Making a Theoretical Contribution with Qualitative Research
Authors struggling with how to make a strong theoretical contribution is the challenge I see most often in journal submissions. In their recent editorial, Making a Theoretical Contribution with Qualitative Research, Rouse and her coauthors (2025) provide practical guidance for qualitative scholars seeking to meet high standards for theoretical contribution. The authors argue that the “inherent openness and contextual grounding [of qualitative research] can make it challenging to articulate a crisp, generalizable theoretical contribution”. To address this, they outline six key pathways: (1) leveraging the unusual beyond fascinating settings; (2) leveraging inference beyond patterns and regularities; (3) leveraging tensions beyond opening the black box; (4) leveraging visualizations beyond boxes and arrows; (5) leveraging language beyond hyperbole; and (6) leveraging the moment beyond emulating past work. A central theme is that theory must “move from description (patterns) to explanation (mechanisms) to transferrable theoretical account”. The editorial also acknowledges the new role of AI as a “co-theorist” – assisting in pattern recognition and theorization, but not replacing human interpretive depth.
Rouse, E., Reinecke, J., Ravasi, D., Langley, A., Grimes, M., & Gruber, M. (2025). Making a Theoretical Contribution with Qualitative Research. Academy of Management Journal, 68(2), 257–266. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2025.4002
The Core Building Blocks of a Theoretical Article
In Sense and Structure—The Core Building Blocks of an AMR Article, Lange and Pfarrer (2017) outline five essential steps for crafting effective Academy of Management Review articles. I believe that these five steps are useful for anyone who writes theoretical articles – not just for AMR. As an author you must (1) establish common ground by “[laying] out the basic assumptions, boundary conditions, and prescriptions of the literature, forming an agreeable starting point with your readers.” (2) You then introduce a complication (a problem, puzzle, or twist) by “pointing out to your readers some kind of complication to the common ground that you’ve already established.” (3) You demonstrate concern by providing “a compelling explanation of the complication’s importance.” (4) You present a course of action, describing “how you will be addressing and resolving your paper’s central complication.” (5) Finally, you highlight your contribution by explaining “how your work will shape or change the conversation—how it makes a distinct contribution.”
Lange, D., & Pfarrer, M.D. (2017). Editors’ Comments: Sense and Structure—The Core Building blocks of an AMR Article. Academy of Management Review, 42(3), 407–416. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0225
Propositional, Perspectival, and Provocative Styles of Theorizing
It is clear that theorizing in our discipline is primarily aimed at explaining and predicting phenomena in terms of causes and effects related to underlying structures and mechanisms (propositional style). In the recently published article Unlocking the Power of Diversity for Supply Chain Knowledge: Is Pluralism in Theorizing Styles the Key? by Joep Cornelissen, Victoria Stephens, and Lee Matthews in the Journal of Supply Chain Management, the authors argue for a pluralistic approach to theorizing in SCM research. They criticize the dominance of the propositional style of theorizing, which focuses on explaining and predicting phenomena, and propose the inclusion of perspectival and provocative styles. These alternative styles aim to reinterpret and critique existing concepts, respectively. The authors emphasize that the incorporation of multiple theorizing styles can lead to better, more comprehensive knowledge production in SCM by addressing the complex and dynamic nature of the discipline. They call for an inclusive epistemology that values diverse epistemic goals equally and promotes a more reflexive and holistic understanding of supply chain management phenomena.
Cornelissen, J., Stephens, V., & Matthews, L. (2024). Unlocking the Power of Diversity for Supply Chain Knowledge: Is Pluralism in Theorizing Styles the Key? Journal of Supply Chain Management, 60(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12328
How To Improve Your Writing Skills
What distinguishes a good paper? The idea should be creative, the methodological approach should be flawless, and there should be a theoretical contribution. Sure. However, good communication with the reader is at least as important as all of the rest. Unfortunately, very often I have reviewed manuscripts that contain interesting theories, data, and results, but are simply not well-written. As academics we are often busy, but there is one thing we all should do: read a book about academic writing. The reading time is well invested. I have two book recommendations. The first is Natalie Reid (2018), Getting Published in International Journals: Writing Strategies for European Social Scientists. An academic friend of mine once wrote on LinkedIn that this was the best book he had ever read. And it is really good. My favorite chapters deal with “paragraphing” and “constructing and argument, sentence by sentence”. My second recommendation is aimed at German-speaking academics: Gerlinde Mautner (2019), Wissenschaftliches Englisch: Stilsicher Schreiben in Studium und Wissenschaft. This is one of the best books I have ever read.
Reid, N. (2018): Getting Published in International Journals: Writing Strategies for European Social Scientists. Revised Edition. ISBN 0692929959
Mautner, G. (2019): Wissenschaftliches Englisch: Stilsicher Schreiben in Studium und Wissenschaft. 3rd Edition. ISBN 3825252191
The Map Is Not the Territory
One of the most interesting articles I have read recently is The Map Is Not the Territory: A Boundary Objects Perspective on Supply Chain Mapping by Fabbe-Costes and her coauthors (IJOPM, 2020). The authors argue: “Most past conceptions of SC mapping have involved identifying one map of a supply chain as a common reference point for all actors concerned. As such, a supply chain map, like a geographical map, is supposed to represent the SC ‘territory’.” They then show that no map can actually include everything, that is, “the map is not the territory”. The authors compare three paradigmatic positions: In positivism, a supply chain map is simply a representation of what the supply chain is (i.e., the territory). In interpretivism, a map is a mental individual representation of the supply chain. In constructivism, a map is what is needed to work and reach the shared goal – it is what is “at stake” for each “social world”.
Fabbe-Costes, N., Lechaptois, L., & Spring, M. (2020), “The Map Is Not the Territory”: A Boundary Objects Perspective on Supply Chain Mapping. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 40 (9), 1475–1497. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-12-2019-0828
Dancing the Supply Chain
Rarely have I put as much passion into an article as in the case of my new one, entitled Dancing the Supply Chain: Toward Transformative Supply Chain Management (JSCM, 2021). Herein, I argue that “[i]t is time to replace the modernist tropes of designing, planning, and optimizing the supply chain with a new metaphor that accounts for the transformative power of management: that of dancing the supply chain“. The article starts by challenging the conventional static and reductionist assumptions of the supply chain and reinterprets it as a social-ecological system. I then use the adaptive cycle from panarchy theory to describe the supply chain’s behavior: “An adaptive cycle sequentially accounts for growth and stability, as well as change and variety”. A panarchy is then presented as “a structure of adaptive cycles that are linked across different levels on scales of space, time, and meaning” (supply chain level, political-economic level, planetary level). I then analyze cross-level linkages within the panarchy, which reveals that these adaptive cycles interact. The article ends with a new research agenda “that will allow understanding the world’s empirical complexity differently and challenging the effectiveness and relevance of SCM research in a turbulent and uncertain environment”. I wrote this article in a way that allows it to be integrated in course curricula (M.Sc. & Ph.D.). I hope you will enjoy reading this article as much as I enjoyed writing it.
Wieland, A. (2021). Dancing the Supply Chain: Toward Transformative Supply Chain Management. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 57 (1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12248
Social Network Analysis in Supply Chain Management
It is time to take a closer look at Borgatti & Li’s (2009) important article: On Social Network Analysis in a Supply Chain Context. The article has become part of the canon of SCM literature since its publication and it is now a mandatory reading in many SCM master programs across the globe. In simple language, the article offers a very good introduction to the subject of social networks and relates social network concepts (e.g., ego network, node centrality, structural hole, structural equivalence) to the supply chain context. Even ten years after its publication, the article has not lost its relevance for our discipline. Last year, it was one of the ten most downloaded articles from the Journal of Supply Chain Management. The authors argue “that the network perspective has the potential to be a unifying force that can bring together many different streams of management research, including SCM, into a coherent management science perspective”. I agree.
Borgatti, S.P. & Li, X. (2009). On Social Network Analysis in a Supply Chain Context. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 45 (2), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-493X.2009.03166.x
Issues in Supply Chain Management
Lambert & Cooper’s (2000) paper Issues in Supply Chain Management has certainly been one of the most influential articles of our discipline. Herein, they presented a framework for SCM as well as questions for how it could be implemented. The framework contained a set of cross-functional, cross-organizational business processes that could be used as a way to manage relationships with customers and suppliers. The article continues to be an important cornerstone in research on the topic of integration. Now, more than fifteen years later, Lambert & Enz (2016) present an updated version, Issues in Supply Chain Management: Progress and Potential. Herein, the authors “review the progress that has been made in the development and implementation of the proposed SCM framework since 2000 and identify opportunities for further research”. Interestingly, they have changed their minds about some statements made in the 2000 article, for example that competition is no longer between companies, but between supply chains, which they now argue is not technically correct. The authors also present a revised version of the framework from 2000.
Lambert, D.M. & Cooper, M.C. (2000). Issues in Supply Chain Management. Industrial Marketing Management, 29 (1), 65-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-8501(99)00113-3
Lambert, D.M. & Enz, M.G. (2016). Issues in Supply Chain Management: Progress and Potential. Industrial Marketing Management, 62, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.12.002
Understanding and Tackling Societal Grand Challenges through SCM Research
The Academy of Management Journal’s previous editorial team defined its term with a thematic emphasis on “grand challenges”, and called for research through editorials on a wide array of topics that explored global problems including climate change, aging societies, natural resources, societal resilience, digital workforce, digital money, and gender inequality among others, as well as methodological approaches with which to tackle them. They defined a grand challenge as “specific critical barrier(s) that, if removed, would help solve an important societal problem with a high likelihood of global impact through widespread implementation”. Certainly the most widely adopted grand challenges are the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations. Another example, not mentioned by the editors, are the planetary boundaries identified by Steffen et al. (2015). Following their emphasis, what could our discipline do to better understand and tackle societal grand challenges and maybe also in a more systematic way? Do we need to renovate our thematic and methodological portfolios? Some of these AMJ editorials can certainly be an inspiration for SCM research.
George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A., & Tihanyi, L. (2016). Understanding and Tackling Societal Grand Challenges through Management Research. Academy of Management Journal, 59 (6), 1880-1895. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4007
Justice as Fairness in the Supply Chain
Among the most interesting SCM articles I have recently read is Jack et al.’s (2018) recent study, titled Accounting, Performance Measurement and Fairness in UK Fresh Produce Supply Networks. Why I highlight this study here is because this is one of the rare interpretive studies related to SCM and it could therefore serve as a blueprint for those of us who struggle with the dominance of positivist studies in our discipline. The authors build on John Rawls’ theories of justice as fairness and apply it to the supply chain relationships between suppliers and supermarkets. They then ask three questions: First, “how performance measurement, risk management and communication of accounting information are used by intermediaries in an allegedly unfair commercial environment”. Second, “the extent to which the accounting and control practices observed support perceptions that suppliers in supermarket-dominated supply networks are treated unfairly”. And third, “what accounting and control practices would be indicative of fair commercial relationships?” I wish I could see more studies like this.
Jack, L., Florez-Lopez, R., & Ramon-Jeronimo, J.M. (2018). Accounting, Performance Measurement and Fairness in UK Fresh Produce Supply Networks. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 64, 17-30 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2017.12.005
