Abstract
Incompleteness of inductive reasoning presents an enduring dilemma to organizational research. We examine two practical reasoning strategies—idealization and contextualization—that can be used at the pinnacle of this dilemma: when theoretical conclusions are drawn from empirical data. Understanding the two strategies can lead to more effective argumentation and evaluation.
Appreciating the methodological incompleteness of both strategies in turn helps us distinguish between the methodological and the policy dimensions of organization-scientific debates.
Appreciating the methodological incompleteness of both strategies in turn helps us distinguish between the methodological and the policy dimensions of organization-scientific debates.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Peer-reviewed scientific journal | Academy of Management Review |
| Volume | 35 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Pages (from-to) | 315-333 |
| Number of pages | 19 |
| Publication status | Published - 2010 |
| MoE publication type | A1 Journal article - refereed |
Keywords
- STORIES
- SCIENCE
- OPPORTUNITIES
- EXPLANATION
- RETHINKING
- CONSTRUCTS
- DISCOVERY
- KNOWLEDGE
- ECONOMICS
- MYSTERY
- KOTA2010