Building Theory about Theory Building: What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution?

Abstract

We distill existing literature on theoretical contribution into two dimensions, originality (incremental or revelatory) and utility (scientific or practical). We argue for a revision in the way scholars approach the utility dimension by calling for a view of theorizing that would enable theories with more "scope" (both scientific and practical utility). We also argue for an orientation toward "prescience" as a way of achieving scope and fulfilling our scholarly role of facilitating organizational and societal adaptiveness.

Crafting Sustainable Development Solutions: Frugal Innovations of Grassroots Entrepreneurs

“…In the analysis of the data, we followed a qualitative Grounded Theory approach, based on the methods proposed by Gioia et al [115]. The method has proved to be a fruitful and robust tool for theories validation and theories building, and is increasingly used among management and entrepreneurship scholars [115,116]. The analysis followed two main stages: the creation of a data structure and the discussion about the relationships existing between the theoretical dimensions that emerged from such a structure (see figure in Section 5.1).…”

Ambicultural blending between Eastern and Western paradigms: Fresh perspectives for international management research

“…The motivation for a more practical orientation is to cultivate a more paradigmatically integrative research 'relevance' (Corley and Gioia 2011) that Asian actors might actually be able to use and Asian researchers can use sympathetically within indigenous Asian contexts. To have any effect and make any real difference it will need to pass the test of blended theories which should "have explanatory power and are able to energize coherent and sustainable programs of research" (Cornelissen and Durand 2012, 154).…”

Some helpful sources for prospective authors in Asia Pacific Journal of Management

“…Just testing what is already well known without providing clear contributions or some new information is likely to lead to rejection in good academic journals (e.g., Kilduff, 2007;Rynes, 2002;Rynes et al, 2005). Additional guidance on contributing to theory is available in a number of sources in the management literature (e.g., Colquitt & Ireland, 2009;Corley & Gioia, 2011;Van de Ven, 2007;Whetten, 1989). For contributions to practice, some helpful works include Bartunek and Rynes (2010), Christensen and Raynor (2003), and Peng and Dess (2010).…”