zealand, this study tests the fit and predictive validities of set membership configurations for simple and complex antecedent conditions that indicate high/low core self-evaluations, job stress, and high/low job satisfaction. The findings support the conclusion that complexity theory in combination with configural analysis offers useful insights for explaining nuances in the causes and outcomes to high stress as well as low stress among farm managers. Some findings support and some are contrary to symmetric relationship findings (i.e., highly significant correlations that support main effect hypotheses).

The introductory chapter includes how to design-in good practices in theory, data collection procedures, analysis, and interpretations to avoid these bad practices. Given that bad practices in research are ingrained in the career training of scholars in sub-disciplines of business/management (e.g., through reading articles exhibiting bad practices usually without discussions of the severe weaknesses in these studies and by research courses stressing the use of regression analysis and structural equation modeling), this editorial is likely to have little impact. However, scholars and executives supporting good practices should not lose hope. The relevant literature includes a few brilliant contributions that can serve as beacons for eliminating the current pervasive bad practices and for performing highly competent research.

This study aims to draw on the complexity theory and uses a non-an asymmetrical method – fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to test the core tenets of complexity theory, namely, asymmetry, equifinality and causal complexity and valence reversals or conjunction with a focus on testing the relationships between service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty. Case outcome forecasting accuracy rather than relationships are tested in asymmetric testing.

Both symmetrical (structural equation modelling or SEM) and non-symmetrical (fsQCA) methods were used to test the proposed relationships (symmetrical testing) and case outcome forecasting accuracy (asymmetric testing). The former was used as a comparison. The study setting was in Australian airports. The data were collected from departure passengers.

The results from SEM and fsQCA differ substantially. The former provides very simplistic findings of variable directional relationships; whereas the latter presents asymmetrical, equifinal and conjunctional relationships regarding service quality, customer satisfaction and behavioural intentions. These findings support the core tenets of the complexity theory.

The study findings conform to the complexity theory that indicates relationships between variables can be nonlinear and the same causes can produce different effects. The findings suggest the outcomes of interest often result from combined antecedent conditions rather than a single causal factor. The study confirms that asymmetrical thinking relies on Boolean algebra and set theory principles.

This study uses both symmetrical and asymmetrical methods to reveal the nuanced information about the relationship that has been tested primarily using symmetrical methods.

The traditional and still dominant logic among nearly all empirical positivist researchers in schools of management is to write symmetric (two-directional) variable hypotheses (SVH) even though the same researchers formulate their behavioral theories at the case (typology) identification level. Cyert and March’s (1963), Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall), Howard and Sheth’s (1969, Howard, J. A., & Sheth, J. N. (1969). The theory of buyer behavior. New York, NY: Wiley), and Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C.’s (1978, Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. [A. D. Meyer, collaborator; H. J. Coleman Jr., contributor]. New York, NY: McGraw Hill) typologies of organizations’ strategy configurations (e.g., “Prospectors, Analyzers, and Defenders”) are iconic examples of formulating theory at the case identification level. When testing such theories, most researchers automatically, nonconsciously, switch from building theory of beliefs, attitudes, and behavior at the case identification level to empirically testing of two-directional relationships and additive net-effect influences of variables. Formulating theory focusing on creating case identification hypotheses (CIH) to describe, explain, and predict behavior and then empirically testing at SVH is a mismatch and results in shallow data analysis and frequently inaccurate contributions to theory. This chapter describes the mismatch and resulting unattractive outcomes as well as the pervasive practice of examining only fit validity in empirical studies using symmetric tests. The chapter reviews studies in the literature showing how matching both case-based theory and empirical positivist research of CIH is possible and produces findings that advance useful theory and critical thinking by executives and researchers.

This paper provides guidelines for the design and execution of survey research in operations management (OM). The specific requirements of survey research aimed at gathering and analysing data for theory testing are contrasted with other types of survey research. The focus is motivated by the need to tackle the various issues which arise in the process of survey research. The paper does not intend to be exhaustive: its aim is to guide the researcher, presenting a systematic picture which synthesises suitable survey practices for research in an OM context. The fundamental aim is to contribute to an increase in the quality of OM research and, as a consequence, to the status of the OM discipline among the scientific community.

The purpose of this paper is to describe potential flaws and pitfalls in the contemporary process of testing the theory of a research model in business research through the use of covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM).

This paper offers a foundation for discussion, debate and questioning regarding the contemporary process of testing the theory of a research model in business research through CB-SEM.

The contemporary process to test theory of a research model through CB-SEM in business research lacks to a large extent a stepwise and iterative process of an accumulation of knowledge to build sound and rigorous business theory that is both reliable and valid over time as well as across contexts.

This paper provides an awakening toward further debate and discussion on the relevance and suitability of the contemporary process to test the theory of a research model through CB-SEM in business research – is it science, quasi-science or just nonsense?

The primary implication of this paper is that its content will challenge most readers ' preconceptions of the topic and stimulate debate. Subsequently, it is the author’s hope that the content is thought-provoking and counterintuitive. Some scholars might reject the content, while others may find it valuable.

The paper intends to provide counterintuitive thoughts regarding the contemporary process of testing the theory of a research model in business research through the use of CB-SEM. CB-SEM offers potentially valuable merits in business research settings, if applied and performed properly.

Traditionally, the main goal of empirical research has been to test theories. Yet, theory-testing is problematical in the social sciences. Findings from empirical studies have proven hard to replicate and there is a lack of progress in creating a coherent and cumulative knowledge base. There are both practical and epistemological issues that prevent effective empirical tests. It is difficult to operationalize constructs and design decisive tests of theories. The laws and regularities posited in theories in the natural sciences are independent of human actors, while theories in the social sciences describe systems and structures that are created and maintained by human actors. Nonetheless, human actors are sometimes guided by theories. They may change their behavior or make different decisions based on academically produced knowledge. This relationship is usually mediated by the use of tools of various sorts (i.e., design principles, diagrams, or stories). I discuss why scholars should conduct empirical research to test the pragmatic validity of tools that are derived from theories rather than testing the scientific validity of the theories themselves.

The purpose of this paper is to report the extent and trends of theoretical developments in the empirical quantitative manufacturing strategy (MS) literature published between the years 1966 and 2015 and provide research gaps that can be bridged by the future research.

This content analysis-based literature review analyzes 133 empirical quantitative MS articles published in refereed international journals in the discipline of operations management. These articles are categorized into five article types, namely, reporters, testers, qualifiers, builders, and expanders following the framework of Colquitt and Zapata-Phelan (2007). Analyses are carried out to unearth important trends in theory development in these article types.

Theory development is progressing in empirical quantitative MS literature. However, the trend is shifting from theory testing to theory building. MS discipline has borrowed theories from other disciplines. Expectancy theory and media richness theory are the micro theories while resource-based view, contingency theory, and trade-off theory are the major macro theories used in this domain. The most impactful constructs include environmental technology portfolio, enterprise resource planning, manufacturing proactiveness, and modularity-based manufacturing practices, and the most dominant article types are qualifiers and expanders.

The findings are based on the empirical quantitative articles published in the MS discipline which provides a partial view of theory development in the MS discipline.

The paper highlights predominant theories, frameworks, and constructs that can be utilized by practitioners to improve their understanding of MS, their ability to predict future scenarios and solve practical problems.

No such study has been conducted to date in the MS discipline, and it is hoped that this study will play a significant role in further developing theory in the MS discipline.