• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Academy of management learning & education >The Folly of Using Research Lacking Rigor as a Call to Action
【24h】

The Folly of Using Research Lacking Rigor as a Call to Action

机译：利用缺乏严谨的研究作为行动号召的愚蠢行为

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

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.
机译：管理研究人员需要不断努力，以确保将我们的发现和结论转化为管理实践。因此，探索当代研究对管理实践的有用性是一个值得追求的目标。然而，由于Pearce和Huang的文章（2012年，本期）报道的分析缺乏严格性，学者们无法得出有意义且有用的结论来指导研究实践。具体来说，作者对可付诸实施的概念是模棱两可的，而且相互矛盾，因此没有科学地加以实施。我们通过首先描述三个插图来说明具体的关注点，这些插图共同证明了这项研究为何无法满足严格研究的基本标准。然后，我们通过将分类并描述为可行的研究（Lee，Ashford和Bobko，1990年）与我们的研究（Stewart和Barrick，2000年）编码为不可行的研究进行对比，从而明确说明了该措施为何无法评估似乎打算捕获的内容。 。此图说明了Pearce和Huang的分析所依据的任意和不一致的分类，并说明了如何将两个研究编码为相反的类别，两者均使用严格设计的研究来产生可操作的结果。我们还提供了一些与当代管理研究中相关主题整体相关的一般性评论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号