COMPARE AND CONTRAST AT LEAST THREE VIEWS OF WHAT

CONSTITUTES A THEORY.
Stewart and Klein (2016) state that the word ‘theory’ is derived from ancient Greek ‘theoria’,

meaning ‘looking at’ or ‘being aware of’. There are many modern definitions such as, ‘…an

explanation of a phenomenon arrived at through examination and contemplation of the relevant

facts; a statement of one or more laws or principles which are generally held as describing an

essential property of something. (Oxford English dictionary, 2015)

Wacker opens up the discourse on theory by stating that theory has different opinions and

definitions given by researchers. Various schools of thoughts have defined theory within the

ambits of their work and perspective. Some schools see theory as an abstract endeavor which has

no need for “testing or application to be viewed as good theory” (Wacker 1998 p362 on

Lindblom 1987). This means that theory is an endeavor arrived at through “lay investigation

rather than scientific process” (Wacker 1998 p362).

Churchman (1961) put forward a view that in the absence of a “measurement system” a theory

cannot be deemed valid. Contrary to this assertion is Boer, Holweg, Kilduff, Pagell, Schmenner,

and Voss (2015) who reiterate that “discovery and observation are equally important and often

neglected avenues contributing to theory”. They explain that there is no one right way to making

a contribution, yet consistency between ontology, epistemology, and claimed contribution is

what matters. The authors further argue that the choice of theory is critical, as a common mistake

is trying to contribute to high-level theories borrowed from other fields.

Therefore the proper definition of theory and what instructs good theory must be clearly stated.

Waker (1998) puts forward a formal and operationalization definition of theory.

He follows the academic definition of theory to be made up of four components which are

definitions of terms or variables, a domain where the theory applies, a set of relationships of

variables and specific predictions factual claims.(Hunt, 1991; Bunge, 1967; Reynolds, 1971.)
It is most important according to Waker (1998) that researchers view theory as extremely

relevant to their work for the following reasons.

 Theory provides a structure for inquiry.

 It lays the foundation for expansion of field work.

 Theory allows for expounding on realistic approaches to the research world.

Where there are differences of opinion especially in management sciences, theory provides a

structure around which researchers can work. Sometimes academicians find it difficult to

determine what inputs or factors or elements to employ when defining terms. Theory is a

blueprint from which they can build their work on.

Theory lays the foundation for expansion of field work. Consistent methodologies according to

Wacker (1998) are required to build a body of knowledge efficiently. Theory is relevant and may

be applied to practical situations with the empirical support to back its employment. ‘‘Good

theory is practical precisely because it advances knowledge in a scientific discipline, guides

research toward crucial questions, and enlightens the profession of management’’.

A theory’s exactness and constraints are established in the definitions of terms, the domain of the

theory, the explanation of relationships, and the specific conjectures. Authors usually agree that

the goal of ‘good’ theory is a clear explanation of how and why certain relationships lead to

certain events. Consequently, these explanations of relationships are crucial for ‘good’ theory-

development. Other authors’ statements on theory state the importance of relationship-building:

Theory is an organized set of postulations about a comprehensive behavior or structure assumed

to hold throughout a significantly broad range of specific instances (Sutherland, 1976: 9)

Wacker (1998) explained that theoretical definitions cannot be directly observed. Assertions are

made to their properties and existence in order to account for what is observable. Theoretical
definitions are conceptual in nature. These conceptual foundations extend more than their

measurement.

The domain of the theory is the exact setting or circumstances where the theory can be applied.

Reeves, Albert, Kuper & Hodges (2008) defined theory “as an organised, understandable, and

structured formulation of a set of issues that are conveyed as a meaningful whole. Theories are

usually generated deductively, from an empirically informed act of creativity, then empirically

verified. This means that theories evolve from an ongoing process of deduction and induction.

Reeves et al(2008) postulate that theories are usually used to create a research question, guide

the choice of appropriate data, interpret the data, and bring forward reasons of the underlying

causes or influences of observed phenomena. In the natural sciences theories are used to generate

predictions about the connectivity between two or more different elements in order to generate

universal laws. In contrast, social scientists assume that social reality is too complex to consider

variables in isolation in order to test their causal relationship. In addition, social scientists view

universal laws as being unable to explain the complex interrelated functions of societies, thus

making it impossible to draw on evidence for prediction. For social scientists, a theory is

primarily a hypothetical tool useful in making sense of a complex social reality.

Whilst the above schools of thought are predisposed to viewing theory as an empirical exercise

which makes use of scientific enquiry and measurement techniques to establish precepts and

concepts, Lindblom (1987) viewed theory as not necessarily needing application. Theory

according to Lindblom (1987 p 517) states that what constitutes” knowledge today is based on

lay work rather than professional investigation. To have a good theory it is not necessary to have

been examined or subject to testing. It is sufficient to have been postulated.

alternatives, costs and benefits, requires extensive information, in depth computation, and

pervasive value consensus to make people convinced as a prototype of how decisions are

made.’’ (Atkinson 2011)

Boer et al (2015) expound that “theories explain facts and provide stories as to how phenomena

work the way that they do. Theories are invented; they are not built. Our understanding can be

built up from hypotheses and their tests, but the theories that explain what the hypotheses have

shown are inventions that often come years after the facts have been settled.

Even with these assertions, most scholars view theory as being made up of four different

concepts

 Definition of variables. In this stage what concepts are required are included in the

formulation and by necessity what is not required is excluded. Therefore the exercise here

is to bring in relevant factors and remove what we do not require. We follow the virtue of

conservation and retain uniqueness.

 Limiting the domain. Observations are made in this stage as to what constitutes

antecedent events as well as subsequent events. Waker (1998) states that” it is the stage

where generalizability comes into play” and the timing and location of events are

captured.

 Building models and relationships. The internal consistency of relationships as well as

the logical conclusions as to their interrelatedness is determined. Relationships are

ascertained.

 Theory predictions and empirical support. Scientific and empirical verification for the

theory is ascertained. The conditions for predictions are laid out and the criteria for
testing created models are established. In this stage the virtues of a good theory defined

as parsimony, fecundity are brought to bear on the model.

Atkinson, S. (2011). Embodied and Embedded Theory in Practice: The Student-Owned

Learning-Engagement (SOLE) Model. International Review of Research in Open and

Distributed Learning, 12(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v12i2.929

Boer, H., Holweg, M., Kilduff, M., Pagell, M., Schmenner, R., & Voss, C. (2015). Making a

meaningful contribution to theory. International Journal of Operations & Production

Management, 35(9), 1231-1252.

Bunge, M., 1967. Scientific Research 1: The Search For System. Springer-Verlag, New York

Churchman, C.W. 1961. Prediction and Optimal Decisions. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

Hunt, S.D., 1991. Modern Marketing Theory: Critical Issues in the Philosophy of Marketing

Science. Southwestern Publishing, Cincinnati, OH

Lindblom, C.E., 1987. Alternative to validity: some thoughts suggested by Campbell’s

guidelines. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 8, 509–520

Oxford English Dictionary. Available at http://www.oed.com/ [accessed Jun 2015]

Reeves, S., Albert, M., Kuper, A., & Hodges, B. D. (2008). Why use theories in qualitative

research? BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online), 337

IN.

Stewart, D., & Klein, S. (2016). The use of theory in research. International Journal of Clinical

Pharmacy, 38(3), 615-619.

Wacker, J. G. (1998). A definition of theory: research guidelines for different theory building

research methods in operations management. Journal of operations management, 16(4), 361-

385.