Two Strategies for Inductive Reasoning in Organizational Research
研究了组织研究者从经验数据得出理论结论时使用的理想化和情境化两种推理策略，帮助更有效地论证和评估，并区分方法论与政策层面的争论。
Incompleteness of inductive reasoning presents an enduring dilemma for organizational researchers. We examine two practical reasoning strategies—idealization and contextualization—that can be used at the pinnacle of this dilemma: when theoretical conclusions are drawn from empirical data. Understanding the two strategies can lead to more effective argumentation and evaluation. Appreciating the methodological incompleteness of both strategies, in turn, helps us distinguish between the methodological and the policy dimensions of organization-scientific debates.