I want assistance in developing criteria for evaluating a management theory and systems thinking theory. Here are the guidelines:
Proposed Guidelines for Developing Evaluation Criteria:
Problem 1. Identify the theory and its context: What is the theory and where does it fit in the context of existing research?
Problem 2. Examine the Method: How did the author or researcher develop the theory? For example:
a) Does the theory build on existing theoretical frameworks?
b) Was the theory grounded in research? If so, what method was used, and does that method seem credible? [See p. 685 of the Denyer and Tranfield chapter for a list of questions on methodology.]
c) What are the assumptions underpinning the theory? Is it possible to test and challenge the theory and any assumptions underpinning the theory?
Problem 3. Examine Support for the Theory: Is there empirical validity to support the theory?
a) Has other research supported the theory?
b) Has any research attempted to falsify the theory? Was the attempt successful? If so, does this undermine the theory?
Problem 4. Examine the Credibility of the Theory: Does the theory provide a relatively understandable explanation?
a) Does believability require a "leap of faith" on the part of the reader? How so?
b) Does the theory add new insight to our current understanding of behavior? Or is the theory largely a reiteration of previous work?
c) Conversely: Does it build on previous theory? If so, how does this affect the credibility (/ believability) of the theory?
Problem 5. Examine the Researcher: What are the credentials of the author or researcher who developed the theory?
a) In what context did the researcher function? For example, when did he or she develop the theory? What was the researcher/author's professional background? And is this relevant to the theory that was developed? How so?
b) What was going on in the environment in which the author functioned at the time (or closely preceding) the theory development?
c) Did the researcher/author bring a particular perspective to the theory? In what way?
d) How has the researcher been viewed by his or her peers?