IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v29y2012i5p484-498.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Consideration of Observational Design Decisions in the Theory Construction Process

Author

Listed:
  • Duncan R. Shaw
  • Timothy F. H. Allen

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to develop an explicit protocol for gaining the use of new concepts from external and transdisciplinary sources during the theory construction process. We are concerned with Churchman's ‘sweeping in’ of alternative perspectives and with inductive research. The potential for innovation that concepts from external disciplines bring is balanced by the risks of working outside a researcher's area of expertise. There is potential for researcher bias when gathering new ideas as well as when filtering possible new theory, and a protocol might help minimize such problems. For example, few business researchers are fully versed in ecology, and vice versa. This applies to the authors here, but we look at the issue from our respective sides and bring our respective expertise. Hierarchy theory is fundamentally a theory of observation. Here it helps us to define how the perspective of the researcher affects theory construction and the use of transdisciplinary concepts. It introduces a precision about the use of levels and brings out the dualism that arises in movement between levels. We use this to develop a theoretical model of the theory‐building process that avoids bias whilst making best use of the researcher's preconceptions. We illustrate our protocol using the business ecosystem metaphor, which is common in the business literature. Our special case that straddles business and ecology might offer guidance in other transdisciplinary efforts. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Duncan R. Shaw & Timothy F. H. Allen, 2012. "A Systematic Consideration of Observational Design Decisions in the Theory Construction Process," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 484-498, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:29:y:2012:i:5:p:484-498
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2157
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2157?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Costanza, Robert & d'Arge, Ralph & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Stephen & Grasso, Monica & Hannon, Bruce & Limburg, Karin & Naeem, Shahid & O'Neill, Robert V. & Paruelo, Jose, 1998. "The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 3-15, April.
    2. Allen S. Lee & Richard L. Baskerville, 2003. "Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 221-243, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guswin de Wee, 2022. "Evaluating and understanding the outcomes of the South African National Drug Master Plan 2013–2017: A systems‐based integrative propositional analysis application," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 44-62, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dirk Lauinger & Romain G. Billy & Felipe Vásquez & Daniel B. Müller, 2021. "A general framework for stock dynamics of populations and built and natural environments," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(5), pages 1136-1146, October.
    2. Yangcheng Hu & Yi Liu & Changyan Li, 2022. "Multi-Scenario Simulation of Land Use Change and Ecosystem Service Value in the Middle Reaches of Yangtze River Urban Agglomeration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Gunasekaran, Angappa & Irani, Zahir & Choy, King-Lun & Filippi, Lionel & Papadopoulos, Thanos, 2015. "Performance measures and metrics in outsourcing decisions: A review for research and applications," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 153-166.
    4. Shuming Ma & Jie Huang & Yingying Chai, 2021. "Proposing a GEE-Based Spatiotemporally Adjusted Value Transfer Method to Assess Land-Use Changes and Their Impacts on Ecosystem Service Values in the Shenyang Metropolitan Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-20, November.
    5. Nicholaus Mwageni & Robert Kiunsi, 2024. "Green Spaces in Residential Areas of Dar es Salaam City: Types, Coverage and Uses," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 14(3), pages 121-121, July.
    6. Nunes, P.A.L.D. & Nijkamp, P., 2011. "Biodiversity: Economic perspectives," Serie Research Memoranda 0002, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    7. Emmanuelle Vaast & Geoff Walsham, 2009. "Trans-Situated Learning: Supporting a Network of Practice with an Information Infrastructure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 547-564, December.
    8. Hendrawan, Dienda C P & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "Oil Palm Smallholder Farmers' Livelihood Resilience and Decision Making in Replanting," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322441, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Michael Vössing & Niklas Kühl & Matteo Lind & Gerhard Satzger, 2022. "Designing Transparency for Effective Human-AI Collaboration," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 877-895, June.
    10. Man-Jing Li & Jia-Xu Han & Mao Zhu & Yuan-Biao Zhang, 2019. "The True Valuation of Land Use Project in China Considering Ecosystem Services," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(10), pages 1-46, October.
    11. Ping Shen & Lijuan Wu & Ziwen Huo & Jiaying Zhang, 2023. "A Study on the Spatial Pattern of the Ecological Product Value of China’s County-Level Regions Based on GEP Evaluation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-18, February.
    12. Olayungbo, Adenike Anike, 2021. "Land Use Land Cover Change Detection Using Remote Geospatial Techniques: A Case Study of an Urban City in Southwestern, Nigeria," Problems of World Agriculture / Problemy Rolnictwa Światowego, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, vol. 21(2), June.
    13. Zhewei Zhang & Youngjin Yoo & Kalle Lyytinen & Aron Lindberg, 2021. "The Unknowability of Autonomous Tools and the Liminal Experience of Their Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 1192-1213, December.
    14. Garbarino, Nicola & Guin, Benjamin, 2021. "High water, no marks? Biased lending after extreme weather," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    15. Yue Wang & Qi Fu & Tinghui Wang & Mengfan Gao & Jinhua Chen, 2022. "Multiscale Characteristics and Drivers of the Bundles of Ecosystem Service Budgets in the Su-Xi-Chang Region, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-26, October.
    16. van der Hoff, Richard & Nascimento, Nathália & Fabrício-Neto, Ailton & Jaramillo-Giraldo, Carolina & Ambrosio, Geanderson & Arieira, Julia & Afonso Nobre, Carlos & Rajão, Raoni, 2022. "Policy-oriented ecosystem services research on tropical forests in South America: A systematic literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    17. Borrello, M. & Cecchini, L. & Vecchio, R. & Caracciolo, F. & Cembalo, L. & Torquati, B., 2022. "Agricultural landscape certification as a market-driven tool to reward the provisioning of cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    18. Feng, Hongli & Jha, Manoj & Gassman, Philip W. & Parcel, Joshua D., 2007. "A Recent Trend in Ecological Economic Research: Quantifying the Benefits and Costs of Improving Ecosystem Services," ISU General Staff Papers 200701010800001812, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    19. Dragos Vieru & Pierre-Emmanuel Arduin, 2016. "Sharing Knowledge in a Shared Services Center Context: An Explanatory Case Study of the Dialectics of Formal and Informal Practices," Post-Print hal-01458031, HAL.
    20. Holmes, Thomas P. & Bergstrom, John C. & Huszar, Eric & Kask, Susan B. & Orr, Fritz, III, 2002. "Estimating The Local Economic Benefits Of Riparian Ecosystem Restoration Using Iterated Contingent Valuation," Faculty Series 16696, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:29:y:2012:i:5:p:484-498. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.