GSM 6190

Theory in Management
Title

: The Process of building Theory

Authors : Clayton M. Christensen and

David M. Sundhal,
Harvard Business School (2001)
By
: Megat Shariffudin b. Zulkifli (GM
03958)
Mohamad Razif b. Haji Abdul
Mubin (GM 03956)

Purpose

Help define the types of good topics or

questions to address in a productive
research agenda
Offer guidance in designing research
programmes to improve
understanding in management theory

A theory of theory building Iterative process

1st phase
Observe phenomena and describe
problems that we are facing
Careful description of the phenomena
in words and numbers
Classify the phenomena into
categories of similar thing

2nd Phase
Building theories to explain the
behavior of the phenomena.
A statement of what causes what,
and why, and under what
circumstances
Contingent explanation of causality,
to understand why things turn out
the way they do
Be able to predict with confidence

The process of building better theory

Discover new thing that a theory did not lead
them to expect i.e. paradox or anomaly
Respond:
More accurately describing what the phenomena are
and are not
Defining a revised classification scheme, or
specifying ways to measure more accurate attributes
Articulating new statement of what causes what,
and why, and under what circumstances

The cycle repeated again when new researcher

found other anomalies

Figure 1: The Process by which

theory is built
Theory is a statement of
what causes what, and why,
and under what
circumstances

paradigm

ive ve
t
uc sdiscti
d
In ocPree
pr

Theory

Classification

Observe, describe & measure

phenomena

Ind
pr uct
ive
Co o c
nfi es
rm s

Anoma
ly

Cycles of theory building

Pre-paradigmatic
Finding anomalies on the conceptual
definition of categories

Post-paradigmatic
Figuring out how to measure the
phenomena and predict

Role of anomaly in theory-building

Discover things where prior theory

cannot account falsifiable of theory
Generate more accurate theory.
Assert what causes what, and why,
and under what circumstances

Anomaly seeking research three

mechanisms:
1.Look at phenomena through the lenses of
other academic disciplines
2.Look at the phenomena within the
phenomena
3.Look at a broader variety of phenomena
(than previous researcher were able to
examine)

1. lenses of other academic

disciplines

Mechanism that leads researchers to

look for different things than scholars
within the existing dominant discipline
intuitively look for

Enables researchers to attach meaning

and significance to phenomena which,
when not viewed through new lenses,
might appear inconsequential

2. phenomena within the phenomena

Nested research design (Yin, 1984) - Study
how individuals act and interact within
groups
How interaction amongst groups and
companies effect the actions of individuals
Anomalies will only surface while studying
second-order interactions within a nested
design

3. Broader variety of phenomena

Uses a theory to predict a broader,
more diverse range of phenomena
than prior scholars had examined,
leading to even better theory.

The importance of categorization

Short-circuit the process of building a theory by leaping
from phenomena to theory would lead to less value to
future researchers and practitioners the theory does
not have contingent explanatory power.
Two stages of categorization:
Substantive classification
The classification schemes tend to be defined by the attributes of the
phenomena
Prerequisite to the emergence of theory grounded in formal calssification
But Difficult to conclude that one scheme is superior to another because
there are so many dimensions of the phenomena

Formal classification
Formal categories tends to be defined in terms of circumstances in which
practitioners might find themselves rather than attributes of phenomena
Map into the theory stage of theory building (figure 1)
The emergence of formal categories, to assert how causal chain (what
causes what, and why) might yield different outcomes in different situations

Classification and productive research

questions
To improve a theory, researchers could
ask ever-deeper categorization questions
about the work of prior writers
Classifications questions can be a reliable
mechanism by which anomalies are
uncovered, enabling researchers to add
value

Avoidance of classification
Categorization is the bedrock of meaningful theory.
Researchers often see categorization as
operationalizing constructs, that only allow them to
state under this specific circumstance these actions
cause these results. Still useful if subsequent
scholars can use those findings to predict what are
likely to see when they observed more phenomena
within specific circumstance.
But, if researchers define hypothetical categories in
order to make the mathematics of their analysis
tractable, then subsequent scholars cannot use their
work to build theory

Classification and the external validity

of research
External validity arises when a reader ask how
can we be sure these lessons can be applied to
this other situation? (external validity)
External validity is established through
classification
Classification that is mutually exclusive and
collectively exhaustive could explain what causes
what, and why, and under what circumstances

Classification and nested research designs

Solid theory asserts what causes what and why
Grounded in a robust categorization scheme that can
define for specific managers in specific situations
which courses of action would lead to the best results
Nested research look at phenomena within
phenomena case studies of specific situations
within the population that are unexplained outliers
(anomalies)
Help define categories and can articulate a theory
with better external validity

Conclusion the incongruity of actions

and words
Academicians Job market emphasized on
deep training in using tools of measurement
and analysis
Little emphasize about how to define good
research questions
Inherent problem - lack of understanding
(among the academicians) on the problem
of anomaly-discovery : constitute the
foundation of research work.