Achieving Research Design Excellence Through the Pursuit of Perfection: Toward Strong Theoretical Calibration

• Published date: 01 January 2018
• Author: Christopher W. Craighead,David J. Ketchen,Li Cheng
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12156
• Date: 01 January 2018

ACHIEVING RESEARCH DESIGN EXCELLENCE THROUGH

THE PURSUIT OF PERFECTION: TOWARD STRONG

THEORETICAL CALIBRATION

DAVID J. KETCHEN, JR.

Auburn University

CHRISTOPHER W. CRAIGHEAD AND LI CHENG

University of Tennessee

Supply chain research has become increasingly theory-driven, research

designs have become more rigorous, and analytical methods have grown

in depth and breadth. Given this important and positive progression, we

believe that it is time for scholars to abandon a popular data collection

method—single-source surveys—due to its inherent limitations. In the

past, single-source surveys have fueled important steps forward in knowl-

edge development, but the field has progressed to the point that stronger

designs are needed. Rather than attacking past research grounded in

single-source surveys (including our own) or offering stop-gap advice

(e.g., get more respondents), we offer a more constructive path forward—

scholars should let their theory drive their designs. Specifically, we pro-

pose the concept of theoretical calibration—the degree to which the key

tenets of a study’s theory are captured within its research design—and

describe four approaches that scholars can take to increase theoretical cal-

ibration. Our hope is that, in the future, surveys will remain one impor-

tant method among many that can be used to build knowledge and

inform managers, but that journal gatekeepers will judge designs that rely

on single-source surveys alone to no longer be sufficient.

Keywords: single-source surveys; research design; theoretical calibration

TOWARD RESEARCH DESIGN PERFECTION

Our view is that the time has come for supply chain

scholars to abandon single-source surveys due to their

inherent limitations. The compromises inherent in

single-source survey data are especially troublesome in

a field like supply chain management wherein the

links between different chain members are core con-

cerns. Asking a person representing one node ques-

tions about issues that involve other nodes or the

chain as a whole is akin to surveying only wives or

only husbands and then drawing conclusions about

marriages. In both cases, one simply cannot be confi-

dent in the findings because only part of the relation-

ship has been tapped.

In discussing their experiences as Academy of Man-

agement Journal associate editors, Bono and McNamara

(2011) note “the core problem with AMJ submissions

rejected for design problems is not that they were

well-designed studies that ran into problems during

execution... it is that the scholars made too many

compromises at the design stage.” We recommend

that supply chain scholars refuse to make such

research design compromises. A leader once told his

subordinates, “We are going to relentlessly chase per-

fection, knowing full well we will not catch it, because

nothing is perfect. But we are going to relentlessly

chase it, because in the process we will catch excel-

lence. I am not remotely interested in just being

good.”

1

Our position is that scholars should pursue

research design perfection—fully recognizing that it

cannot be realized (McGrath, 1981)—and thereby

1

The leader was an American football coach named Vince Lom-

bardi. Consistent with Lombardi’s philosophy, his team did not

win every game, but they did win five league championships in

nine seasons with Lombardi at the helm.

Volume 54, Number 116

Journal of Supply Chain Management

2018, 54(1), 16–22

©2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.