轨迹在管理研究中的应用:对未来研究的回顾与展望

IF 9.3 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Brian W. Swider, Junhui Yang, Mo Wang
{"title":"轨迹在管理研究中的应用:对未来研究的回顾与展望","authors":"Brian W. Swider, Junhui Yang, Mo Wang","doi":"10.1177/01492063231207341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The increased incorporation of time, theoretically and empirically, has dramatically advanced our understanding of management. Trajectories, which describe longitudinal change in constructs using functions of time, have become one of management scholars’ most widely used methodological tools to examine if, how, and why constructs change. Yet, despite the rapid growth of trajectory research, we lack a coherent framework for understanding how trajectories can be used to generate valuable insights into change-related work phenomena. In this article, we review more than two decades of trajectory research to develop a taxonomy that delineates the theoretical extensions offered by different trajectory-related research questions. In addition, although seminal method articles offered initial how-to instructions for conducting trajectory analyses, there has since been no systematic review of the methodological practices actually used in trajectory research. Our review distinguishes eight critical methodological choices required in every trajectory study, catalogs the frequency of methodological choices made in prior research, identifies problematic practices that persist, and offers actionable recommendations to develop rigorous trajectory research. Finally, we discuss eight pressing issues in current trajectory research, including several prominent practices that must be abandoned, and suggest how to avoid or minimize these concerns in future studies. Together, our review provides management scholars with an organizing platform for developing trajectory-related research questions and a comprehensive guide to rigorous study designs and analyses.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Use of Trajectories in Management Research: A Review and Insights for Future Research\",\"authors\":\"Brian W. Swider, Junhui Yang, Mo Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01492063231207341\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The increased incorporation of time, theoretically and empirically, has dramatically advanced our understanding of management. Trajectories, which describe longitudinal change in constructs using functions of time, have become one of management scholars’ most widely used methodological tools to examine if, how, and why constructs change. Yet, despite the rapid growth of trajectory research, we lack a coherent framework for understanding how trajectories can be used to generate valuable insights into change-related work phenomena. In this article, we review more than two decades of trajectory research to develop a taxonomy that delineates the theoretical extensions offered by different trajectory-related research questions. In addition, although seminal method articles offered initial how-to instructions for conducting trajectory analyses, there has since been no systematic review of the methodological practices actually used in trajectory research. Our review distinguishes eight critical methodological choices required in every trajectory study, catalogs the frequency of methodological choices made in prior research, identifies problematic practices that persist, and offers actionable recommendations to develop rigorous trajectory research. Finally, we discuss eight pressing issues in current trajectory research, including several prominent practices that must be abandoned, and suggest how to avoid or minimize these concerns in future studies. Together, our review provides management scholars with an organizing platform for developing trajectory-related research questions and a comprehensive guide to rigorous study designs and analyses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54212,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063231207341\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063231207341","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

时间在理论和经验上的日益结合,极大地推进了我们对管理的理解。轨迹,用时间函数描述结构的纵向变化,已经成为管理学者最广泛使用的方法工具之一,用于检查结构是否、如何以及为什么变化。然而,尽管轨迹研究快速增长,我们缺乏一个连贯的框架来理解轨迹如何被用来产生对变化相关工作现象的有价值的见解。在本文中,我们回顾了二十多年来的轨迹研究,以建立一个分类,描述了不同轨迹相关研究问题提供的理论扩展。另外,尽管开创性的方法文章为进行轨迹分析提供了最初的操作指导,但是从那时起就没有对轨迹研究中实际使用的方法实践进行系统的回顾。我们的综述区分了每个轨迹研究中需要的八种关键方法选择,对先前研究中所做的方法选择的频率进行了分类,确定了持续存在的问题实践,并提供了可操作的建议,以开展严格的轨迹研究。最后,我们讨论了当前轨迹研究中的八个紧迫问题,包括必须放弃的几个突出实践,并建议如何在未来的研究中避免或尽量减少这些问题。总之,我们的综述为管理学者提供了一个有组织的平台,以发展与轨迹相关的研究问题,并为严格的研究设计和分析提供了全面的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Use of Trajectories in Management Research: A Review and Insights for Future Research
The increased incorporation of time, theoretically and empirically, has dramatically advanced our understanding of management. Trajectories, which describe longitudinal change in constructs using functions of time, have become one of management scholars’ most widely used methodological tools to examine if, how, and why constructs change. Yet, despite the rapid growth of trajectory research, we lack a coherent framework for understanding how trajectories can be used to generate valuable insights into change-related work phenomena. In this article, we review more than two decades of trajectory research to develop a taxonomy that delineates the theoretical extensions offered by different trajectory-related research questions. In addition, although seminal method articles offered initial how-to instructions for conducting trajectory analyses, there has since been no systematic review of the methodological practices actually used in trajectory research. Our review distinguishes eight critical methodological choices required in every trajectory study, catalogs the frequency of methodological choices made in prior research, identifies problematic practices that persist, and offers actionable recommendations to develop rigorous trajectory research. Finally, we discuss eight pressing issues in current trajectory research, including several prominent practices that must be abandoned, and suggest how to avoid or minimize these concerns in future studies. Together, our review provides management scholars with an organizing platform for developing trajectory-related research questions and a comprehensive guide to rigorous study designs and analyses.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
22.40
自引率
5.20%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management (JOM) aims to publish rigorous empirical and theoretical research articles that significantly contribute to the field of management. It is particularly interested in papers that have a strong impact on the overall management discipline. JOM also encourages the submission of novel ideas and fresh perspectives on existing research. The journal covers a wide range of areas, including business strategy and policy, organizational behavior, human resource management, organizational theory, entrepreneurship, and research methods. It provides a platform for scholars to present their work on these topics and fosters intellectual discussion and exchange in these areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信