Objectives

• To understand the purpose, pre-requites, processes

involved and expected outcomes of research ---to
develop an outcome, process and activity orientation for
doing research

• To understand and appreciate the efforts required in

identifying a research theme and preparing a research
proposal and develop a research proposal

• To initiate the preparation of a research proposal

 Theoretical Contribution

Source:
Whetten D. A.(1989) What Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution?.,
Academy of Management Review, !4 (4), 490-495.
 Purpose

• Simple concepts to help theory development process

• To clarify expectations and standards in conceptual

contributions
 What Constitutes a Theoretical
Contribution?
1. What are the building blocks of theory development?

2. What is a legitimate value added contribution to theory

development?

3. What factors are considered in judging conceptual

papers?
 Building Blocks:
Four elements of a complete theory (Dubin 1978)

• What?

• How?

• Why?

• Who? When? Where?

 What?

– What are the factors (variables, constructs, concepts)

that affect the research phenomenon?

– Comprehensiveness and Parsimony

– Err by including more factors than excluding

 How?
– How are the factors related?

– Introduces Causality

– Visual Representation desirable (aid to balance

parsimony and comprehensiveness)

• What and how together determines the domain

of the theory
 Why?
– Underlying psychological, sociological and economic
dynamics that justify selection of factors and the
proposed relationships
– Theoretical glue that holds the model together
– Why should this model be accepted?
– Soundness of fundamental views of human nature,
organizational requisites or societal processes
provides the basis for the reasonableness of the
conceptualization
 Why?

– Logic Replaces data in theory development

– All relationships in the model should not be tested
before---To challenge and extend existing knowledge
– How and What describe; Why explains
 Who? When? Where?

– Conditions that place limitations on the proposed

model

– Effects of time and context

– Specifies the contextual limit of the propositions

– Test the theory in different conditions/context to

understand limitations

– Discuss limits of generalisibility

– Need to think whether the theoretical effects vary over

time due to time dependent variables or instability of
the model
 What is a Legitimate Value Added
contribution?
• What and How?

– Just an addition or deletion of a factor does not make

a theoretical contribution

– Need to demonstrate the value of a proposed change

– How a new variable alter the understanding of the

phenomenon?
What is a Legitimate Value Added contribution?

• Why?

– Borrowing perspectives from other fields

– Question assumption of existing theories (basis of

new theory)
What is a Legitimate Value Added contribution?
• Who, when , Where?
– Not sufficient to point out limitation of of a proposed
theory
– Need to understand why the limitations exist and how
they can be rectified (by changing “what and how” of
the theory)
– Apply old model to a new settings an showing that it
works in the new setting is not enough
– Need to learn something new about the theory while
testing the same theory in a different context to make
a contribution
What is a Legitimate Value Added Contribution?
Testing the old theory in a new setting can result in
theoretical contribution when
– Proposed improvements should affect multiple
elements the theory
– Theoretical critiques should marshall compelling
evidences; evidence can be logical; empirical or
epistemological
– Theoretical critiques should propose remedies or
alternatives; should craft improved conceptualizations
 Factors Considered in judging
conceptual contributions?
• What is new?
– New theories or altering extant views
• So what?
– Will the theory likely change the research practice in
the discipline ?
– Are linkages to research evident?
• Why so?
– Are the underlying logic and supporting evidence
compelling?
– Are the authors assumptions explicit?
 Factors Considered in judging
conceptual contributions?
• Well done?

– Is the research rigorous enough for the results to be

credible ?

– Conveys completeness, thoroughness?

– Multiple theoretical elements covered

– Any glaring logical flaws in arguments made?

– Thoughts developed over an extended period of time

informed by extensive peer input?
 Factors Considered in judging
conceptual contributions?
• Done Well?
– Is the paper well written?
– Does it flow logically?
– Is it enjoyable to read?
– It it long enough to cover the subject and short
enough to be interesting?
– Doe the papers appearance reflect high professional
standards?
– It is the format and content consistent with the Notice
to contributors?
 Factors Considered in judging
conceptual contributions?
• Why now?

– Is this topic of contemporary interestn to scholars?

– Will it likely adavnce curent discussions? Stimulate

new discussions? Or revitalise old discussions?

• Who cares?

– What percentage f academic readers are interested in

this topic?
 Conclusion
• Theory development process and criteria for judging
theoretical contribution to be broadly understood

• To facilitate communication between contributors and

evaluators