Book contents
- Explaining Management Phenomena
- Explaining Management Phenomena
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures and Tables
- Preface
- Articles
- Chapter 1 The Nature of Explanation
- Chapter 2 Causation
- Chapter 3 Modes of Explanation
- Chapter 4 Microfoundations
- Chapter 5 Theory versus Non-theory–Based Explanation
- Chapter 6 Multi-theoretical Explanation
- Chapter 7 Research Methods
- Chapter 8 Explanation as Science (or Art?)
- Appendix Chinese Philosophy and Scientific Research
- Notes
- References
- Index
- References
References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 December 2022
Book contents
- Explaining Management Phenomena
- Explaining Management Phenomena
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures and Tables
- Preface
- Articles
- Chapter 1 The Nature of Explanation
- Chapter 2 Causation
- Chapter 3 Modes of Explanation
- Chapter 4 Microfoundations
- Chapter 5 Theory versus Non-theory–Based Explanation
- Chapter 6 Multi-theoretical Explanation
- Chapter 7 Research Methods
- Chapter 8 Explanation as Science (or Art?)
- Appendix Chinese Philosophy and Scientific Research
- Notes
- References
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Explaining Management PhenomenaA Philosophical Treatise, pp. 226 - 252Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Abbott, K. W., Green, J. F. and Keohane, R. O. 2016. Organizational ecology and institutional change in global governance. International Organization, 70: 247–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adomako, S. and Amankwah-Amoah, J. 2021. Managerial attitude towards the natural environment and environmental sustainability expenditure. Journal of Cleaner Production, 326: 129384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agassi, J. 1960. Methodological individualism. British Journal of Sociology, 11: 244–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agassi, J. 1971. Tautology and testability in economics. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1: 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aguinis, H., Cascio, W. F. and Ramani, R. S. 2017. Science’s reproducibility and replicability crisis: International business is not immune. Journal of International Business Studies, 48: 653–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alchian, A. A. and Demsetz, H. 1972. Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62: 777–795.Google Scholar
Aldrich, H. E. 1992. Incommensurable paradigms? Vital signs from three perspectives. In Reed, M. and Hughes, M. (Eds.), Rethinking organization: New directions in organization theory and analysis: 17–45. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Alexander, S. 1920. Space, time, and deity: The Gifford Lectures at Glasgow 1916–1918. Vol. II. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Alvarez, M. and Hyman, J. 1998. Agents and their actions. Philosophy, 73: 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, S. A., Barney, J. B., and Anderson, P. 2013. Forming and exploiting opportunities: The implications of discovery and creation processes for entrepreneurial and organizational research. Organization Science, 24: 301–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, S. A., Barney, J. B., McBride, R. and Wuebker, R. 2014. Realism in the study of entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Review, 39: 227–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amihud, Y. and Lev, B. 1981. Risk reduction as a managerial motive for conglomerate mergers. Bell Journal of Economics, 12: 605–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amihud, Y. and Lev, B. 1999. Does corporate ownership structure affect its strategy towards diversification? Strategic Management Journal, 20: 1063–1069.3.0.CO;2-S>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, P. J., Blatt, R., Christianson, M. K., Grant, A. M., Marquis, C., Neuman, E. J., Sonenshein, S. and Sutcliffe, K. M. 2006. Understanding mechanisms in organizational research: Reflections from a collective journey. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15: 102–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, T. G., Nimanandh, K., Htun, K. T. and Santidhirakul, O. 2022. MNC response to superstitious practice in Myanmar IJVs: Understanding contested legitimacy, formal–informal legitimacy thresholds, and institutional disguise. Journal of International Business Studies, 53: 1178–1201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arntzenius, F. 1992. The common cause principle. In Hull, D. and Okruhlik, K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1992 biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Vol. 2: 227–237. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Arthurs, J. D., Busenitz, L. W., Hoskisson, R. E. and Johnson, R. A. 2009. Signaling and initial public offerings: The use and impact of the lockup period. Journal of Business Venturing, 24: 360–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayer, A. J. 1959. Editor’s introduction. In Ayer, A. J. (Ed.), Logical positivism: 3–28. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Baetu, T. M. 2015. The completeness of mechanistic explanations. Philosophy of Science, 82: 775–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bai, X., Tsang, E. W. K. and Xia, W. 2020. Domestic versus foreign listing: Does a CEO’s educational experience matter? Journal of Business Venturing, 35: 105906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkema, H. G. and Vermeulen, F. 1998. International expansion through start-up or acquisition: A learning perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 41: 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, E. 1994. Why P rather than Q? The curiosities of fact and foil. Philosophical Studies, 73: 35–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, E. C. 2000. Ockham’s razor and the anti-superfluity principle. Erkenntnis, 53: 353–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barney, J. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17: 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barney, J. B. 2001. Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Academy of Management Review, 26: 41–56.Google Scholar
Bartlett, C. A. and Ghoshal, S. 1989. Managing across borders: The transnational solution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Beach, D. 2016. It’s all about mechanisms – What process-tracing case studies should be tracing. New Political Economy, 21: 463–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beach, D. and Pedersen, R. B. 2019. Process-tracing methods: Foundations and guidelines. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beauchamp, T. and Rosenberg, A. 1981. Hume and the problem of causation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bechtel, W. 2005. Explanation: A mechanistic alternative. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biology and Biomedical Sciences, 36: 421–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, A. 2010. Process tracing and causal inference. In Brady, H. E. and Collier, D. (Eds.), Rethinking social inquiry: Diverse tools, shared standards (2nd ed.): 207–220. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Bergh, D. D., Sharp, B. M., Aguinis, H. and Li, M. 2017. Is there a credibility crisis in strategic management research? Evidence on the reproducibility of study findings. Strategic Organization, 15: 423–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, M. W. and Young, P. G. 1995. Using latent semantic indexing for multilanguage information retrieval. Computers and Humanities, 29: 413–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bettis, R. A. 2012. The search for asterisks: Compromised statistical tests and flawed theories. Strategic Management Journal, 33: 108–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bettman, J. R. and Weitz, B. A. 1983. Attributions in the board room: Causal reasoning in corporate annual reports. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28: 165–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilton, N. 2016. How Elizabeth Holmes’s House of Cards came tumbling down. Vanity Fair, September 6. [www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/09/elizabeth-holmes-theranos-exclusive].Google Scholar
Bingham, C. B. and Kahl, S. J. 2013. The process of schema emergence: Assimilation, deconstruction, unitization and the plurality of analogies. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 14–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y. and Jordan, M. I. 2003. Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3: 993–1022.Google Scholar
Block, L. and Kramer, T. 2009. The effect of superstitious beliefs on performance expectations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37: 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumberg, A. E. and Feigl, H. 1931. Logical positivism. Journal of Philosophy, 28: 281–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J. and Labianca, G. 2009. Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323: 892–895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boudon, R. 1998. Social mechanisms without black boxes. In Hedström, P. and Swedberg, R. (Eds.), Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory: 172–203. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowden, B. 2021. The historic (wrong) turn in management and organizational studies. Journal of Management History, 27: 8–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braithwaite, R. B. 1946. Teleological explanation. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 47: i–xx.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, W. F. and Chinn, C. A. 1994. The theory-ladenness of data: An experimental demonstration. In Ram, A. and Eiselt, K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixteenth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society: 61–65. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Brewer, W. F. and Lambert, B. L. 2001. The theory-ladenness of observation and the theory-ladenness of the rest of the scientific process. Philosophy of Science, 68: S176–S186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brock, D. M. and Hydle, K. M. 2018. Transnationality – Sharpening the integration-responsiveness vision in global professional firms. European Management Journal, 36: 117–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bromberger, S. 1966. Why-questions. In Colodny, R. (Ed.), Mind and cosmos: 86–111. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Bryman, A. 2006. Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research, 6: 97–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, D. and Dawson, P. M. 2007. Discourse and audience: Organizational change as multi-story process. Journal of Management Studies, 44: 669–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckley, P. J. and Chapman, M. 1997. The perception and measurement of transaction costs. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 21: 127–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bulcão-Neto, R. F., Camacho-Guerrero, J. A., Dutra, M., Barreiro, A., Parapar, J. and Macedo, A. A. 2011. The use of latent semantic indexing to mitigate OCR effects of related document images. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 17: 64–80.Google Scholar
Bunge, M. 1997. Mechanism and explanation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 27: 410–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunge, M. 2004. How does it work? The search for explanatory mechanisms. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34: 182–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. 1979. Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. Hants: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Caldwell, B. 1980. Positivist philosophy of science and the methodology of economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 14: 53–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, C. 1982. A dubious distinction? An inquiry into the value and use of Merton’s concepts of manifest and latent function. American Sociological Review, 47: 29–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caplan, A. L. 1977. Tautology, circularity, and biological theory. American Naturalist, 111: 390–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capon, N., Farley, J. U. and Hoenig, S. 1996. Toward an integrative explanation of corporate financial performance. Boston, MA: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappelli, P. and Sherer, P. D. 1991. The missing role of context in OB: The need for a meso-level approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 13: 55–110.Google Scholar
Carminati, L. 2018. Generalizability in qualitative research: A tale of two traditions. Qualitative Health Research, 28: 2094–2101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carreyrou, J. 2020. Bad blood: Secrets and lies in a Silicon Valley startup. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Cartwright, N. 1999. The dappled world: A study of the boundaries of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castrodeza, C. 1977. Tautologies, beliefs, and empirical knowledge in biology. American Naturalist, 111: 393–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, A. D. 1977. The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.Google Scholar
Chang, W. L. and Lii, P. 2010. Feng Shui and its role in corporate reputation and image: A review from business and cultural perspectives. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 27: 1–14.Google Scholar
Checkel, J. T. 2006. Tracing causal mechanisms. International Studies Review, 8: 362–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Child, J. 1997. Strategic choice in the analysis of action, structure, organizations and environment: Retrospect and prospect. Organization Studies, 18: 43–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Child, J., Chung, L. and Davies, H. 2003. The performance of cross-border units in China: A test of natural selection, strategic choice and contingency theories. Journal of International Business Studies, 34: 242–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiles, T. H. and McMackin, J. F. 1996. Integrating variable risk preferences, trust, and transaction cost economics. Academy of Management Review, 21: 73–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, I., Nisbett, R. E. and Norenzayan, A. 1999. Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality. Psychological Bulletin, 125: 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, C. C., Lee, S. H., Beamish, P. W., Southam, C. and Nam, D. D. 2013. Pitting real options theory against risk diversification theory: International diversification and joint ownership control in economic crisis. Journal of World Business, 48: 122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, P. and Rowlinson, M. 2004. The treatment of history in organisation studies: Towards an “historic turn?”. Business History, 46: 331–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coase, R. H. 1988. The nature of the firm: Meaning. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 4: 19–32.Google Scholar
Coff, R. 2003. Bidding wars over R&D-intensive firms: Knowledge, opportunism, and the market for corporate control. Academy of Management Journal, 46: 74–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, B. A. 2017. How should novelty be valued in science? Elife, 6: e28699.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, B. D. and Dean, T. J. 2005. Information asymmetry and investor valuation of IPOs: Top management team legitimacy as a capital market signal. Strategic Management Journal, 26: 683–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, D. 2011. Understanding process tracing. PS: Political Science & Politics, 44: 823–830.Google Scholar
Collins, J., Hall, N. and Paul, L. A. 2004. Counterfactuals and causation: History, problems, and prospects. In Collins, J., Hall, N. and Paul, L. A. (Eds.), Causation and counterfactuals: 1–57. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colquitt, J. A. and George, G. 2011. Publishing in AMJ − Part 1: Topic choice. Academy of Management Journal, 54: 432–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colvin, G. 2020. Coming out of a crisis, the boldest companies win. Fortune, June 25. [https://fortune.com/2020/06/25/coronavirus-business-opportunities-spending-mergers-acquisitions-research-development-recruiting/]Google Scholar
Copi, I. M. and Cohen, C. 1998. Introduction to logic (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Corbett, A. C. 2007. Learning asymmetries and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Journal of Business Venturing, 22: 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornelissen, J. and Durand, R. 2012. More than just novelty: Conceptual blending and causality. Academy of Management Review, 37: 152–154.Google Scholar
Coviello, N. E. and McAuley, A. 1999. Internationalization and the smaller firm: A review of contemporary empirical research. Management International Review, 39: 223–256.Google Scholar
Crick, F. 1989. What mad pursuit: A personal view of scientific discovery. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W. and White, R. E. 1999. An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24: 522–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Csibra, G. and Gergely, G. 2007. “Obsessed with goals”: Functions and mechanisms of teleological interpretation of actions in humans. Acta Psychologica, 124: 60–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Currie, G. 1984. Individualism and global supervenience. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 35: 345–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danermark, B., Ekstrőm, M., Jakobsen, L. and Karlsson, J. C. 2002. Explaining society: Critical realism in the social sciences. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Darden, L. 2006. Reasoning in biological discoveries: Essays on mechanisms, interfield relations, and anomaly resolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. 1963. Actions, reasons, and causes. Journal of Philosophy, 60: 685–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidsson, P. and Wiklund, J. 2009. Scott A. Shane: Winner of the global award for entrepreneurship research. Small Business Economics, 33: 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, G. F. and Marquis, C. 2005. Prospects for organization theory in the early twenty-first century: Institutional fields and mechanisms. Organization Science, 16: 332–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, M. E., Barber, W. P., Finelli, J. J. and Klem, W. 1952. Report of committee on new recording means and computing devices. Chicago, IL: Society of Actuaries.Google Scholar
Davis, M. S. 1971. That’s interesting! Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1: 309–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, T. R. and Luthans, F. 1980. A social learning approach to organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 5: 281–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, M. and Botterill, G. S. 2008. Contrast, inference and scientific realism. Synthese, 160: 249–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, T. and Kincaid, H. 1994. Putting inference to the best explanation in its place. Synthese, 98: 271–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Massis, A. and Foss, N. J. 2018. Advancing family business research: The promise of microfoundations. Family Business Review, 31: 386–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demeulenaere, P. 2011. Introduction. In Demeulenaere, P. (Ed.), Analytical sociology and social mechanisms: 1–30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denis, D. J., Denis, D. K. and Sarin, A. 1999. Agency theory and the influence of equity ownership structure on corporate diversification strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 1071–1076.3.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dicker, G. 1998. Hume’s epistemology and metaphysics: An introduction. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Doll, R., Peto, R., Wheatley, K., Gray, R. and Sutherland, I. 1994. Mortality in relation to smoking: 40 years’ observations on male British doctors. British Medical Journal, 309: 901–911.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donaldson, L. 1995. American anti-management theories of organization: A critique of paradigm proliferation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Donaldson, L. 1998. The myth of paradigm incommensurability in management studies: Comments by an integrationist. Organization, 5: 267–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, L. 2001. The contingency theory of organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dore, R. P. 1961. Function and cause. American Sociological Review, 26: 843–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, H. E. 2009. Reintroducing prediction to explanation. Philosophy of Science, 76: 444–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dow, D. and Karunaratna, A. 2006. Developing a multidimensional instrument to measure psychic distance stimuli. Journal of International Business Studies, 37: 578–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, P. B. 1959. Subjunctive conditionals, time order, and causation. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 59: 125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dretske, F. I. 1977. Referring to events. Midwest Studies of Philosophy, 2: 90–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubin, R. 1982. Management: Meanings, methods, and moxie. Academy of Management Review, 7: 372–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duch, W., Swaminathan, K. and Meller, J. 2007. Artificial intelligence approaches for rational drug design and discovery. Current Pharmaceutical Design, 13: 1497–1508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunlop, C. A. and Radaelli, C. M. 2017. Learning in the bath-tub: The micro and macro dimensions of the causal relationship between learning and policy change. Policy and Society, 36: 304–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durand, R. and Vaara, E. 2009. Causation, counterfactuals and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 30: 1245–1266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eden, D. and Rynes, S. 2003. Publishing across borders: Furthering the internationalization of AMJ. Academy of Management Journal, 46: 679–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edmonds, D. and Eidinow, J. 2001. Wittgenstein’s poker: The story of a ten-minute argument between two great philosophers. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14: 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M. 2021. What is the Eisenhardt Method, really? Strategic Organization, 19: 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elder-Vass, D. 2007. For emergence: Refining Archer’s account of social structure. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37: 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elder-Vass, D. 2014. Social entities and the basis of their powers. In Zahle, J. and Collin, F. (Eds.), Rethinking the individualism-holism debate: 39–53. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elgin, C. 2007. Understanding and the facts. Philosophical Studies, 132: 33–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. 1984. Ulysses and the sirens: Studies in rationality and irrationality (Revised ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elster, J. 1989. Nuts and bolts for the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. 1994. Functional explanation: In social science. In Martin, M. and McIntyre, L. C. (Eds.). Readings in the philosophy of social science: 403–414. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Emmet, D. 1962. “That’s that”; or some uses of tautology. Philosophy, 37: 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, B. 2009. Ontological individualism reconsidered. Synthese, 166: 187–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairbank, J. K. 1983. The United States and China (4th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fay, B. 1996. Contemporary philosophy of social science: A multicultural approach. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Feldman, M. S. and Pentland, B. T. 2003. Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 94–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felin, T., Foss, N. J. and Ployhart, R. E. 2015. The microfoundations movement in strategy and organization theory. Academy of Management Annals, 9: 575–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, A. 1976. Can evolutionary theory predict? American Naturalist, 110: 1101–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, J. H. 1974. Grünbaum’s “defense” of the symmetry thesis. Philosophical Studies, 25: 173–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortin, N. M., Hill, A. J. and Huang, J. 2014. Superstition in the housing market. Economic Inquiry, 52: 974–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, J. R. 1994. Auditing, hermeneutics, and subjectivity. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 19: 235–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, A. 2015. The theory-ladenness of experiment. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 46: 155–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedman, D. A. 1991. Statistical models and shoe leather. Sociological Methodology, 21: 291–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. 1953. Essays in positive economics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. 1974. Explanation and scientific understanding. Journal of Philosophy, 71: 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Michael 2000. Hempel and the Vienna Circle. In Fetzer, J. H. (Ed.), Science, explanation, and rationality: Aspects of the philosophy of Carl G. Hempel: 39–64. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, Y.-L. 1922. Why China has no science − An interpretation of the history and consequences of Chinese philosophy. International Journal of Ethics, 32: 237–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadamer, H.-G. 1975. Truth and method. Translated by G. Barden and J. Cumming. New York: Seabury.Google Scholar
Gaddis, J. L. 2002. The landscape of history: How historians map the past. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galton, F. 1886. Regression towards mediocrity in hereditary stature. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 15: 246–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gambetta, D. 1998. Concatenations of mechanisms. In Hedström, P. and Swedberg, R. (Eds.), Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory: 102–124. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gandjour, A. and Lauterbach, K. W. 2003. Inductive reasoning in medicine: Lessons from Carl Gustav Hempel’s “inductive‐statistical” model. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 9: 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, A. 1981. Forms of explanation: Rethinking the questions in social theory. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Gaur, A. S., Kumar, V. and Singh, D. 2014. Institutions, resources, and internationalization of emerging economy firms. Journal of World Business, 49: 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelfert, A. 2010. Reconsidering the role of inference to the best explanation in the epistemology of testimony. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 41: 386–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerring, J. 2007. The case study: What it is and what it does. In Boix, C. and Stokes, S. C. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of comparative politics: 90–122. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. 2008. The mechanismic worldview: Thinking inside the box. British Journal of Political Science, 38: 161–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerring, J. 2010. Causal mechanisms: Yes, but … Comparative Political Studies, 43: 1499–1526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghoshal, S. and Moran, P. 1996. Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 21: 13–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A., 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies of qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Glennan, S. S. 1996. Mechanisms and the nature of causation. Erkenntnis, 44: 49–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glennan, S. 2010. Ephemeral mechanisms and historical explanation. Erkenntnis, 72: 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Görling, S. and Rehn, A. 2008. Accidental ventures: A materialist reading of opportunity and entrepreneurial potential. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 24: 94–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwood, J. D. 1990. Two dogmas of neo-empiricism: The “theory-informity” of observation and the Quine-Duhem thesis. Philosophy of Science, 57: 553–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, M. A. 2007. Specifying organizational contexts: Systematic links between contexts and processes in organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28: 859–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunstone, R. F. and White, R. T. 1981. Understanding of gravity. Science Education, 65: 291–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gurd, B. and Or, F. K. H. 2011. Attitudes of Singaporean Chinese towards retirement planning. Review of Pacific Basin Financial Markets and Policies, 14: 671–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannan, M. T. and Freeman, J. 1989. Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, N. R. 1969. Perception and discovery: An introduction to scientific inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Freeman, Cooper & Company.Google Scholar
Harbers, H. and de Vries, G. 1993. Empirical consequences of the “double hermeneutic.” Social Epistemology, 7: 183–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harima, A. and Freudenberg, J. 2020. Co-creation of social entrepreneurial opportunities with refugees. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 11: 40–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harman, G. H. 1965. The inference to the best explanation. Philosophical Review, 74: 88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harré, R. 1970. The principles of scientific thinking. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harré, R. 1988. Modes of explanation. In Hilton, D. J. (Ed.), Contemporary science and natural explanation: 129–144. Brighton: Harvestor Press.Google Scholar
Harré, R. and Madden, E. H. 1975. Causal powers: A theory of natural necessity. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Harré, R. and Second, P. F. 1972. The explanation of social behavior. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hartley, J. 1997: The representative agent in macroeconomics. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassard, J. 1988. Overcoming hermeticism in organization theory: An alternative to paradigm incommensurability. Human Relations, 41: 247–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, D. M. 1998. Causal asymmetries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1967. Studies in philosophy, politics and economics. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, D. 2020. Zoom booms due to COVID-19, with Q1 revenue nearly tripling, stock at new high. Deadline, June 2. [https://deadline.com/2020/06/zoom-video-communication-revenue-rises-q1–1202949506/]Google Scholar
Hedberg, B. 1981. How organizations learn and unlearn. In Nystrom, P. C. and Starbuck, W. H. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design. Vol. 1: 3–27. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hedström, P. and Swedberg, R. 1996. Social mechanism. Acta Sociologica, 39: 281–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedström, P. and Swedberg, R. 1998. Social mechanisms: An introductory essay. In Hedström, P. and Swedberg, R. (Eds.), Social mechanisms: An analytical approach to social theory: 1–31. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedström, P. and Ylikoski, P. 2010. Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 36: 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heeley, M. B., Matusik, S. F. and Jain, N. 2007. Innovation, appropriability, and the underpricing of initial public offerings. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 209–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heller, M. 1985. Non-backtracking counterfactuals and the conditional analysis. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 15: 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helm, P. 1971. Manifest and latent functions. Philosophical Quarterly, 21: 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G. 1942. The function of general laws in history. Journal of Philosophy, 39(2): 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G. 1950. Problems and changes in the empiricist criterion of meaning. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 4(11): 41–63.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. 1965. Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. 1970. Fundamentals of concept formation in empirical science. In Neurath, O., Carnap, R. and Morris, C. (Eds.), Foundations of the unity of science. Vol. 2: 651–745. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. and Oppenheim, P. 1948. Studies in the logic of explanation. Philosophy of Science, 15: 135–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hensel, P. G. 2021. Reproducibility and replicability crisis: How management compares to psychology and economics – A systematic review of literature. European Management Journal, 39: 577–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hintikka, J. 1988. On the incommensurability of theories. Philosophy of Science, 55: 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hitchcock, C. R. 1995. Salmon on explanatory relevance. Philosophy of Science, 62: 304–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hitchcock, C. R. 1996. Farewell to binary causation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 26: 267–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E. and Ireland, R. D. 1994. A mid-range theory of the interactive effects of international and product diversification on innovation and performance. Journal of Management, 20: 297–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. 2007. Meanings of methodological individualism. Journal of Economic Methodology, 14: 211–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollenbeck, J. R. and Wright, P. M. 2017. Harking, sharking, and tharking: Making the case for post hoc analysis of scientific data. Journal of Management, 43: 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, J. F. L., Easterby-Smith, M. and Snell, R. S. 2006. Transferring organizational learning systems to Japanese subsidiaries in China. Journal of Management Studies, 43: 1027–1058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, L. S. and Teng, C. I. 2009. Development of a Chinese superstitious belief scale. Psychological Reports, 104: 807–819.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huff, T. E. 2017. The rise of early modern science: Islam, China, and the West (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, D. 1999. An enquiry concerning human understanding (Edited by Beauchamp, T. L.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, D. 2007. A treatise of human nature. Vol. 1 (Edited by Norton, D. F. and Norton, M. J). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Humphreys, P. 1989. The chances of explanation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hunt, S. D. 1994. A realist theory of empirical testing resolving the theory-ladenness/objectivity debate. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 24: 133–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilgen, D. R., Major, D. A. and Tower, S. L. 1994. The cognitive revolution in organizational behavior. In Greenberg, J. (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science: 1–22. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Illari, P. 2013. Mechanistic explanation: Integrating the ontic and epistemic. Erkenntnis, 78: 237–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Illari, P. and Williamson, J. 2011. Mechanisms are real and local. In Illari, P., Russo, F. and Williamson, J. (Eds.), Causality in the sciences: 818–844. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iriyama, A. and Madhavan, R. 2014. Post‐formation inter‐partner equity transfers in international joint ventures: The role of experience. Global Strategy Journal, 4: 331–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, N. and Carter, P. 1991. In defence of paradigm incommensurability. Organization Studies, 12: 109–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssen, M. C. and Tan, Y. H. 1991. Why Friedman’s non-monotonic reasoning defies Hempel’s covering law model. Synthese, 86: 255–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jansson, L. 2015. Explanatory asymmetries: Laws of nature rehabilitated. Journal of Philosophy, 112: 577–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, C. 2008. Romeo, René, and the reasons why: What explanation is. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 108: 61–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, C. S. and Nolan, D. 2008. Backwards explanation. Philosophical Studies, 140: 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenson, J. C. 2015. The belief illusion. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 67: 965–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, G. and Perry, C. 1982. Popper, induction and falsification. Erkenntnis, 18: 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judge, W. Q. and Dooley, R. 2006. Strategic alliance outcomes: A transaction‐cost economics perspective. British Journal of Management, 17: 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kao, J. 1993. The worldwide web of Chinese business. Harvard Business Review, 71(2): 24–36.Google Scholar
Kerr, N. L. 1998. HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2: 196–217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kieser, A. 1994. Why organization theory needs historical analyses − and how this should be performed. Organization Science, 5: 608–620.Google Scholar
Kim, W. C., Hwang, P. and Burgers, W. P. 1989. Global diversification strategy and corporate profit performance. Strategic Management Journal, 10: 45–57.Google Scholar
Kincaid, H. 1986. Reduction, explanation and individualism. In Martin, M. and McIntyre, L. C. (Eds.), Readings in the philosophy of social science: 497–513. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kincaid, H. 1990. Assessing functional explanations in the social sciences. In Fine, A., Forbes, M. and Wessels, L. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1990 biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Vol. 1: 341–354. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
King, G., Keohane, R. O. and Verba, S. 1994. Designing social inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, B. 1988. Vertical integration as organizational ownership: The Fisher Body-General Motors relationship revisited. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 4: 199–213.Google Scholar
Klein, B., Crawford, R. G. and Alchian, A. A. 1978. Vertical integration, appropriable rents, and the competitive contracting process. Journal of Law and Economics, 21: 297–326.Google Scholar
Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F. and Hall, R. J. 1994. Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19: 195–229.Google Scholar
Klein, P. G. 2008. The make-or-buy decision: Lessons from empirical studies. In Menard, C. and Shirley, M. M. (Eds.), Handbook of new institutional economics: 435–464. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Kogut, B. 1991. Joint ventures and the option to expand and acquire. Management Science, 37: 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koontz, H. 1961. The management theory jungle. Academy of Management Journal, 4: 174–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korman, J. and Khemlani, S. 2020. Explanatory completeness. Acta Psychologica, 209: 103139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Korsgaard, S. T. 2011. Entrepreneurship as translation: Understanding entrepreneurial opportunities through actor-network theory. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 23: 661–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krugman, P. 2020. Arguing with zombies: Economics, politics, and the fight for a better future. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. 1990. Dubbing and redubbing: The vulnerability of rigid designation. In Savage, C. W. (Ed.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. XIV: Scientific theories: 298–318. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Kvanvig, J. 2003. The value of knowledge and the pursuit of understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lampel, J. and Giachetti, C. 2013. International diversification of manufacturing operations: Performance implications and moderating forces. Journal of Operations Management, 31: 213–227.Google Scholar
Lane, P. J., Cannella, A. A. and Lubatkin, M. H. 1999. Ownership structure and corporate strategy: One question viewed from two different worlds. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 1077–1086.3.0.CO;2-O>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, S. M. 1981. Mathematical models: A sketch for the philosophy of mathematics. American Mathematical Monthly, 88: 462–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langley, A. 1999. Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24: 691–710.Google Scholar
Langley, A., Smallman, C., Tsoukas, H. and Van de Ven, A. H. 2013. Process studies of change in organization and management: Unveiling temporality, activity, and flow. Academy of Management Journal, 56: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langley, A. and Tsoukas, H. 2010. Introducing “Perspectives on process organization studies.” In Hemes, T. and Maitlis, S. (Eds.), Process, sensemaking and organizing: 1–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Laudan, L. 1996. Beyond positivism and relativism: Theory, method, and evidence. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Lebow, R. N. and Stein, J. G. 1996. Back to the past: Counterfactuals and the Cuban missile crisis. In Tetlock, P. and Belkin, A. (Eds.), Counterfactual thought experiments in world politics: Logical, methodological and psychological perspectives: 119–148. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
Leonard‐Barton, D. 1992. Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S1): 111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lester, R. A. 1946. Shortcomings of marginal analysis for wage-employment problems. American Economic Review, 36: 63–82.Google Scholar
Levinthal, D. and March, J. G. 1993. Myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitt, B. and March, J. G. 1988. Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14: 319–340.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. 1979. Counterfactual dependence and time’s arrow. Noûs, 13: 455–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. 1983. New work for a theory of universals. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 61: 343–377.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. W. and Smith, W. K. 2014. Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening the focus and widening the scope. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50: 127–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, P. 2012. Emergent properties in the work of Friedrich Hayek. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82: 368–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, P. P. 1998. Towards a geocentric framework of organizational form: A holistic, dynamic and paradoxical approach. Organization Studies, 19: 829–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, P. P. 2014. The unique value of Yin-Yang balancing: A critical response. Management and Organization Review, 10: 321–332.Google Scholar
Li, P. P. 2016. Global implications of the indigenous epistemological system from the East: How to apply Yin-Yang balancing to paradox management. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 12: 42–77.Google Scholar
Li, P. P. 2021. The meta-perspective of Yin-Yang balancing: Salient implications for organizational management. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Part 73A: 51–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, P. P., Li, Y. and Liu, H. 2012. The exploration-exploitation link reframed from paradox into duality. Working Paper, Copenhagen Business School.Google Scholar
Lindenberg, S and Foss, N. J. 2011. Managing joint production motivation: The role of goal framing and governance mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 36: 500–525.Google Scholar
Lipton, P. 1990. Contrastive explanation. In Knowles, D. (Ed.), Explanation and its limits: 247–266. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lipton, P. 2009. Understanding without explanation. In de Regt, H. W., Leonelli, S. and Eigner, K. (Eds.), Scientific understanding: Philosophical perspectives: 43–63. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, D. 1991. Varieties of social explanation: An introduction to the philosophy of social science. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Little, D. 1998. Microfoundations, method, and causation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
Little, D. 2012. Explanatory autonomy and Coleman’s boat. Theoria, 27: 137–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, C. and de Rond, M. 2016. Good night, and good luck: Perspectives on luck in management scholarship. Academy of Management Annals, 10: 409–451.Google Scholar
Locke, J. 1975. An essay concerning human understanding (4th ed.). Nidditch, P. H. (Ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Losee, J. 2005. Theories on the scrap heap: Scientists and philosophers on the falsification, rejection, and replacement of theories. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Lukes, S. 1968. Methodological individualism reconsidered. British Journal of Sociology, 19: 119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyngaas, S. 2021. Apple sues NSO Group over spyware. CNN Business, November 23. [www.cnn.com/2021/11/23/tech/apple-nso-spyware-lawsuit/index.html]Google Scholar
Mach, E. 1883. Die mechanik in ihrer entwicklung. Leipzig: Brockhaus. Translated by T. J. McCormick, 1960. The science of mechanics. Chicago, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
Machamer, P., Darden, L. and Craver, C. F. 2000. Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of Science, 67: 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madeddu, M. and Zhang, X. 2017. Harmonious spaces: The influence of Feng Shui on urban form and design. Journal of Urban Design, 22: 709–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahoney, J. 2001. Beyond correlational analysis: Recent innovations in theory and method. Sociological Forum, 16: 575–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maiocchi, R. 1990. The case of Brownian motion. British Journal for the History of Science, 23: 257–283.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. 2000. Kinds of assumptions and their truth: Shaking an untwisted F-twist. Kyklos, 53: 317–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mäki, U. 2004. Theoretical isolation and explanatory progress: Transaction cost economics and the dynamics of dispute. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 28: 319–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2: 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchionni, C. 2006. Contrastive explanation and unrealistic models: The case of the new economic geography. Journal of Economic Methodology, 13: 425–446.Google Scholar
Marchionni, C. 2008. Explanatory pluralism and complementarity. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 38: 314–333.Google Scholar
Marquis, C. and Tilcsik, A. 2013. Imprinting: Toward a multilevel theory. Academy of Management Annals, 7: 195–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martignoni, D. and Keil, T. 2021. It did not work? Unlearn and try again − Unlearning success and failure beliefs in changing environments. Strategic Management Journal, 42: 1057–1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masterman, M. 1970. The nature of a paradigm. In Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge: 59–89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, J. A. 2004. Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in education. Educational Researcher, 33(2): 3–11.Google Scholar
Mayntz, R. 2004. Mechanisms in the analysis of social macro-phenomena. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34: 237–259.Google Scholar
McAuliffe, W. H. 2015. How did abduction get confused with inference to the best explanation? Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 51: 300–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McBreen, B. 2007. Realism and empiricism in Hume’s account of causality. Philosophy, 82: 421–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCain, K. 2015. Explanation and the nature of scientific knowledge. Science & Education, 24: 827–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, J. M. 2007. Actions, reasons, and intentions: Overcoming Davidson’s ontological prejudice. Dialogue, 46: 459–479.Google Scholar
McKelvey, B. 1978. Organizational systematics: Taxonomic lessons from biology. Management Science, 24: 1428–1440.Google Scholar
McKinley, W. and Mone, M. A. 1998. The re-construction of organization studies: Wrestling with incommensurability. Organization, 5: 169–189.Google Scholar
McMullin, E. 2008. The virtues of a good theory. In Psillos, S. and Curd, M. (Eds.), The Routledge companion to philosophy of science: 498–508. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
McMullen, J. S., Plummer, L. A. and Acs, Z. J. 2007. What is an entrepreneurial opportunity? Small Business Economics, 28: 273–283.Google Scholar
Merton, R. K. 1957. Social theory and social structure (Enlarged and revised ed.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Merton, R. K. 1968. Social theory and social structure (Enlarged ed.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M.. 1984. Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1973. System of logic, Books I–III. In Robson, J. M. (Ed.), The collected works of J. S. Mill. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Miller, K. D. and Tsang, E. W. K. 2011. Testing management theories: Critical realist philosophy and research methods. Strategic Management Journal, 32: 139–158.Google Scholar
Miller, R. W. 1987. Fact and method: Explanation, confirmation and reality in the natural and social sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Millman, N. 2021. The simplest explanation for the Delta surge is still the best one. Yahoo News, August 31. [www.yahoo.com/news/simplest-explanation-delta-surge-still-095512097.html]Google Scholar
Murphey, M. G. 1986. Explanation, cause, and covering laws. History and Theory, 25: 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutch, A. 2013. Sociomateriality − Taking the wrong turning? Information and Organization, 23: 28–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, E. 1979. The structure of science: Problems in the logic of scientific explanation. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Naraniecki, A. 2010. Neo-positivist or neo-Kantian? Karl Popper and the Vienna Circle. Philosophy, 85: 511–530.Google Scholar
Nature. 2007. Hard to swallow: Is it possible to gauge the true potential of traditional Chinese medicine? Nature, 448: 106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neander, K. 1991. The teleological notion of “function.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 69: 454–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Needham, J. 1954. Science and civilisation in China. Vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. 1999. Defending abduction. Philosophy of Science, 66: S436–S451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. 2000. Hempel’s theory of statistical explanation. In Fetzer, J. H. (Ed.), Science, explanation, and rationality: Aspects of the philosophy of Carl G. Hempel: 138–163. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nobel, W. S. 2006. What is a support vector machine? Nature Biotechnology, 24: 1565–1567.Google Scholar
Numagami, T. 1998. The infeasibility of invariant laws in management studies: A reflective dialogue in defense of case studies. Organization Science, 9: 2–15.Google Scholar
Oremus, W. 2021. Elizabeth Holmes’s trial spotlights Silicon Valley’s thin line between hype and deceit. Washington Post, September 1. [www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/09/01/elizabeth-holmes-theranos-trial-analysis-silicon-valley/]Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. 2007. Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28: 1435–1448.Google Scholar
Østergaard, C. R., Timmermans, B. and Kristinsson, K. 2011. Does a different view create something new? The effect of employee diversity on innovation. Research Policy, 40: 500–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, W. and Sun, L. Y. 2018. A self-regulation model of Zhong Yong thinking and employee adaptive performance. Management and Organization Review, 14: 135–159.Google Scholar
Pathak, B., Ashok, M. and Tan, Y. L. 2020. Value co-destruction: Exploring the role of actors’ opportunism in the B2B context. International Journal of Information Management, 52: 102093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, M. Q. 2002. Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Pearl, J. 1998. Graphs, causality, and structural equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 27: 226–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearl, J. 2009. Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pearl, J. and Mackenzie, D. 2018. The book of why: The new science of cause and effect. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. 1908. A neglected argument for the reality of God. Hibbert Journal, 7: 90–112.Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. 1986. The writings of Charles S. Peirce − A chronological edition. Vol. 3 (1872–1878) (Edited by M. H. Fisch). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Perrin, J. 1913. Les atomes. Paris: Alcan. Translated by D. Hammick, 1923. Atoms. London: Constable.Google Scholar
Peters, R. H. 1976. Tautology in evolution and ecology. American Naturalist, 110: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettit, P. 2003. Groups with minds of their own. In Schmitt, F. F. (Ed.), Socializing metaphysics: 167–193. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Pfeffer, J. 1993. Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18: 599–620.Google Scholar
Phillips, D. C. 1990. Subjectivity and objectivity: An objective inquiry. In Eisner, E. W. and Peshkin, A. (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate: 19–37. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Pilling, B. K., Crosby, L. A. and Jackson, D. W. 1994. Relational bonds in industrial exchange: An experimental test of the transaction cost economic framework. Journal of Business Research, 30: 237–251.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., Podsakoff, N. P., Mishra, P. and Escue, C. 2018. Can early-career scholars conduct impactful research? Playing “small ball” versus “swinging for the fences.” Academy of Management Learning & Education, 17: 496–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popper, K. R. 1994. The myth of the framework: In defense of science and rationality. Notturno, M. A. (Ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Poppo, L. and Zenger, T. 1998. Testing alternative theories of the firm: Transaction cost, knowledge‐based, and measurement explanations for make‐or‐buy decisions in information services. Strategic Management Journal, 19: 853–877.3.0.CO;2-B>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pouder, R. and St. John, C. H. 1996. Hot spots and blind spots: Geographical clusters of firms and innovation. Academy of Management Review, 21: 1192–1225.Google Scholar
Prasad, A. 2002. The contest over meaning: Hermeneutics as an interpretive methodology for understanding texts. Organizational Research Methods, 5: 12–33.Google Scholar
Pratt, S. and Kirillova, K. 2019. Are hotel guests bothered by unlucky floor or room assignments? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 83: 83–94.Google Scholar
Priem, R. L. and Butler, J. E. 2001a. Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review, 26: 22–40.Google Scholar
Priem, R. L. and Butler, J. E. 2001b. Tautology in the resource-based view and the implications of externally determined resource value: Further comments. Academy of Management Review, 26: 57–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qui, J., Donaldson, L. and Luo, B. N. 2012. The benefits of persisting with paradigms in organizational research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26: 93–104.Google Scholar
Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. 1935. On the concept of function in social science. American Anthropologist, 37: 394–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raisch, S. and Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34: 375–409.Google Scholar
Ramoglou, S. and Tsang, E. W. K. 2016. A realist perspective of entrepreneurship: Opportunities as propensities. Academy of Management Review, 41: 410–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramoglou, S. and Tsang, E. W. K. 2017. In defense of common sense in entrepreneurship theory: Beyond philosophical extremities and linguistic abuses. Academy of Management Review, 42: 736–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramsey, F. P. 1925. The foundations of mathematics. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 2: 338–384.Google Scholar
Ravichandran, H. 2021. Business opportunity where you least expect it. Forbes, June 9. [www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2021/06/09/business-opportunity-where-you-least-expect-it/]Google Scholar
Reece, B. C. 2019. Aristotle’s four causes of action. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 97: 213–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reichenbach, H. 1956. The direction of time. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiss, J. 2009. Counterfactuals, thought experiments, and singular causal analysis in history. Philosophy of Science, 76: 712–723.Google Scholar
Reuer, J. J., Tyler, B. B., Tong, T. W. and Wu, C. W. 2012. Executives’ assessments of international joint ventures in China: A multi-theoretical investigation. Management and Organization Review, 8: 311–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuters. 2020. Samsung to relocate Chinese display production to Vietnam. June 19. [www.reuters.com/article/vietnam-samsung-idUSL4N2DW2CV]Google Scholar
Reydon, T. A. and Scholz, M. 2009. Why organizational ecology is not a Darwinian research program. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 39: 408–439.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, P. 1971. The model of the text: Meaningful action considered as a text. Social Research, 38: 529–562.Google Scholar
Roberts, C. 1996. The logic of historical explanation. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Robins, J. A. 1987. Organizational economics: Notes on the use of transaction-cost theory in the study of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32: 68–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ronen, S. and Shenkar, O. 1985. Clustering countries on attitudinal dimensions: A review and synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 10: 435–454.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, R. 1979. The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86: 638–641.Google Scholar
Rosenzweig, P. 2007. Misunderstanding the nature of company performance: The halo effect and other business delusions. California Management Review, 49(4): 6–20.Google Scholar
Ross, W. D. (Ed.). 1936. Aristotle’s Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth, G. 1976. History and sociology in the work of Max Weber. British Journal of Sociology, 27: 306–318.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M. 1985. Issues of level in organizational research: Multi-level and cross-level perspectives. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7: 1–37.Google Scholar
Roy, W. G. 1990. Functional and historical logics in explaining the rise of the American industrial corporation. Comparative Social Research, 12(20): 19–44.Google Scholar
Rubin, M. 2022. The costs of HARKing. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 73: 535–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rugman, A. 1979. International diversification and the multinational enterprise. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Runde, J. and de Rond, M. 2010. Evaluating causal explanations of specific events. Organization Studies, 31: 431–450.Google Scholar
Ryan, L. V. and Schneider, M. 2003. Institutional investor power and heterogeneity: Implications for agency and stakeholder theories. Business & Society, 42: 398–429.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. C. 1975. Theoretical explanation. In Körner, S. (Ed.), Explanation: 118–145. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. C. 1984. Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. C. 1990. Scientific explanation: Causation and unification. Critica: Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofia, 22(66): 3–23.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. C. 1999. The spirit of logical empiricism: Carl G. Hempel’s role in twentieth-century philosophy of science. Philosophy of Science, 66: 333–350.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. C. 2006. Four decades of scientific explanation. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Salvato, C. and Aldrich, H. E. 2012. “That’s interesting!” in family business research. Family Business Review, 25: 125–135.Google Scholar
Sankey, H. 1993. Kuhn’s changing concept of incommensurability. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 44: 759–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkar, S. 1996. (Ed.) The emergence of logical empiricism: From 1900 to the Vienna Circle. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Sawyer, R. K. 2002. Nonreductive individualism: Part I − Supervenience and wild disjunction. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 32: 537–559.Google Scholar
Sayer, A. 1992. Method in social science: A realist approach (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Scheffler, I. 1957. Explanation, prediction and abstraction. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 7: 293–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A. G. 1998. Pluralism and incommensurability in strategic management and organization theory: A problem in search of a solution. Organization, 5: 147–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A. G., Does, E. and Marti, E. 2016. Epistemology: Philosophical foundations and organizational controversies. In Mir, R., Willmott, H. and Greenwood, M. (Eds.), The Routledge companion to philosophy in organization studies: 33–50. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J. 1909. On the concept of social value. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 23: 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scriven, M. 1959. Explanation and prediction in evolutionary theory. Science, 130: 477–482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scriven, M. 1962. Explanations, predictions, and laws. In Feigl, H. and Maxwell, G. (Eds.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. III: 170–230. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. 1990. Collective intentions and actions. In Cohen, P. R., Morgan, J. and Pollack, M. (Eds.), Intentions in communication: 401–415. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. R. 1991. Intentionalistic explanations in the social sciences. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 21: 332–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. R. 2006. Social ontology: Some basic principles. Anthropological Theory, 6: 12–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. R. 2007. Freedom & neurobiology: Reflections on free will, language, and political power. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S. 2000. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25: 217–226.Google Scholar
Shankman, N. A. 1999. Reframing the debate between agency and stakeholder theories of the firm. Journal of Business Ethics, 19: 319–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shevrin, H. and Dickman, S. 1980. The psychological unconscious: A necessary assumption for all psychological theory? American Psychologist, 35: 421–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Short, J. 2009. The art of writing a review article. Journal of Management, 35: 1312–1317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siggelkow, N. 2007. Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 20–24.Google Scholar
Sigmund, K. 2017. Exact thinking in demented times: The Vienna Circle and the epic quest for the foundations of science. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. 1991. Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science, 2: 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sindo, T. 1973. Allergy: Concept and history. Journal of Asthma Research, 10: 141–155.Google Scholar
Sivin, N. 1978. On the word “Taoist” as a source of perplexity. With special reference to the relations of science and religion in traditional China. History of Religions, 17: 303–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sivin, N. 1988. Science and medicine in imperial China − The state of the field. Journal of Asian Studies, 47: 41–90.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. F. 1985. Cognitive science and behaviourism. British Journal of Psychology, 76: 291–301.Google Scholar
Smith, A. 1776. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, reprinted in Campbell, R. H, Skinner, A. S and Todd, W. B (Eds.). 1976. Glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith. Vol. II. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sousa, C. M. and Bradley, F. 2006. Cultural distance and psychic distance: Two peas in a pod? Journal of International Marketing, 14: 49–70.Google Scholar
Spirtes, P., Glymour, C. and Schein, R. 1993. Causation, prediction and search. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
St. John, C. H. 2005. Multi-theoretical mixed-level research in strategic management. Research Methodology in Strategy and Management, 2: 197–223.Google Scholar
Staw, B. M. and Ross, J. 1978. Commitment to a policy decision: A multi-theoretical perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 40–64.Google Scholar
Stebbins, G. L. 1977. In defense of evolution: Tautology or theory? American Naturalist, 111: 386–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steel, D. 2004. Social mechanisms and causal inference. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34: 55–78.Google Scholar
Steel, D. 2005. Mechanisms and functional hypotheses in social science. Philosophy of Science, 72: 941–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steel, D. 2008. Across the boundaries. Extrapolation in biology and social Sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stephan, A. 1992. Emergence – A systematic view on its historical facets. In Beckermann, A., Flohr, H. and Kim, J. (Eds.), Emergence or reduction? Essays on the prospects of nonreductive physicalism: 25–48. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. and Ben-Zeev, T. 2001. Complex cognition: The psychology of human thought. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stinchcombe, A. L. 1968. Constructing social theories. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Stöttinger, B. and Schlegelmilch, B. B. 1998. Explaining export development through psychic distance: Enlightening or elusive? International Marketing Review, 15: 357–372.Google Scholar
Stouffer, S. A., Suchman, E. A., Devinney, L. C., Star, S. A. and Williams, R. M., Jr. 1949. The American soldier: Adjustment during army life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. 1990. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Strevens, M. 2004. The causal and unification accounts of explanation unified − Causally. Noûs, 38: 154–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strevens, M. 2013. No understanding without explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 44: 510–515.Google Scholar
Su, W. and Tsang, E. W. K. 2015. Product diversification and financial performance: The moderating role of secondary stakeholders. Academy of Management Journal, 58: 1128–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Surdu, I., Mellahi, K. and Glaister, K. W. 2019. Once bitten, not necessarily shy? Determinants of foreign market re-entry commitment strategies. Journal of International Business Studies, 50: 393–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Susman, G. I. and Evered, R. D. 1978. An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 582–603.Google Scholar
Sutton, R. I. and Staw, B. M. 1995. What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 371–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanson, D. 1988. Migraine and magnesium: Eleven neglected connections. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 31: 526–557.Google Scholar
Tallman, S. and Li, J. 1996. Effects of international diversity and product diversity on the performance of multinational firms. Academy of Management Journal, 39: 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, C. S. K. and Wu, A. M. 2012. Gambling-related cognitive biases and pathological gambling among youths, young adults, and mature adults in Chinese societies. Journal of Gambling Studies, 28: 139–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thagard, P. R. 1978. The best explanation: Criteria for theory choice. Journal of Philosophy, 75: 76–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, D. 2022. Theranos scandal: Who is Elizabeth Holmes and why was she on trial? BBC News, January 4. [www.bbc.com/news/business-58336998]Google Scholar
Thomas, D. C., Cuervo-Cazurra, A. and Brannen, M. Y. 2011. Explaining theoretical relationships in international business research: Focusing on the arrows, NOT the boxes. Journal of International Business Studies, 42: 1073–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilly, C. 2001. Mechanisms in political processes. Annual Review of Political Science, 4: 21–41.Google Scholar
Trout, J. D. 2002. Scientific explanation and the sense of understanding. Philosophy of Science, 69: 212–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 1997. Organizational learning and the learning organization: A dichotomy between descriptive and prescriptive research. Human Relations, 50: 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 1998. Can guanxi be a source of sustained competitive advantage for doing business in China? Academy of Management Executive, 12(2): 64–73.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2000. Transaction cost and resource-based explanations of joint ventures: A comparison and synthesis. Organization Studies, 21: 215–242.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2002. Self‐serving attributions in corporate annual reports: A replicated study. Journal of Management Studies, 39: 51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2004a. Toward a scientific inquiry into superstitious business decision-making. Organization Studies, 25: 923–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2004b. Superstition and decision-making: Contradiction or complement? Academy of Management Executive, 18(4): 92–104.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2006a. Economies of scale versus intellectual curiosity. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23: 157–165.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2006b. Behavioral assumptions and theory development: The case of transaction cost economics. Strategic Management Journal, 27: 999–1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2008. Transferring knowledge to acquisition joint ventures: An organizational unlearning perspective. Management Learning, 39: 5–20.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2013. Case study methodology: Causal explanation, contextualization, and theorizing. Journal of International Management, 19: 195–202.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2014a. Ensuring manuscript quality and preserving authorial voice: The balancing act of editors. Management and Organization Review, 10: 191–197.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2014b. Generalizing from research findings: The merits of case studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16: 369–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2016. How existing organizational practices affect the transfer of practices to international joint ventures. Management International Review, 56: 565–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2022a. Alternative typologies of case study theorizing: Causal explanation versus theory development as a classification dimension. Journal of International Business Studies, 53: 53–63.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2022b. That’s interesting! A flawed article has influenced generations of management researchers. Journal of Management Inquiry, 31: 150–164.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. and Blevins, D. P. 2015. A critique of the information asymmetry argument in the management and entrepreneurship underpricing literature. Strategic Organization, 13: 247–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. and Kwan, K.-M. 1999. Replication and theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24: 759–780.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. and Williams, J. N. 2012. Generalization and induction: Misconceptions, clarifications, and a classification of induction. MIS Quarterly, 36: 729–748.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. and Yamanoi, J. 2016. International expansion through start-up or acquisition: A replication. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 2291–2306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. and Zahra, S. 2008. Organizational unlearning. Human Relations, 61: 1435–1462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsilipakos, L. 2015. Clarity and confusion: in social theory: Taking concepts seriously. Farmham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Tunçalp, D. 2016. Questioning the ontology of sociomateriality: A critical realist perspective. Management Decision, 54: 1073–1087.Google Scholar
Turner, J. H. and Maryanski, A. 1979. Functionalism. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
Udehn, L. 2002. The changing face of methodological individualism. Annual Review of Sociology, 28: 479–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H. 1989. Nothing is quite so practical as a good theory. Academy of Management Review, 14: 486–489.Google Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H. and Engleman, R. M. 2004. Event-and outcome-driven explanations of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 19: 343–358.Google Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H. and Poole, M. S. 1995. Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20: 510–540.Google Scholar
Van Evera, S. 1997. Guide to methods for students of political science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Van Lent, W. and Durepos, G. 2019. Nurturing the historic turn: “History as theory” versus “history as method”. Journal of Management History, 25: 429–443.Google Scholar
von Mises, L. 1949. Human action: A treatise on economics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
von Wright, G. H. 1971. Explanation and understanding. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University PressGoogle Scholar
Wathne, K. H. and Heide, J. B. 2000. Opportunism in interfirm relationships: Forms, outcomes, and solutions. Journal of Marketing, 64: 36–51.Google Scholar
Watkins, J. W. N. 1957. Historical explanation in the social sciences. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 8: 104–117.Google Scholar
Watson, S. and Hewett, K. 2006. A multi‐theoretical model of knowledge transfer in organizations: Determinants of knowledge contribution and knowledge reuse. Journal of Management Studies, 43: 141–173.Google Scholar
Weaver, G. R. and Gioia, D. A. 1994. Paradigms lost: Incommensurability vs structurationist inquiry. Organization Studies, 15: 565–590.Google Scholar
Weber, E., Van Bouwel, J. and De Vreese, L. 2013. Scientific explanation. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1922. Economy and society, reprinted by Roth, G and Wittich, C. (Eds.). 1968. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1958. The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
Weick, K. 2003. Theory and practice in the real world. In Tsoukas, H. and Knudsen, C. (Eds.), The handbook of organization theory: Meta-theoretical perspectives: 453–475. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Weingartner, R. H. 1961. The quarrel about historical explanation. Journal of Philosophy, 58: 29–45.Google Scholar
Welch, C., Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E., Piekkari, R. and Plakoyiannaki, E. 2022. Reconciling theory and context: How the case study can set a new agenda for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 53: 4–26.Google Scholar
Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E. and Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E., 2011. Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 42: 740–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, H. 1957. The parting of the Way: Lao Tzu and the Taoist movement. Boston, MA: Beacon Hill Press.Google Scholar
Wensley, A. K. and Navarro, J. G. C. 2015. Overcoming knowledge loss through the utilization of an unlearning context. Journal of Business Research, 68: 1563–1569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkenfeld, D. A. 2014. Functional explaining: A new approach to the philosophy of explanation. Synthese, 191: 3367–3391.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. 1975. Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism: Firms, markets, relational contracting. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. 1996. Economic organization: The case for candor. Academy of Management Review, 21: 48–57.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. 1997. Hierarchies, markets and power in the economy: An economic perspective. In Menard, C. (Ed.), Transaction cost economics: Recent developments: 1–29. Brookfield, VT: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Wilson, G. M. 1985. Davidson on intentional action. In LePore, E. and McLaughlin, B. P. (Eds.), Actions and events: Essays on the philosophy of Donald Davidson: 29–43. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. A. and Keil, F. 1998. The shadows and shallows of explanation. Minds and Machines, 8: 137–159.Google Scholar
Wong, S. H. 2012. Does superstition help? A study of the role of superstitions and death beliefs on death anxiety amongst Chinese undergraduates in Hong Kong. OMEGA – Journal of Death and Dying, 65: 55–70.Google Scholar
Wong, W.-C. 2006. Understanding dialectical thinking from a cultural-historical perspective. Philosophical Psychology, 19: 239–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, M. S. and McKinley, W. 2010. The production of entrepreneurial opportunity: A constructivist perspective. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4: 66–84.Google Scholar
Woodward, J. 2003. Making things happen: A theory of causal explanation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wray, K. B. 2002. Social selection, agents’ intentions, and functional explanation. Analyse & Kritik, 24: 72–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, C. 2015. The ontic conception of scientific explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 54: 20–30.Google Scholar
Wright, C. and van Eck, D. 2018. Ontic explanation is either ontic or explanatory, but not both. Ergo, 5: 997–1029.Google Scholar
Yaghmaie, A. 2017. How to characterise pure and applied science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 31: 133–149.Google Scholar
Yan, A. and Gray, B. 1994. Bargaining power, management control, and performance in United States–China joint ventures: A comparative case study. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1478–1517.Google Scholar
Yates, J. 2005. Structuring the information age: Life insurance and technology in the 20th century. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Ylikoski, P. 2007. The idea of contrastive explanandum. In Persson, J. and Ylikoski, P. (Eds.), Rethinking explanation: 27–42. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Ylikoski, P. 2014. Rethinking micro-macro relations. In Zahle, J. and Collin, F. (Eds.), Rethinking the individualism-holism debate: 117–135. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zajac, E. J. and Olsen, C. P. 1993. From transaction cost to transaction value analysis: Implications for the study of interorganizational strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 30: 131–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zald, M. N. 1993. Organization studies as a scientific and humanistic enterprise: Toward a reconceptualization of the foundations of the field. Organization Science, 4: 513–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zemla, J. C., Sloman, S., Bechlivanidis, C. and Lagnado, D. A. 2017. Evaluating everyday explanations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24: 1488–1500.Google Scholar
Zhang, F., Lyu, C. and Zhu, L. 2021. Organizational unlearning, knowledge generation strategies and radical innovation performance: Evidence from a transitional economy. European Journal of Marketing, 56: 133–158.Google Scholar
孟子《盡心上》Mencius. Jin xin IGoogle Scholar
莊子《養生主》Zhuangzi. Nourishing the lord of life.Google Scholar