Theory in the organizational sciences: How will we know it when we see it?

Organizational Psychology Review

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 94-106

  Ferris, Gerald R ^a   Hochwarter, Wayne A ^a   Buckley, M Ronald ^b  

^a FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

Author keywords

Ambiguity; Organizational sciences; Theory; Theory development

Indexed keywords

EID: 84887469768     PISSN: 20413866     EISSN: 20413874     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/2041386611423696     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Aguinis, H., Pierce, C., Bosco, F., Dalton, D., & Dal-ton, C. (2011). Debunking myths and urban legends about meta-analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 14, 306–331.
2. Albert, S., & Anderson, M. (2010). Conceptual trans-lation: A metatheoretical program for the con-struction, critique, and integration of theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19, 34–46.
3. Bacharach, S. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14, 496–515.
4. Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 164–180.
5. Bedeian, A. (2003). The manuscript review process: The proper role of authors, referees, and editors. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12, 331–338.
6. Buckley, M., Hamdani, M., Klotz, A., & Valcea, S. (2011). Into the great wide open: Bridging the micro-macro divide in the organizational sciences. In D. Ketchen, Jr. & D. Bergh (Eds.), Research methodology in strategy and management (Vol. 6, pp. 31–68). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
7. Colquitt, J., & Zapata-Phelan, C. (2007). Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 281–303.
8. Combs, J. (2010, September). Making a theoretical contribution in empirical research. Presentation at the Professional Development Research Collo-quium, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.
9. Corley, K., & Gioia, D. (2011). Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36, 12–32.
10. Cummings, L., & Frost, P. (1995). Conceptual per-spectives: Introduction. In L. Cummings & P. Frost (Eds.), Publishing in the organizational sciences (2nd ed., pp. 3–12). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Davis, M. (1971). That’s interesting! Philosophy of Social Science, 1, 309–344.
12. Dewey, J. (1896). The reflex arc concept in psychol-ogy. The Psychological Review, 3, 357–370.
13. Dubin, R. (1976). Theory building in applied areas. In M. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 17–39). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
14. Eden, D. (2002). From the editors. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 841–846.
15. Eden, D. (2004). Reflections on the AMJ associate editor role. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 167–173.
16. Eden, L. (2010). Adding spice to our scholarly jour-nals: The JIBS experience. International Studies Quarterly, 54, 903–909.
17. Ferris, G. R., Bowen, M., Treadway, D., Hochwarter, W., Hall, A., & Perrewé, P. (2006). The assumed linearity of organizational phenomena: Implications for occupational stress and well-being. In P. Perrewé & D. Ganster (Eds.), Research in occupational stress and well-being (Vol. 5, pp. 205–232). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
18. Ferris, G. R., & Judge, T. (1991). Personnel/human resources management: A political influence per-spective. Journal of Management, 17, 447–488.
19. Ferris, G. R., Ketchen, D. J., Jr., & Buckley, M. R. (2008). Making a life in the organizational sciences: No one ever said it was going to be easy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 741–753.
20. Ferris, G. R., Perrewé, P., & Buckley, M. (2009). Mentoring Ph.D. students within an apprentice-ship framework. In S. Armstrong & C. Fukami (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of management learning, education, and development (pp. 271–287). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D., Perrewé, P., Brouer, R., Douglas, C., & Lux, S. (2007). Political skill in organizations. Journal of Management, 33, 290–320.
22. Friedman, M. (1949). The Marshallian demand curve. The Journal of Political Economy, 57, 463–495.
23. Gioia, D., & Pitre, E. (1990). Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building. Academy of Management Review, 15, 584–602.
24. Gorelick, R. (2011). What is theory? Ideas in Ecology and Evolution, 4, 1–10.
25. Gray, P., & Cooper, W. (2010). Pursuing failure. Organizational Research Methods, 13, 620–643.
26. Halbesleben, J., Wheeler, A., & Buckley, M. (2004). The influence of great theoretical works on subse-quent empirical work. Management Decision, 42, 1210–1225.
27. Hambrick, D. (2007). The field of management’s devotion to theory: Too much of a good thing? Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1346–1352.
28. Hochwarter, W., Ferris, G., & Hanes, T. (2011). Multi-study packages in organizational science research. In D. Ketchen, Jr. & D. Bergh (Eds.), Building methodological bridges: Research methodology in strategy and management (Vol. 6, pp. 163–199). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
29. Hochwarter, W., Ferris, G., Laird, M., Treadway, D., & Gallagher, V. (2010). Non-linear politics perceptions – Work outcome relationships: A three-study, five-sample investigation. Journal of Management, 36, 740–763.
30. Hochwarter, W., Kolodinsky, R., Witt, L., Hall, A., Ferris, G., & Kacmar, K. (2006). Competing perspectives on the role of understanding in the politics perceptions – Job performance relation-ship: A test of the ‘‘antidote’’ versus ‘‘distraction’’ hypotheses. In E. Vigoda-Gadot & A. Drory (Eds.), Handbook of organizational politics (pp. 271–285). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
31. James, W. (1907). Pragmatism: A new way for some old ways of thinking. Popular lectures on philosophy by William James. New York, NY: Long-mans, Green.
32. Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 31, 385–408.
33. Jones, E. E. (1990). Interpersonal perception. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman.
34. Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolu-tions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
35. Leavitt, K., Mitchell, T., & Peterson, J. (2010). Theory pruning: Strategies to reduce our dense theoretical landscape. Organizational Research Methods, 13, 644–667.
36. LePine, J., & Wilcox-King, A. (2010). Editor’s com-ments: Developing novel theoretical insight from reviews of existing theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 35, 506–509.
37. Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychol-ogy. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
38. Lykken, D. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151–159.
39. McKinley, W. (2010). Organizational theory devel-opment: Displacement of ends? Organization Studies, 31, 47–68.
40. Mintzberg, H. (2005). Developing theory about the development of theory. In K. Smith & M. Hitt (Eds.), Great minds in management: The process of theory development (pp. 355–372). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
41. Okhuysen, G., & Bonardi, J. (2011). Editors’ com-ments: The challenges of building theory by combining lenses. Academy of Management Review, 36, 6–11.
42. Oswick, C., Fleming, P., & Hanlon, G. (2011). From borrowing to blending: Rethinking the processes of organizational theory building. Academy of Management Review, 36, 318–337.
43. Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. (2006). Hard facts, danger-ous half-truths, and total nonsense: Profiting from evidence-based management. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
44. Platt, J. (1964). Strong inference. Science, 146, 347–353.
45. Reay, T., & Whetten, D. (2011). What constitutes a theoretical contribution in family business? Family Business Review, 24, 105–110.
46. Shapira, Z. (in press). ‘‘I’ve got a theory paper – do you?’’: Conceptual, empirical, and theoretical contributions to knowledge in the organizational sciences. Organization Science.
47. Spell, C. (2001). Management fashions: Where do they come from, and are they old wine in new bottles. Journal of Management Inquiry, 10, 358–373.
48. Staw, B. (1995). Repairs on the road to relevance and rigor: Some unexplored issues in publishing organizational research. In L. Cummings & P. Frost (Eds.), Publishing in the organizational sciences (pp. 85–97). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49. Strong, M., Jeanneret, P., McPhail, S., Blakley, B., & D Egidio, E. (1999). Work context: Taxonomy and measurement of the work environment. In N. Peterson, M. Mumford, W. Borman, P. Jeanneret, & E. Fleishman (Eds.), An occupational information system for the 21st century: The development of the O* NET (pp. 127–145). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
50. Sutton, R., & Staw, B. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 371–384.
51. Tsang, E., & Frey, B. (2007). The as-is journal review process: Let authors own their ideas. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6, 128–136.
52. Tsang, E., & Kwan, K. (1999). Replication and theory development in the organizational sciences: A critical realistic perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24, 759–780.
53. Tsui, A. (2009). Autonomy of inquiry: Shaping the future of emerging scientific communities. Management and Organization Review, 5, 1–14.
54. van Knippenberg, D. (2011). Advancing theory in organizational psychology. Organizational Psychology Review, 1, 3–8.
55. Van Maanen, J., Sorensen, J., & Mitchell, T. (2007). The interplay between theory and method. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1145–1154.
56. Webster’s new world college dictionary. (1997). New York, NY: Macmillan.
57. Weick, K. (1989). Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of Management Review, 14, 516–531.
58. Whetten, D. (2009). An examination of the interface between context and theory applied to the study of Chinese organizations. Management and Organization Review, 5, 29–55.
59. Zellars, K., Hochwarter, W., Lanivich, S., Perrewé, P., & Ferris, G. (2011). Accountability for others, perceived resources and well-being: Convergent restricted nonlinear results in two samples. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychol-ogy, 84, 95–115.