What constitutes a theoretical contribution

WHAT CONSTITUTES ATHEORETICAL CONTRIBUTION?

DAVID A. WHETTENR78161011 陳旻孜

There are several excellent treatises on the subject, but they typically involve terms and concepts that are difficult to incorporate into everyday communications with authors and reviewers.

優秀的論文中，說的術語和概念通常很難與編輯或審稿者對話

Available frameworks are as likely to obfuscate, as they are to clarify, meaning.

也意味著這些理論框架是需要被澄清的

This article is a rudimentary effort to fill this gap: The intent is not to create a new conceptualization of theory, but rather to propose several simple concepts for discussing the theory development process.

這篇文章主要是要填補這一個缺口；但不是要建立一個新的理論或概念，而是提出幾個簡單的概念來探討理論發展的過程

What are the building blocks of theory development ？

什麼建立了理論的發展？ What is a legitimate value-added contribution

to theory development ？什麼是正統的理論發展 What factors are considered in judging

conceptual papers ？用什麼角度來判斷一篇文章


Dubin(1978) a complete theory must contain four essential elements. The four essential elements are “what” 、” how” 、” why” and “who, where, when”

一個完整的理論要有四個要素

<what> Two criteria exist for judging the extent to which we

have included the "right" factors: comprehensiveness and parsimony.

what factors ？有兩個標準可以判斷 : 全面性和簡約性


<how> Having identified a set of factors, the researcher's next

question is. How are they related ？研究者在確定一系列因素之後，下一個問題是要知道這些因素

彼此之間是如何相關？ Operationally this involves using “arrows” to connect

the “boxes“ and delineating patterns. 操作上會使用到“箭頭”以及“框”畫出圖表 In particular, formal models aid theory developers and

users to assess the balance between parsimony and completeness.

正式的模型 ( 圖表 ) 可以幫助理論的簡約性和完整性之間的平衡。


<why> What are the underlying psychological, economic, or social

dynamics that justify the selection of factors and the proposed causal relationships ？

選擇的這些因素和因果關係的理由是什麼？ Why should colleagues give credence to this particular

representation of the phenomena? The answer lies in the logic underlying the model. The soundness of fundamental views of human nature, organizational requisites, or societal processes provide the basis for judging the reasonableness of the proposed conceptualization.

為什麼要相信這些代表性的現象？其實答案就在於背後的邏輯模型。如健全人性的基本觀點、組織的必要條件、或社會過程中概念化的合理性都是其判斷的基礎。


<why> During the theory-development process, logic

replaces data as the basis for evaluation. 在理論發展過程中，邏輯數據可以做為評論的基礎 The mission of a theory-development journal

is to challenge and extend existing knowledge, not simply to rewrite it.

理論發展是要挑戰和擴展現有的知識，而不是簡單地重寫它 ( 也就是站在巨人肩膀上 )


<why> The primary difference between propositions

and hypotheses is that propositions involve concepts, whereas hypotheses require measures.

命題和假設之間的主要區別是，命題是一種概念，而假設需要採取措施

To avoid vacuous discussions, propositions should be well grounded in the, as well as the Hows and the Whats.

為了避免空洞的討論，更需要瞭解理論的 Whys 、 Hows 、 Whats


<Who, Where, When> Scholars who study the effects of time and context

on people and events keep asking nagging questions like.

研究者會受到時間和環境的影響 In their efforts to understand a social phenomenon

they tend to consider it only in familiar surroundings and at one point in time. 研究者會在他們的努力之下，理解一種社會現象，但是卻往往

受到 Who, Where, When 的影響，研究範圍只能在熟悉的環境中，在一個時間點內來理解。

What is a legitimate,value-added contribution to theory development ？

Most organizational scholars are not going to generate a new theory from scratch. Instead, they generally work on improving what already exists.

大多數學者不會從頭開始生出一個新的理論，而是針對現在已經存在的理論做改善

What and How. Although, in principle, it is possible to make an important theoretical contribution by simply adding or subtracting factors (Whats) from an existing model, this process seldom satisfies reviewers.

雖然 What and How ，是可以通過簡單的相加或相減因素，從現有的模型作出了重要的理論貢獻，但是只做到這一過程很難滿足審稿人 (AMR 的 )


Science is facts, just as houses are made of stone. . . . But a pile of stones is not a house, and a collection of facts is not necessarily science.

科學是事實，就像房子是石頭做的 ...... 但是，一堆石頭並不是一棟房子，事實的集合，不一定就是科學

Therefore, theoretical insights come from demonstrating how the addition of a new variable significantly alters our understanding of the phenomena by reorganizing our causal maps.

因此，理論觀點是用來展示如何增加新的變數，改變了我們現在所理解的現象進而重組其因果關係


Three broad themes underlie this section:

1. proposed improvements addressing only a single element of an existing theory are seldom judged to be sufficient.

建議改善現有的理論，只有一個因素是不夠的。所以前面 why 一直強調要用多元角度、多領域角度來沉澱理論的發展


2. theoretical critiques should marshal compelling evidence. (logical, empirical, epistemological)

理論批判就要有足夠的證據，這些證據可以是邏輯的、經驗的、知識論。所以前面 what & how依質強調要有足夠的數據才有說服力來挑戰舊有的理論


3. theoretical critiques should propose remedies or alternatives. critics should share responsibility for crafting improved conceptualizations.

理論批判是提出一些補救措施或替代方案，所以批判者應該要你定一些改進的方案，不然我們很難去了解到底原來的理論真的是不好嗎

What Factors Are Considered in Judging Conceptual Papers ？

reviewers consider other factors, including clarity of expression, impact on research, timeliness, and relevance.

reviewers看一篇 paper考慮的因素，包括清晰的表達，研究貢獻、及時性和相關性

The following list of seven key questions, roughly in the order of frequency in which they are invoked, summarizes the concerns raised most frequently by our reviewers.

reviewers總結，在看一篇 paper 時，最常會提出的問題有七個關鍵問題


1. What's new ？

Reviewers are not necessarily looking for totally new theories. However, modifications or extensions of current theories should alter scholars' extant views in important ways.

Reviewers 不一定要找全新的理論。然而，修改或擴展現有的理論，研究者應該改變或修正現有意見的重要途徑。


2. So what ？

理論可能會在組織學上改變做法嗎？

聯繫研究明顯嗎？

論文是否有超越象徵性的陳述或有使用這些想法的價值嗎？

有提出的解決方案來糾正目前的理論缺陷嗎？


3. Why so ？

基本邏輯和支持證據令人信服嗎？

假設是明確的嗎？

意見是可信的嗎？


4. Well done ？

是否反映了豐富的思想與完整性？

有包含多個理論要素（What, How, Why, When-Where-Who），且質量全面嗎？

參數是否廣泛反映了目前的主題？

命題正確嗎？

說法是否有明顯的邏輯錯誤？


5. Done well ？這篇論文寫得好嗎？是否符合邏輯嗎？中央核心容易被訪問嗎？閱讀是令人 enjoy 的嗎？ Paper 在篇幅限制內有討論到該問題核心且又

很有意思嗎？ Paper外表有反映高度專業的標準嗎？格式和內容有符合規格嗎？


6. Why now ？

Is this topic of contemporary interest to scholars in this area ？

這是當代學者最感興趣話題嗎？

Will it likely advance current discussions, stimulate new discussions, or revitalize old discussions ？

它可以激發新的討論，或活化舊的討論呢？


7. Who cares ？

What percentage of academic readers are interested in this topic ？

對這個主題感興趣的學術讀者有多少百分比？

In conclusion, the theory-development process and criteria for judging theoretical contributions need to be broadly understood and accepted so that editors and contributors can communicate effectively.

理論的發展過程和標準，需要判斷理論貢獻被廣泛理解和接受，也可使編輯和撰稿人可以有效的溝通

報告到此結束，謝謝大家 !

Documents

What constitutes a theoretical contribution