The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An assessment of survey research in POM: from constructs to theory
Abstract
The use of field‐based empirical methodologies in the production and operations management (POM) area has been steadily increasing over the past several years. One of the most prominent among these is the survey research methodology which has often been used to capture data from business organizations. However, to effectively contribute to theory development in the POM field, this methodology must be carefully implemented. Poorly designed and executed survey research is of little or no value. This paper attempts to provide a normative perspective on ‘good survey research practices’. In doing so, it attempts to bridge the gap between survey research and theory development. The paper liberally draws from work in other social science disciplines like psychology, marketing, organizational behavior, and other related fields that are more mature in the use of surveys, and applies it to the POM area. A set of ideal survey research attributes are identified, and existing POM survey work in four prestigious academic journals is evaluated with respect to these attributes. Results of assessing 25 survey‐based articles published in these journals between 1990 and 1995 indicate that both exploratory as well as explanatory survey research is being conducted, with current emphasis being more on explanatory kind of research. In order to move the field forward, greater attention will need to be focused on employing multi‐item constructs, assessing them for content validity, and purifying them through field‐based pretesting. More sophisticated POM studies in the future would have to aim for testing theory with reliable and valid scales that are relatively free of measurement related errors. It is hoped that this work will act as a catalyst in compressing the learning curve with respect to survey research practices in POM, and also accelerate the use of greater methodological rigor in future empirical studies in the field.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549
The Practice of Social Research
Neustadtl, A., & Babbie, E. (1989) · Teaching Sociology · doi:10.2307/1318433 · Cited by 14,398
Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150783 · Cited by 12,222
Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377701400320 · Cited by 10,390
Testing Structural Equation Models.
Clogg, C. C., Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1995) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2580595 · Cited by 8,211
Foundations of Behavioral Research
Stockton, R., & Kerlinger, F. N. (1974) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.2307/1162206 · Cited by 7,347
An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment
Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378802500207 · Cited by 6,293
Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings.
Rutherford, G. S. W., Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1988) · The Statistician · doi:10.2307/2348783 · Cited by 5,830
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- 10.2307/3150876 · doi:10.2307/3150876 · Paper page
- 10.2307/3151642 · doi:10.2307/3151642 · Paper page
- Dubin R. 1978. Theory Building. Free Press New York.
- 10.2307/3172650 · DOI · Paper page
- McGrath J. 1979. Toward a theory of method for research on organizations. In: Mowday R.T. Steers R.M. (Eds.) Research in Organizations: Issues and Controversies. Goodyear Publishing Santa Monica CA pp. 4–21.
- Nunnally J.C. 1978. Psychometric Theory. McGraw‐Hill New York.
Cited by
Peng, D. X., & Lai, F. (2012) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2012.06.002 · Cited by 1,532
Stakeholder pressure and the adoption of environmental practices: The mediating effect of training
Sarkis, J., Gonzalez‐Torre, P., & Adenso‐Diaz, B. (2010) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2009.10.001 · Cited by 1,518
Wong, C. Y., Boon‐itt, S., & Wong, C. W. Y. (2011) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2011.01.003 · Cited by 1,083
Dubey, R., Gunasekaran, A., Childe, S. J., Fosso Wamba, S., Roubaud, D., & Foropon, C. (2021) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2019.1582820 · Cited by 958
Luthra, S., & Mangla, S. K. (2018) · Process Safety and Environmental Protection · doi:10.1016/j.psep.2018.04.018 · Cited by 909
Metadata
- Authors
- Malhotra, M. K., & Grover, V.
- Venue
- Journal of Operations Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-07
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 407-425
- ISSN
- 0272-6963 (ISSN-L)
- 1873-1317
- OpenAlex
- W2122983118
- Cited by
- 1,313
- References
- 27
- FWCI
- 18.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An assessment of survey research in POM: from constructs to theory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0272-6963(98)00021-7
- The paper
- Malhotra, M. K., & Grover, V. (1998). An assessment of survey research in POM: from constructs to theory. Journal of Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-6963(98)00021-7
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.