Teaching our successors about the art of theory building can be a challenge. If you have taught a theory-building course in any of our fields, you may have experienced a common hazard: The seminar can devolve into yet another methods course when the more methodologically inclined take over, focusing the class’s attention on the flaws in tests of our theories. I describe a way of transforming these fault-findings into higher-level learning opportunities by asking a simple question: “So what?” Repeatedly asking questions about whether and how much the faults matter can help students become more thoughtful readers of empirical research by moving them beyond the mechanical application of conventional rules to a deeper appreciation of theory-building processes.
AndersonL. W.KrathwohlD. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives: Complete edition. New York, NY: Longman.
2.
BacharachS. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14, 496-515.
3.
BambergerP. A. (2018). AMD: Clarifying what we are about and where we are going. Academy of Management Discoveries, 4, 1-10.
4.
BelmiP.PfefferJ. (2015). How “organization” can weaken the norm of reciprocity: The effects of attributions for favors and a calculative mindset. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1, 93-113.
5.
ByronK.ThatcherS. M. B. (2016). Editors’ comments: “What I know now that I wish I knew then”: Teach theory and theory building. Academy of Management Review, 41, 1-8.
6.
ChatterjeeA.HambrickD. C. (2007). It’s all about me: Narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 351-386.
7.
CooperW. H.RichardsonA. J. (1986). Unfair comparisons. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 179-186.
8.
DearbornC.SimonH. A. (1958). Selective perception: A note on the departmental identification of executives. Sociometry, 21, 140-144.
9.
GouldnerA. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-178.
10.
GreinerL. E. (1972). Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review, 50(July–August), 37-46.
11.
HambrickD. C. (2005). Upper echelons theory: Origins, twists and turns, and lessons learned. In SmithK. G.HittM. A. (Eds.), Great minds in management: The process of theory development (pp. 109-127). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
12.
HambrickD. C.MasonP. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193-206.
13.
KolbD. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
14.
MichelA. (2011). Transcending socialization: A nine-year ethnography of the body’s role in organization control and knowledge workers’ transformation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56, 325-368.
15.
NunnallyJ. C.BernsteinI. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
16.
RaginsB. R. (2018). From boxing to dancing: Creating a developmental editorial culture. Journal of Management Inquiry, 27, 158-163.
17.
ReganD. T. (1971). Effects of a favor and liking on compliance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 7, 627-639.
18.
ReidE. (2015). Embracing, passing, revealing, and the ideal worker image: How people navigate expected and experienced professional identities. Organization Science, 26, 997-1017.
19.
SimpsonB.HarrellA.MelamedD.HeisermanN.NegraiaD. V. (2018). The roots of reciprocity: Gratitude and reputation in generalized exchange systems. American Sociological Review, 83, 88-110.
20.
SmithK. G.HittM. A. (2005). Great minds in management: The process of theory development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
21.
StawB. M.SanderlandsL. E.DuttonJ. E. (1981). Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 501-524.
22.
SuddabyR. (2010). Editor’s comments: Construct clarity in theories of management and organization. Academy of Management Review, 35, 346-357.
23.
ToobinJ. (2014, April14). This is my jail. The New Yorker, pp. 26-32.
24.
Van de VenA. H. (2016). Happy birthday, AMD!Academy of Management Discoveries, 2, 1-3.
25.
WestphalJ. D.ShaniG. (2016). Psyched-up to suck-up: Self-regulated cognition, interpersonal influence, and recommendations for board appointment in the corporate elite. Academy of Management Journal, 59, 479-509.
26.
WhettenD. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution?Academy of Management Review, 14, 490-495.
