Achieving accuracy, generalization-to-contexts, and complexity in theories of business-to-business decision processes

Abstract

This article describes field research methods that provide advances in developing accurate theories of business-to-business (B2B) decision processes. The article supports and extends prior work by Woodside (2010) that bridging qualitative and quantitative research method is possible to achieve accuracy, complexity, and generality across cases in B2B decision processes.As an aid in doing so, the article argues for the study of a few (n = 5 to 50) cases via case study research (CSR). The article defines CSR, and describes several CSR theories and methods that are useful for describing, explaining, and forecasting processes occurring in business-to-business (B2B) contexts. The discussion includes summaries of six B2B case studies spanning more than 60 years of research. This article advocates embracing the view that isomorphic theory of realities of B2B processes is possible via advances in CSR methods. The discussion advocates rejecting the dominant logic of attempting to describe and explain B2B processes by arms-length fixed-point surveys that usually involve responses from one executive per firm with no datamatching of firms in specific B2B relationships-such surveys lack details and accuracy necessary for understanding, describing, and forecasting B2B processes.Keywords business-to-business relationship; case study research; direct research; participant observation; ethnographic decision tree model; fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis; degrees-offreedom analysis 5

On the use of qualitative comparative analysis in management

“…First, by familiarizing the management research community with the benefits of using QCA to understand organizational phenomena (Curchod, 2003). Second, by highlighting the relevance of the use of QCA in specific management domains such as marketing (Kent, 2009a;2009b;Woodside & Zhang, 2012), public management (Kitchener et al, 2002), leadership (Ford et al, 2013), B to B decision-making (Woodside & Baxter, 2013), and configurations/typologies of organizations (Fiss, 2007;. Third, by identifying the specificities of QCA's own empirical processes (Duşa, 2007;Woodside, 2011;Woodside et al, 2012 (Greckhamer et al, 2013;Fiss et al, 2013).…”

“…Such studies aim to increase research validity (Aguilera-Caracuel et al, 2014), nuance (Woodside & Zhang, 2013), or question existing knowledge (Woodside & Baxter, 2013).…”

“…That objective may be unachievable due to a large size of cases under investigation. Woodside and Baxter (2013) suggest between 5 and 50 as a number of cases to study, although many of the articles this study mentions deal with a large-N.…”

The Impact of Cognition on New Value Creation within the Institutional Theory Perspective

“…In this way, researcher bias tried to be minimized. Moreover, for analytical generalizability of the results, triangulation in terms of researcher and data source was applied [54].…”

On the Use of Qualitative Comparative Analysis to Identify the Bright Spots in Dark Tourism

“…For Ordanini, Parasuraman and Rubera (2013), QCA makes better sense of the data in research contexts. To the list of benefits of this method can be added achieving accuracy and generalisation (Woodside and Baxter, 2013), it is more informative and structured . Last but not least, this method can be applied to a variety of areas like education (Schneider, Bentrop & Paunescu, 2010); health (Chang, Tseng & Woodside, 2013); ICT ; hospitality (Ordanini, Parasuraman and Rubera, 2013), in B2B context (Woodside & Baxter, 2013), countries economic performance (Vis, 2007), politics (Stokke, 2007) to name a few.…”