The Folly of Using Research Lacking Rigor as a Call to Action
- 1 June 2012
- journal article
- Published by Academy of Management in Academy of Management Learning & Education
- Vol. 11 (2), 278-284
- https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2012.0085
Abstract
Management researchers need to continually work to assure that our findings and conclusions are translated into management practice. Exploring the usefulness of contemporary research for the practice of management is therefore a worthy pursuit. However, the lack of rigor associated with the analyses reported in Pearce and Huang's article (2012, this issue) leaves scholars unable to draw meaningful and useful conclusions that can guide research practice. Specifically, the authors' conceptualization of actionable is defined ambiguously and in contradictory ways, and is therefore operationalized unscientifically. We illustrate specific concerns by first describing three illustrations that collectively demonstrate why the study fails to satisfy basic criteria for rigorous research. We then explicitly illustrate why the measure fails to assess what is seemingly intended to be captured by contrasting a study classified and described as actionable (Lee, Ashford, & Bobko, 1990) with our study (Stewart & Barrick, 2000) coded as not actionable. This illustration demonstrates the arbitrary and inconsistent classification underlying Pearce and Huang's analysis, and demonstrates how two studies coded into opposite categories both used rigorously designed studies to produce actionable results. We also provide a few general comments related to the overall topic of relevance in contemporary management research.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Teaching Evidence-Based Management in MBA Programs: What Evidence Is There?Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2011
- Rigor and Relevance in Organization StudiesJournal of Management Inquiry, 2009
- The Moderating Role of Top Management Team Interdependence: Implications for Real Teams and Working GroupsThe Academy of Management Journal, 2007
- HR Professionals' beliefs about effective human resource practices: correspondence between research and practiceHuman Resource Management, 2002
- TEAM STRUCTURE AND PERFORMANCE: ASSESSING THE MEDIATING ROLE OF INTRATEAM PROCESS AND THE MODERATING ROLE OF TASK TYPE.The Academy of Management Journal, 2000
- Repairs on the Road to Relevance and Rigor: Some Unexplored Issues in Publishing Organizational ResearchPublished by SAGE Publications ,1995
- INTERACTIVE EFFECTS OF "TYPE A" BEHAVIOR AND PERCEIVED CONTROL ON WORKER PERFORMANCE, JOB SATISFACTION, AND SOMATIC COMPLAINTS.The Academy of Management Journal, 1990
- Interpersonal expectancy effects: the first 345 studiesBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1978