Read Online (Free) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support . We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader. With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free. Get StartedAlready have an account? Log in Monthly Plan
Yearly Plan
Log in through your institution Purchase a PDFPurchase this article for $29.00 USD. How does it work?
journal article Organizational Theories: Some Criteria for EvaluationThe Academy of Management Review Vol. 14, No. 4 (Oct., 1989) , pp. 496-515 (20 pages) Published By: Academy of Management https://doi.org/10.2307/258555 https://www.jstor.org/stable/258555 Read and download Log in through your school or library Alternate access options For independent researchers Read Online Read 100 articles/month free Subscribe to JPASS Unlimited reading + 10 downloads Purchase article $29.00 - Download now and later Abstract A set of ground rules and vocabulary to facilitate focused discussion about the structure of organization and management theories are proposed. The many previous efforts at defining and evaluating theory help establish criteria for theory construction and evaluation. In the establishment of these criteria, description is distinguished from theory, and a matrix of criteria for evaluating the variables, constructs, and relationships that together compose a theory is developed. The proposed matrix may be useful both for defining the necessary components of good theory and for evaluating and/or comparing the quality of alternative theories. Finally, a discussion of the way theories fit together to give a somewhat broader picture of empirical reality reveals the lines of tension between the two main criteria for evaluating theory. Journal Information The Academy of Management Review, now in its 26th year, is the most cited of management references. AMR ranks as one of the most influential business journals, publishing academically rigorous, conceptual papers that advance the science and practice of management. AMR is a theory development journal for management and organization scholars around the world. AMR publishes novel, insightful and carefully crafted conceptual articles that challenge conventional wisdom concerning all aspects of organizations and their role in society. The journal is open to a variety of perspectives, including those that seek to improve the effectiveness of, as well as those critical of, management and organizations. Each manuscript published in AMR must provide new theoretical insights that can advance our understanding of management and organizations. Most articles include a review of relevant literature as well. AMR is published four times a year with a circulation of 15,000. Publisher Information The Academy of Management (the Academy; AOM) is a leading professional association for scholars dedicated to creating and disseminating knowledge about management and organizations. The Academy's central mission is to enhance the profession of management by advancing the scholarship of management and enriching the professional development of its members. The Academy is also committed to shaping the future of management research and education. Founded in 1936, the Academy of Management is the oldest and largest scholarly management association in the world. Today, the Academy is the professional home for more than 18290 members from 103 nations. Membership in the Academy is open to all individuals who find value in belonging. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. Read Online (Free) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support . We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader. With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free. Get StartedAlready have an account? Log in Monthly Plan
Yearly Plan
Log in through your institution Purchase a PDFPurchase this article for $14.00 USD. How does it work?
journal article Alternative Criteria for Theory EvaluationSocial Service Review Vol. 62, No. 2 (Jun., 1988) , pp. 211-224 (14 pages) Published By: The University of Chicago Press https://www.jstor.org/stable/30011963 Read and download Log in through your school or library Alternate access options For independent researchers Read Online Read 100 articles/month free Subscribe to JPASS Unlimited reading + 10 downloads Purchase article $14.00 - Download now and later Abstract The development of a meaningful scientific framework for social work research requires an approach that reflects contemporary understandings of social scientific thought and is consistent with the values of the profession. The purpose of this article is to assist in the development of this framework by proposing new criteria for evaluating theories. These critiera are based on a social constructionist perspective of human beings and a responsiveness to social work ideology and practice. Journal Information Current issues are now on the Chicago Journals website. Read the latest issue.Founded in 1927, Social Service Review (SSR) is devoted to the publication of thought provoking, original research on pressing social issues and promising social work practices and social welfare policies. Articles in SSR analyze issues from the vantage points of a broad spectrum of disciplines, theories, and methodological traditions, at the individual, family, community, organizational, and societal levels. Publisher Information Since its origins in 1890 as one of the three main divisions of the University of Chicago, The University of Chicago Press has embraced as its mission the obligation to disseminate scholarship of the highest standard and to publish serious works that promote education, foster public understanding, and enrich cultural life. Today, the Journals Division publishes more than 70 journals and hardcover serials, in a wide range of academic disciplines, including the social sciences, the humanities, education, the biological and medical sciences, and the physical sciences. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. |
Which of the following is not a criterion for the evaluation of a theory of personality?
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 membukakan Inc.
