Entwicklung und Konkretisierung einer Forschungsidee

  • Jan Goldenstein
  • Michael Hunoldt
  • Peter Walgenbach
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

In diesem Kapitel werden Wege aufgezeigt, über die eine eigene Forschungsidee sowie, darauf aufbauend, konkrete Forschungsfragen entwickelt werden können. Es wird zunächst darauf eingegangen, wie Forschungsideen aus bereits erfolgten Literaturaufarbeitungen und darin identifizierten Forschungslücken gewonnen werden können. Weiterhin wird dargelegt, wie die selbstständige Aufarbeitung der vorhandenen Literatur in die Ableitung einer eigenen Forschungsidee münden kann. Schließlich wird aufgezeigt, wie aus dem Spannungsfeld zwischen praktischen Beobachtungen und theoriegeleiteten Erklärungsmustern eine Forschungsidee erwachsen kann.

Literatur

  1. Almandoz, J. (2014). Founding teams as carriers of competing logics: when institutional forces predict banks’ risk exposure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(3), 442–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Capasso, A., Gallucci, C., & Rossi, M. (2015). Standing the test of time. Does firm performance improve with age? An analysis of the wine industry. Business History, 57(7), 1037–1053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dunn, M. B., & Jones, C. (2010). Institutional logics and institutional pluralism: the contestation of care and science logics in medical education, 1967–2005. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1), 114–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Feldman, M. S., & March, J. G. (1981). Information in organizations as signal and symbol. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(2), 171–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Giambatista, R., Rowe, W. G., & Riaz, S. (2005). Nothing succeeds like succession: a critical review of leader succession literature since 1994. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(6), 963–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gil, A. J., & Carrillo, F. J. (2016). Knowledge transfer and the learning process in Spanish wineries. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 14(1), 60–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Greenwood, R., Díaz, A. M., Li, S. X., & Lorente, J. C. (2010). The multiplicity of institutional logics and the heterogeneity of organizational responses. Organization Science, 21(2), 521–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jaskiewicz, P., Combs, J. G., & Rau, S. B. (2015). Entrepreneurial legacy: toward a theory of how some family firms nurture transgenerational entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(1), 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kodeih, F., & Greenwood, R. (2014). Responding to institutional complexity: the role of identity. Organization Studies, 35(1), 7–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Loewenstein, J., Ocasio, W., & Jones, C. (2012). Vocabularies and vocabulary structure: a new approach linking categories, practices, and institutions. The Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 41–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mezias, J. M., & Starbuck, W. H. (2003). Studying the accuracy of managers’ perceptions: a research odyssey. British Journal of Management, 14(1), 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nöllke, M. (1998). Kreativitätstechniken. Planegg: STS-Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Reay, T., Jaskiewicz, P., & Hinings, C. R. (2015). How family, business, and community logics shape family firm behavior and “rules of the game” in an organizational field. Family Business Review, 28(4), 292–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Roberts, P. W., Khaire, M., & Rider, C. I. (2011). Isolating the symbolic implications of employee mobility: price increases after hiring winemakers from prominent wineries. The American Economic Review, 101(3), 147–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Scherer, J. (2010). Kreativitätstechniken: In 10 Schritten Ideen finden, bewerten, umsetzen. Offenbach: Gabal.Google Scholar
  17. Simsek, Z., Fox, B. C., & Heavey, C. (2015). “What’s past is prologue”: a framework, review, and future directions for organizational research on imprinting. Journal of Management, 41(1), 288–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Starbuck, W. H. (1992). Strategizing in the real world. International Journal of Technology Management, Special Publication on Technological Foundations of Strategic Management, 8(1/2), 77–85.Google Scholar
  19. Tosi, H., Aldag, R., & Storey, R. (1973). On the measurement of the environment: an assessment of the lawrence and Lorsch environmental uncertainty subscale. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(1), 27–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Voronov, M., De Clercq, D., & Hinings, C. R. (2013). Institutional complexity and logic engagement: an investigation of ontario fine wine. Human Relations, 66(12), 1563–1596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Goldenstein
    • 1
  • Michael Hunoldt
    • 2
  • Peter Walgenbach
    • 2
  1. 1.Lehrstuhl für ABWL/Organisation, Führung und HRMFriedrich-Schiller-Universität JenaJenaDeutschland
  2. 2.Lehrstuhl für ABWL/Organisation, Führung und HRMFriedrich-Schiller-Universität JenaJenaDeutschland

Personalised recommendations