Theory-Building In The Field Of Management A Qualitative And Quantitative Review Of Four Decades Of Literature

We coded articles from Academy of Management Review to address three key questions: 1) what areas of study in management have featured the most impactful theory-building during the past four decades, 2) what are the tactics used by individual authors who have produced the most numerous and impactful theory-building articles, and 3) are these trends influenced by editorship? We consider a range of variables that may affect success in publishing theory-building articles, including the number of unique areas of study represented (divisions in the Academy of Management) and number of coauthors. Perhaps surprisingly, our results indicate that the more niche areas of study ranked highest in terms of citations when controlling for division size (number of total articles representing each division), with Organizations and the Natural Environment ranking the highest in overall citations. We also found that the most successful authors were those who published articles in more areas of study (i.e., the "Renaissance" approach). This effect did not hold for editors, however; those who oversaw publication of articles representing more areas of study achieved less impact for the journal during their tenure. We also uncovered an inverted U-shaped curve, with the average number of authors per article predicting number of articles and citations, such that between 2 and 3 authors appear optimal for success in terms of quantity and quality. We propose a recommended set of behaviors and interdisciplinary research questions for future theory-building efforts, targeting HRM scholars, journal editors, and junior scholars.