...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of product innovation management >The Ongoing Process of Building a Theory of Disruption
【24h】

The Ongoing Process of Building a Theory of Disruption

机译：建立干扰理论的持续过程

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

At its foundation, this article is a description of what my students and I observed about how communities of scholars can build bodies of understanding that cumulatively improve. We have offered in our model of the theory-building process a set of constructs, labeled with terms such as observation, categorization, association, anomaly, descriptive theory, and normative theory. Their purpose is to abstract up from the detail of thousands of research projects—to offer a general description of the way productive research processes work. Within this description of theory building, I also attempt to recount as a case-study illustration the process by which the theory of disruptive innovation has been built to date. It is quite apparent that this model has caused me to accept with gratitude some of the criticisms and suggestions authors of other articles in this issue have proferred and that it has caused me to dismiss, sometimes with impatient language, assertions that cannot plausibly lead to building better theory. Most importantly for the purposes of this issue, I hope this article shows that if a subsequent researcher uncovers an anomaly to a prior scholar's work, it represents triumph for both, because it will create the opportunity for them to improve the crispness of definitions, the salience of the categorization scheme, and the methods for measuring the phenomena and the outcomes of interest (Gilbert and Christensen, 2005). It will allow them to articulate better theory. When I have not accepted a criticism of one of these authors, it generally is because I have not been able to see a logical link to an anomaly; as such, it is impossible to tell whether they are offering a better theory. I would be honored to have them identify explicitly any anomalies the theory of disruption cannot yet account for and to suggest improvements, because I merely have hoped to set in place a solid enough foundation on which subsequent researchers can build.
机译：从根本上讲，本文是对我和我的学生所观察到的关于学者社区如何建立能够累积进步的理解体系的描述。我们在理论构建过程的模型中提供了一组构建，这些构建用术语（例如观察，分类，关联，异常，描述性理论和规范性理论）标记。他们的目的是从成千上万个研究项目的细节中抽象出来，以对生产研究过程的工作方式进行一般性描述。在对理论构建的描述中，我还尝试将迄今为止建立颠覆性创新理论的过程作为案例研究的例证进行叙述。很明显，这种模式使我感激地接受了本期其他文章的作者提出的一些批评和建议，并且它使我驳斥了有时不能用不耐烦的语气导致断言的断言。更好的理论。对于此问题而言，最重要的是，我希望本文能表明，如果随后的研究人员发现先前学者的工作异常，则代表着两者的胜利，因为这将为他们创造机会来提高定义的清晰度，即分类方案的显着性，以及衡量现象和感兴趣的结果的方法（Gilbert和Christensen，2005年）。这将使他们能够阐明更好的理论。当我没有接受对其中一位作者的批评时，通常是因为我无法看到与异常有关的逻辑联系。因此，无法判断他们是否提供了更好的理论。我很荣幸能够让他们明确指出中断理论尚无法解决的任何异常现象，并提出改进建议，因为我只是希望为以后的研究人员建立足够坚实的基础。

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