IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/transj/v55y2016i3p241-257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Goldilocks” Theorizing in Supply Chain Research: Balancing Scientific and Practical Utility via Middle‐Range Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher W. Craighead
  • David J. Ketchen
  • Li Cheng

Abstract

While supply chain scholars have made considerable progress in theory building and testing, there has been a relative dearth of middle range theory. Middle‐range theory (MRT) is context‐specific conceptualization providing theoretically grounded insights readily applicable to an empirical context. It promotes rigorous and relevant research, bridges practice and theory, and conveys deeper understanding of how and why phenomena occur. The lack of significant MRT is surprising given the considerable efforts supply chain scholars exert to stay grounded in industry practices. As a result, we put forth a broad call for more middle‐range theorizing and provide guidance on how supply chain scholars may meet this call. Specifically, we describe a MRT lever—theoretical contextualization—that strikes a balance between theory and industry and then present two overarching strategies (bottom‐up and top‐down) for MRT development. We discuss these strategies in the supply chain domain and identify how middle‐range theorizing may be undertaken in four emerging, yet important, topics.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher W. Craighead & David J. Ketchen & Li Cheng, 2016. "“Goldilocks” Theorizing in Supply Chain Research: Balancing Scientific and Practical Utility via Middle‐Range Theory," Transportation Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 241-257, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:transj:v:55:y:2016:i:3:p:241-257
    DOI: 10.5325/transportationj.55.3.0241
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.5325/transportationj.55.3.0241
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5325/transportationj.55.3.0241?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
    ---><---

    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:wly:transj:v:55:y:2016:i:3:p:241-257. 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: .

    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.