Theory framework for applied disciplines: Boundaries, contributing, core, useful, novel, and irrelevant components

Human Resource Development Review

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 321-339

  Swanson, Richard A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT TYLER   (United States)

Author keywords

Applied disciplines; HRD theory; Methodology; Theory; Theory development

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548165788     PISSN: 15344843     EISSN: 15526712     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1534484307303770     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Bacharach, S.B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 496-515.
2. Benbasat, I., & Zmud, R. (1999). Empirical research in IS: The practice of relevance. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 3-16.
3. Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. New York: The Carnegie Foundation.
4. Chermack, T. J., & Burt, G. (Eds.). (in press). Scenario planning: HRD's strategic learning tool. Advances in Developing Human Resources.
5. Cohen, B.P. (1991). Developing sociological knowledge: Theory and method, second edition. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
6. Collins, J. (2005). Good to great and the social sectors: A monograph to accompany good to great. Boulder, CO: Jim Collins.
7. Dubin, R. (1969). Theory building: A practical guide to the construction and testing of theoretical models. New York: Free Press.
8. Hammer, M. (1990). Reengineering work: Don't automate, obliterate. Harvard Business Review, 68(4), 104-112.
9. Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution. New York: Harper.
10. Hunt, S.D. (1994). On rethinking marketing: Our discipline, our practice, our methods. European Journal of Marketing, 28(3), 13-25.
11. Jacobs, R.L. (1997). HRD partnerships for integrating research and practice. In R. A. Swanson & E. F. Holton (Eds.), Human resource development research handbook (pp. 47 - 61). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
12. Korte, R. (unpublished manuscript). Formulating a theoretical base for a discipline. St. Paul, MN.
13. Lee, M. (2001). A refusal to define HRD. Human Resource Development International, 4(3), 327-341.
14. Lincoln, Y. S. (Ed.). (1985). Organizational theory and inquiry: The paradigm revolution. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15. Lynham. S. A. (2000). The development of a theory of responsible leadership for performance. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Human Resource Development Research Center.
16. Lynham, S.A. (2002 a). Theory building in applied disciplines: Advances in developing human resources, 4(3).
17. Lynham, S.A. (2002 b). The general method of theory-building research in applied disciplines. Theory Building in Applied Disciplines: Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4(3), 221-241.
18. McLean, G.N. (1998). HRD: A three-legged stool, an octopus, or a centipede? Human Resource Development International, 1(4), 375-377.
19. McLean, G.N. & McLean. L. (2001). If we can't define HRD in one country, how can we define it in an international context? Human Resource Development International, 4(3), 313-326.
20. Moody, D.L. (2000). Building links between IS research and professional practice: Improving relevance and impact of IS research. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Information Systems (pp. 351-360). Atlanta, GA: Association for Information Systems.
21. Osigweh, C.A.B. (1989). Concept fallibility in organizational science. Academy of Management Review, 14(4) 579-594.
22. Phillips, P.A. (1998). Disseminating and applying best evidence. Medical Journal of Australia, 168, 260-261.
23. Swanson, R.A. (1988). Research and development (and other life and death matters). Performance Improvement Quarterly, 1(1), 69-82.
24. Swanson, R.A. (1993). Scientific management is a Sunday school picnic compared to reengineering. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 4(3), 219-221.
25. Swanson, R.A. (2001). Human resource development and its underlying theory. Human Resource Development International, 4(3), 299-312.
26. Swanson, R. A. & Holton, E. F. (Eds.). (1997). Human resource development research handbook. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
27. Swanson. R. A. & Holton, E.F. (2005). Research in organizations: Foundations and methods of inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
28. Torraco, R.J. (1994). The development and validation of a theory of work analysis. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Human Resource Development Research Center.
29. Torraco, R.J. (1997). Theory-building research methods. In R. A. Swanson & E. F. Holton (Eds.), Human resource development research handbook (pp. 114-137). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
30. Torraco, R.J. (2005). Theory development research methods. In R. A. Swanson & E. F. Holton (Eds.), Research in Organizations: Foundations and Methods of Inquiry (pp. 351-374). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
31. Van de Ven, A.H. (1999). The buzzing, booming, confusing world of organization and management theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, 8(2), 118-125.
32. Van de Ven, A.H. (2007). Engaged scholarship: Creating knowledge for science and practice. Cambridge, UK: Oxford University Press.
33. Weick, K.E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
34. Weick, K.E. (1995). That theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 385-390.