IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/stratm/v10y1989i3p303-306.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A meta‐analysis on the comparative effectiveness of devil's advocacy and dialectical inquiry

Author

Listed:
  • Charles Schwenk

Abstract

The use of meta‐analysis allows us to draw stronger inferences from past research than are possible from traditional literature. In this paper the general purpose of meta‐analysis is discussed, and it is used to resolve a dispute regarding a collection of studies in strategic management dealing with devil's advocacy and dialectical inquiry. The use of meta‐analysis leads to different conclusions from those drawn in an earlier review of these studies. At the end of the paper the limitations and potential uses of meta‐analysis in strategic management are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles Schwenk, 1989. "A meta‐analysis on the comparative effectiveness of devil's advocacy and dialectical inquiry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(3), pages 303-306, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:stratm:v:10:y:1989:i:3:p:303-306
    DOI: 10.1002/smj.4250100309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100309
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/smj.4250100309?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Michael D. Ensley & Allison W. Pearson, 2005. "An Exploratory Comparison of the Behavioral Dynamics of Top Management Teams in Family and Nonfamily New Ventures: Cohesion, Conflict, Potency, and Consensus," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(3), pages 267-284, May.

    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:stratm:v:10:y:1989:i:3:p:303-306. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/10.1111/0143-2095 .

    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.