Construct Objectification and De-Objectification in Organization Theory
Research output: Contributions to collected editions/works › Contributions to collected editions/anthologies › Research
Standard
Thinking Organization. ed. / Alison Linstead; Stephen Linstead. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2005. p. 112-135.
Research output: Contributions to collected editions/works › Contributions to collected editions/anthologies › Research
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - Construct Objectification and De-Objectification in Organization Theory
AU - McKinley, William
PY - 2005
Y1 - 2005
N2 - In the past decade, organizational scholars have devoted considerable attention to an epistemological analysis of the constructs that populate their discipline. For example, Osigweh (1989) noted the lack of precision in many organization theory constructs and identified the phenomena of “concept traveling” and “concept stretching” as important issues. Law et al. (1998) presented a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs, classifying them by the way in which individual dimensions relate to the overall domain of the construct. For example, they pointed out that multidimensional constructs can conform to a latent model, in which case their dimensions are all manifestations of a more general underlying construct; an aggregate model, in which case individual dimensions sum to define the domain of the construct; or a profile model, in which case interactions between dimensions define specific parts of the construct domain. In a similar type of analysis, Morgeson and Hofmann (1999) described the structure and function of “collective constructs,” arguing that this type of construct emerges from interactions between members of a collectivity.
AB - In the past decade, organizational scholars have devoted considerable attention to an epistemological analysis of the constructs that populate their discipline. For example, Osigweh (1989) noted the lack of precision in many organization theory constructs and identified the phenomena of “concept traveling” and “concept stretching” as important issues. Law et al. (1998) presented a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs, classifying them by the way in which individual dimensions relate to the overall domain of the construct. For example, they pointed out that multidimensional constructs can conform to a latent model, in which case their dimensions are all manifestations of a more general underlying construct; an aggregate model, in which case individual dimensions sum to define the domain of the construct; or a profile model, in which case interactions between dimensions define specific parts of the construct domain. In a similar type of analysis, Morgeson and Hofmann (1999) described the structure and function of “collective constructs,” arguing that this type of construct emerges from interactions between members of a collectivity.
KW - Management studies
M3 - Contributions to collected editions/anthologies
SN - 9780415333641
SN - 9780415488013
SP - 112
EP - 135
BT - Thinking Organization
A2 - Linstead, Alison
A2 - Linstead, Stephen
PB - Routledge Taylor & Francis Group
ER -