The DOI matches its Crossref record; 114 of the 114 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inductive Top-Down Theorizing: A Source of New Theories of Organization
Abstract
Building on coherence theory and a pragmatist tradition, we offer an inductive model of top-down theorizing that can be a source of new theories of organization. We explain how an initial hypothesis is refined to enhance its potential contribution (consistent with abduction). But, unlike abduction, we explain how inquiry begins— how research tensions are carved out of the flux of the vast literature—and how constant comparison facilitates an abductive process.
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
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
Wagner, H. R., Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2575405 · Cited by 46,361
Case Study Research: Design and Methods
Chaiklin, H. (1991) · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/00005053-199102000-00025 · Cited by 39,535
The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learning organization
Senge, P. M. (1991) · Performance + Instruction · doi:10.1002/pfi.4170300510 · Cited by 20,060
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2007.24160888 · Cited by 16,670
Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory
Wuetherick, B. (2010) · Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education · doi:10.21225/d5g01t · Cited by 8,311
(1993) · Cited by 7,856
Organizing and the process of sensemaking
Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0133 · Cited by 6,943
Self-citationContingency, Irony, and Solidarity
Rorty, R. (1989) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804397 · Cited by 6,740
Modeling the Shape of the Scene: A Holistic Representation of the Spatial Envelope
Oliva, A., & Torralba, A. (2001) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1023/a:1011139631724 · Cited by 6,319
Cited by
Best-practice recommendations for defining, identifying, and handling outliers
Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Joo, H. (2013) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428112470848 · Cited by 1,341
Schnackenberg, A. K., & Tomlinson, E. C. (2016) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314525202 · Cited by 762
The Lean Startup Framework: Closing the Academic–Practitioner Divide
Shepherd, D. A., & Gruber, M. (2021) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/1042258719899415 · Cited by 459
Self-citationAn Ounce of Prevention Is Worth a Pound of Cure: Improving Research Quality Before Data Collection
Aguinis, H., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2014) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091231 · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Shepherd, D. A., & Sutcliffe, K. M.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Review
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2011-04
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 361-380
- ISSN
- 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3807
- OpenAlex
- W1993964954
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 114
- FWCI
- 74.66
- 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: Inductive Top-Down Theorizing: A Source of New Theories of Organization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5465/amr.2009.0157
- The paper
- Shepherd, D. A., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2011). Inductive Top-Down Theorizing: A Source of New Theories of Organization. Academy of Management Review. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0157
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.
