Whetten - What constitutes a theoretical contribution?
Goal: to find a simple way to communicate the necessary ingredients of a theoretical
contribution.
Key questions:
1. What are the building blocks of theory development?
2. What Is a legitimate value-added contribution to theory development?
3. What factors are considered in judging conceptual papers?
What are the building blocks of theory development?
Complete theory has four essential components (Dubin 1978)
1. What: which factors logically should be considered as part of the explanation
a. Comprehensiveness (are all relevant factors included?)
b. Parsimony (should some factors be deleted because they add little value?)
i. Just deleting it is easier than justifying why it should be included, but this
is not the way a good theorist should think
2. How: How are the factors related?
a. Using arrows to connect the boxes (introducing causality)
3. Why: what are the underlying psychological, economic or social dynamics that justify the
selection of the factors and the proposed relationships?
a. This is the glue that ties the model together
4. Who, where, when: these conditions place limitations on the propositions generated
from a theoretical model.
a. Creates boundaries of generalizability
What Is a legitimate value-added contribution to theory development?
New theories are based on existing theories, but when is the theory of added value.
1. What and how: addition or deletion of factors are not of sufficient magnitude to alter the
core logic of the existing theory
a. Reviewers will not be satisfied
b. One way: demonstrating the value of a proposed change in a list of factors, and
to identify how this change influences all relationships across the model (how)
2. Why: Borrowing a theory from another field to apply to the new theory (difficult)
3. Who, when, where: Applying an old model to a new situation is not satisfactory
a. More effective to do it in qualitative different conditions than in quantitative
1. Proposed improvements addressing only a single element of an existing theory are
seldom judged to be sufficient. Focus should be on multiple elements.
2. Theoretical critiques should marshal compelling evidence. Can be logical, empirical or
epistemological.
3. Theoretical critiques should propose remedies or alternatives
1
,What factors are considered in judging conceptual papers?
7 key questions that answer the question: what constitutes a publishable theory paper?
1. What's new? Does the paper make a significant contribution to the current thinking?
2. So what? Will the theory change the practice or organizational science in this area?
3. Why so? Are the underlying logic and supporting evidence compelling?
4. Well done? Does the paper reflect reasoned thinking? Is everything covered?
5. Done well? Is the paper well written? Does it flow logically?
6. Why now? Is this topic of interest to scholars in this area? Will it add to discussions?
7. Who cares? What percentage of academic readers are interested in this topic?
Shapira - I've got a theory paper - do you?
Theory: signifies the highest level of inquiry in science. It is a formulation of the relationship
among the core elements of a system of variables that ideally is arrived at after overcoming
multiple hurdles and several stages of refinement and empirical testing.
Theory: an analytical structure or system that attempts to explain a particular set of empirical
phenomena.
1. A theory is constructed to provide a coherent explanation of a set of observed
phenomena
2. Theories make assumptions and draw logical derivations, that lead to predictions
3. A theory should be formulated in a way that makes clear how it can be refuted or falsified
4. Ultimate test: comparing its predictions to reality > predictions are subject to a false/true
test.
Model: Implies a formulation that
1. Derives predictions based on clearly specified assumptions and
2. Is precise and falsifiable.
Difference theory / model: a model does not need to provide an explanation of the
phenomenon it deals with and does not need to make a claim about the truth.
Models are precise and often formulated in mathematical terms.
Conceptual framework: These make testable predictions.
1. Provide a structure to organize observations
2. Describes the structure in a clear and precise manner
A framework has not developed into a coherent set of assumptions, derivations and predictions
as a game theory has, for example.
A framework does not have to make strong assumptions as a theory does
2
, Be short: A theory has to be parsimonious: if two theories are offered for explaining the same
phenomenon, with a similar degree of success, the one that is more concise and shorter is
thought to dominate the other. For example, mathematical theories.
3
Goal: to find a simple way to communicate the necessary ingredients of a theoretical
contribution.
Key questions:
1. What are the building blocks of theory development?
2. What Is a legitimate value-added contribution to theory development?
3. What factors are considered in judging conceptual papers?
What are the building blocks of theory development?
Complete theory has four essential components (Dubin 1978)
1. What: which factors logically should be considered as part of the explanation
a. Comprehensiveness (are all relevant factors included?)
b. Parsimony (should some factors be deleted because they add little value?)
i. Just deleting it is easier than justifying why it should be included, but this
is not the way a good theorist should think
2. How: How are the factors related?
a. Using arrows to connect the boxes (introducing causality)
3. Why: what are the underlying psychological, economic or social dynamics that justify the
selection of the factors and the proposed relationships?
a. This is the glue that ties the model together
4. Who, where, when: these conditions place limitations on the propositions generated
from a theoretical model.
a. Creates boundaries of generalizability
What Is a legitimate value-added contribution to theory development?
New theories are based on existing theories, but when is the theory of added value.
1. What and how: addition or deletion of factors are not of sufficient magnitude to alter the
core logic of the existing theory
a. Reviewers will not be satisfied
b. One way: demonstrating the value of a proposed change in a list of factors, and
to identify how this change influences all relationships across the model (how)
2. Why: Borrowing a theory from another field to apply to the new theory (difficult)
3. Who, when, where: Applying an old model to a new situation is not satisfactory
a. More effective to do it in qualitative different conditions than in quantitative
1. Proposed improvements addressing only a single element of an existing theory are
seldom judged to be sufficient. Focus should be on multiple elements.
2. Theoretical critiques should marshal compelling evidence. Can be logical, empirical or
epistemological.
3. Theoretical critiques should propose remedies or alternatives
1
,What factors are considered in judging conceptual papers?
7 key questions that answer the question: what constitutes a publishable theory paper?
1. What's new? Does the paper make a significant contribution to the current thinking?
2. So what? Will the theory change the practice or organizational science in this area?
3. Why so? Are the underlying logic and supporting evidence compelling?
4. Well done? Does the paper reflect reasoned thinking? Is everything covered?
5. Done well? Is the paper well written? Does it flow logically?
6. Why now? Is this topic of interest to scholars in this area? Will it add to discussions?
7. Who cares? What percentage of academic readers are interested in this topic?
Shapira - I've got a theory paper - do you?
Theory: signifies the highest level of inquiry in science. It is a formulation of the relationship
among the core elements of a system of variables that ideally is arrived at after overcoming
multiple hurdles and several stages of refinement and empirical testing.
Theory: an analytical structure or system that attempts to explain a particular set of empirical
phenomena.
1. A theory is constructed to provide a coherent explanation of a set of observed
phenomena
2. Theories make assumptions and draw logical derivations, that lead to predictions
3. A theory should be formulated in a way that makes clear how it can be refuted or falsified
4. Ultimate test: comparing its predictions to reality > predictions are subject to a false/true
test.
Model: Implies a formulation that
1. Derives predictions based on clearly specified assumptions and
2. Is precise and falsifiable.
Difference theory / model: a model does not need to provide an explanation of the
phenomenon it deals with and does not need to make a claim about the truth.
Models are precise and often formulated in mathematical terms.
Conceptual framework: These make testable predictions.
1. Provide a structure to organize observations
2. Describes the structure in a clear and precise manner
A framework has not developed into a coherent set of assumptions, derivations and predictions
as a game theory has, for example.
A framework does not have to make strong assumptions as a theory does
2
, Be short: A theory has to be parsimonious: if two theories are offered for explaining the same
phenomenon, with a similar degree of success, the one that is more concise and shorter is
thought to dominate the other. For example, mathematical theories.
3
