Can you please post the following mail? Thanks!
Reminder:
Call for Papers on a Special Issue of the Review of Managerial Science
Evidence-based Strategic Management (EbSM)
Submission Deadline: March 10, 2013
Guest Editors:
Andreas Bausch, University of Giessen, Germany
Markus Fitza, Texas A&M University, USA
Background
Driven by namable advocates and programmatic publications in leading
academic and practitioner-oriented management journals (Rousseau, 2006;
Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006), evidence-based management is gaining more and more
attention. In essence, the notion of evidence-based management stands for
the need for improved decision-making quality in management practice.
Corporate decision-makers ought to improve decision-making by drawing on
best available information.
In many cases, the facts about what works are out there so why dont
managers use them? (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006).
However, evidence-based management goes beyond this claim. There has been
much debate on the knowledge-doing gap, all too often seen to be
unbridgeable (Kieser & Leiner, 2009). But what is at the core of evidence-
based management is the explicit emphasis on the need for systematic
summaries of decision-relevant research to generate evidence and actionable
knowledge. In this context, evidence means the best summary of knowledge
based on multiple sources of information. Thus, evidence in this sense goes
not only beyond individual experiences but also beyond knowledge provided by
single empirical studies (Frese et al., 2012).
Through evidence-based management, practicing managers develop into experts
who make organizational decisions informed by social science and
organizational research part of the zeitgeist moving professional
decisions away from personal preference and unsystematic experience toward
those based on the best available scientific evidence. (Rousseau, 2006).
We think it is time to let Evidence-based Strategic Management (EbSM) become
an important part of this emergent development. After four decades of
research resulting in a strong theory base which is eclectic in nature, and
yielding substantial empirical knowledge (Hoskisson et al., 1999; Nag,
Hambrick & Chen, 2007), the field of strategic management is especially
appropriate for the evidence-based approach. With several thousand primary
empirical studies there is a natural need for research synthesis. At the
same time, it can be recognized that individual studies and replications
conducted in similar areas of inquiry often produce conflicting results.
Differences, for example, in research methods, measures, samples and time
span induce some variability in the relationship of interest. Accordingly,
an integration of these studies may yield some summary conclusion and a
comprehensive view on the true nature of specific cause-and-effect
relations, including the influence of moderating variables.
In light of the need of cumulative knowledge, meta-analytical approaches
play a central role in evidence-based management. Meta-analysis is a
systematic and quantitative review of the scientific literature delivering a
valid overall picture of relationships between variables (Hunter & Schmidt,
2004). It allows us to integrate existing studies as it examines how strong
certain relationships really are and how much we can trust the
methodological rigor of a body of research. Because of this, meta-analytical
approaches can generate results of greater validity than traditional
narrative reviews and vote-counting methods.
Strategic management researchers make increasing use of meta-analysis to
quantitatively integrate entire lines of research. The number of paper
presentations at major international conferences is rising, and so is the
number of publications in high-ranked journals. With a number of more than
40 meta-analyses published on issues of strategic management such as
diversification (e.g., Palich, Cardinal & Miller, 2000; Bausch & Pils,
2009), internationalization (e.g., Bausch & Krist, 2007; Kirca et al.,
2012), innovation (e.g., Damanpour, 1991; Rosenbusch, Brinckmann & Bausch,
2011), and mergers & acquisitions (e.g., King et al., 2004; Homberg, Rost &
Osterloh, 2009), we believe to have reached a tipping point to establish
what we call Evidence-based Strategic Management (EbSM).
The goal of this special issue is to stimulate authors to further develop
EbSM to explore options and limitations in applying evidence-based
approaches from medicine and other areas to the field of Strategic
Management. The special issue will undoubtedly have a focus on meta-
analysis. However, any submission that examines how good empirical evidence
for practical and theoretical questions can be tracked, aggregated and
evaluated will be welcome.
Potential Research Questions and Contributions
We hope to spur research contributions related to how strategic management
research continues to pursue knowledge accumulation and evidence-based
approaches. The following are illustrative, rather than exhaustive research
questions that would fit very well this special issue:
What constitutes evidence in strategic management research and what
types of evidence can be differentiated?
Which meta-analytic evidence does exist regarding issues in strategy
process and strategy content research? (We encourage meta-analyses and other
systematic reviews on strategic management issues)
How can meta-analytic evidence inform evidence-based best practice
in strategic management and what are similarities and differences compared
to other forms of reviews? (We encourage contributions considering
methodological issues associated with primary and secondary empirical
research in the field of strategic management)
As randomized controlled trials (RCT) or even the review of RCTs are
the gold standard in evidence-based medicine, how is it possible to apply
intervention research? (We encourage experimental studies and vignette
studies on strategic management issues)
What methodologies can be used in evidence-based strategic
management? What can we learn from evidence-based approaches in other
fields? Does the context of strategic management require changes to the
methodology used in other fields?
Submission Instructions
The deadline for submissions is March 10, 2013. To learn more about the
Review of Managerial Science, including additional information on the
submission process, please visit the RMS website at:
www.springer.com/business+%26+management/journal/11846
More Information
For further information, please contact the special issue editors:
Andreas Bausch, University of Giessen (
andreas.bausch@wirtschaft.uni-
giessen.de)
Markus Fitza, Texas A&M University (
mfitza@mays.tamu.edu)
Or, the Editor-In-Chief of the RMS, Wolfgang Kürsten.
The RMS is published by Springer and has been founded in 2007. It is
included in the SSCI Index since 2011.
**************************************
This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.
Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.
You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch
jbunch@benedictine.edu.
Ventures HO!