Causation, counterfactuals, and competitive advantage

Durand, Rodolphe; Vaara, Eero

doi:10.1002/smj.793

Cited by 158 publications

(136 citation statements)

References 85 publications

(115 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

130

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several management scholars have broadened the application of luck by including consideration of counterfactuals (Durand & Vaara, 2009;March, Sproull, & Tamuz, 1991).…”

Section: Luck As Counterfactualmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But such a counterfactual analysis is not easy because controlling for all initial conditions and their interactions with path dependency is difficult. Recent studies have suggested novel approaches to address this challenge (Cornelissen & Durand, 2012;Durand & Vaara, 2009;Vergne & Durand, 2009). For example, some have suggested a 'contrast explanation' approach: one should start by holding all causal factors constant except the one of interest when developing alternative histories for an event (Tsang & Ellsaesser, 2011).…”

Section: Luck As Counterfactualmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Good Night, and Good Luck: Perspectives on Luck in Management Scholarship

Liu

Rond

2016

The Academy of Management Annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is not insignificant that seminal contributions to management scholarship have highlighted luck as an alternative explanation for performance differences between individuals and organizations. Yet it has rarely taken center-stage in scholarship. The principal purpose of this paper is to provide a systematic review of the application of luck in the management literature and in such foundation disciplines as economics, sociology, and psychology. Our analysis finds five common perspectives on luck: (a) luck as Attribution; (b) luck as Randomness; (c) luck as Counterfactual; (d) luck as Undeserved; and (e) luck as Serendipity. We outline various ways in which research on luck may be advanced along each of these perspectives, and develop an underexplored, sixth, perspective on (f) 'luck as Leveler' to provide a possible solution to such issues as social inequality and (unwarranted) executive compensation.

show abstract

“…Several management scholars have broadened the application of luck by including consideration of counterfactuals (Durand & Vaara, 2009;March, Sproull, & Tamuz, 1991).…”

Section: Luck As Counterfactualmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Luck As Counterfactualmentioning

confidence: 99%

Good Night, and Good Luck: Perspectives on Luck in Management Scholarship

Liu

Rond

2016

The Academy of Management Annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Durand and Vaara (2009) for example, in their paper on causation, argue that constructionism is not concerned with external causation, but solely with interpreting and understanding the views and beliefs of social actors. With such a viewpoint it is difficult to address many real-world problems other than seeing them as ultimately grounded in differences in Weltanschauungen, as does soft systems methodology (SSM) (Mingers 1984).…”

Section: Historical Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Helping business schools engage with real problems: The contribution of critical realism and systems thinking

Mingers

2015

European Journal of Operational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The world faces major problems, not least climate change and the financial crisis, and business schools have been criticised for their failure to help address these issues and, in the case of the financial meltdown, for being causally implicated in it. In this paper we begin by describing the extent of what has been called the rigour/relevance debate. We then diagnose the nature of the problem in terms of historical, structural and contextual mechanisms that initiated and now sustain an inability of business schools to engage with real-world issues. We then propose a combination of measures, which mutually reinforce each other, that are necessary to break into this vicious circlecritical realism as an underpinning philosophy that supports and embodies the next points; holism and transdisciplinarity; multimethodology (mixed-methods research); and a critical and ethical-committed stance. OR and management science have much to contribute in terms of both powerful analytical methods and problem structuring methods. Abstract The world faces major problems, not least climate change and the financial crisis, and business schools have been criticised for their failure to help address these issues and, in the case of the financial meltdown, for being causally implicated in it. In this paper we begin by describing the extent of what has been called the rigour/relevance debate. We then diagnose the nature of the problem in terms of historical, structural and contextual mechanisms that initiated and now sustain an inability of business schools to engage with real-world issues. We then propose a combination of measures, which mutually reinforce each other, that are necessary to break into this vicious circlecritical realism as an underpinning philosophy that supports and embodies the next points; holism and transdisciplinarity; multimethodology (mixed-methods research); and a critical and ethical-committed stance. OR and management science have much to contribute in terms of both powerful analytical methods and problem structuring methods. Keywords

show abstract

“…By pursuing alternative explanations that may challenge or even break existing concepts, constructs, assumptions and relationships, researchers extend theoretical understanding in new ways (Durand and Vaara, 2009;Folger and Turillo, 1999). The imaginative use of 'what if' questions (Cornelissen & Durand, 2014) might lead researchers to understand the phenomena under examination anew.…”

Section: Counterfactual Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

I Never Promised You a Rose Garden: When Research Questions Ought to Change

MacIntosh¹,

Bartunek²,

Bhatt³

et al. 2016

Research in Organizational Change and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter addresses a topic which is rarely discussed but is a common feature of field-based action research, namely whether and when research questions can legitimately change during the conduct of a study. We explore three common strategies for developing research questions before problematizing the assumption which these strategies share, namely that research questions are fixed at the outset and remain stable. We note that change can, does and indeed should occur in response to changes in the context within which the research is being conducted. Using an illustrative example of a longitudinal project, we identify refinement and reframing as two distinct types of research question development that might occur. Our conclusions suggest that greater transparency over when, in what circumstances and why researchers elect to change their research questions would be a healthy development for the field.

show abstract

Causation, counterfactuals, and competitive advantage

Cited by 158 publications

References 85 publications

Good Night, and Good Luck: Perspectives on Luck in Management Scholarship

Good Night, and Good Luck: Perspectives on Luck in Management Scholarship

Helping business schools engage with real problems: The contribution of critical realism and systems thinking

I Never Promised You a Rose Garden: When Research Questions Ought to Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About