Research and knowledge building in management studies: an analysis of methodological preferences.

The overall aim of this paper is to explore the nature of the methodology employed in research published in some of the top business and management journals, with a view to understanding aspects of the creation of management knowledge. The article commences with a review of earlier research and commentary on the nature and appropriateness of competing research methodologies and designs. It reports the early bias in favour of positivism and quantitative methodologies, and explores the evolving recognition of the potential contribution of phenomenological research design and qualitative methodologies. An analysis was conducted of the research methodologies adopted by 120 articles drawn from twenty leading management journals published between 1991 and 2000. The findings section discusses key characteristics of authorship, and aspects of the research methodologies adopted. The conclusion notes the wide range of different methodological approaches adopted in pursuit of the development of management knowledge, and different research agendas. Further research needs to characterize and profile the relationship between these agendas and specific methodological approaches, and to develop understanding of the specific contributions of quantitative and qualitative approaches and their associated paradigms.

[1]  Alfred Dupont Chandler,et al.  战略与结构 : 美国工商企业成长的若干篇章=strategy and structure : chapters in the history of the American industrial enterprise , 1962 .

[2]  J. L. Bower,et al.  Business policy: text and cases , 1973 .

[3]  Anthony Giddens,et al.  Positivism and sociology , 1974 .

[4]  Azhdar Karami,et al.  How chief executives’ perception of the environment impacts on company performance , 2002 .

[5]  Marjan Sarshar,et al.  Quantitative and qualitative research in the built environment: application of “mixed” research approach , 2002 .

[6]  Geoffrey M. Hodgson,et al.  The Editors and Authors of Economics Journals: A Case of Institutional Oligopoly? , 1999 .

[7]  W. Judge,et al.  Institutional and Strategic Choice Perspectives on Board Involvement in the Strategic Decision Process , 1992, Academy of Management journal. Academy of Management.

[8]  Martin Hollis,et al.  The philosophy of social science : an introduction , 1994 .

[9]  D. Schendel,et al.  Business Policy or Strategic Management: A Broader View for an Emerging Discipline. Paper No. 371. , 1972 .

[10]  K. Andrews.  The Concept of Corporate Strategy , 1971 .

[11]  Alan Bryman.  Qualitative methods special series , 2002 .

[12]  Eleanor Shaw,et al.  A guide to the qualitative research process: evidence from a small firm study , 1999 .

[13]  Ming-Jer Chen,et al.  Nonresponse and Delayed Response to Competitive Moves: The Roles of Competitor Dependence and Action Irreversibility , 1992 .

[14]  D. Teece,et al.  Fundamental Issues in Strategy: A Research Agenda , 1994 .

[15]  Colin Robson,et al.  Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers , 1993 .

[16]  Michael A. Hitt,et al.  Current and Future Research Methods in Strategic Management , 1998 .

[17]  Michael A. Hitt,et al.  Theory and research in strategic management: Swings of a pendulum , 1999 .

[18]  T. Scandura,et al.  Research Methodology In Management: Current Practices, Trends, And Implications For Future Research , 2000 .

[19]  L. Vogel,et al.  Strategy and Structure , 1986 .

[20]  Igor H.Ansoff.  Strategic Management , 1979 .