Putting theory to work: the use of theory in construction research

Abstract

Attention to epistemology, theory use and citation practices are all issues which distinguish academic disciplines from other ways of knowing. The paper uses examples from construction research to outline and reflect on these issues. In doing so, the discussion provides an introduction to some key issues in social research as well as a reflection on the current state of construction research as a field. More specifically, the paper discusses differences between positivist and interpretivist epistemologies, the role of theory in each and their use by construction researchers. Philosophical differences are illustrated by appeal to two published construction research articles on innovation (Reichstein, Salter and Gann 2005, Harty 2008). An analysis of citations for each highlights different cumulativity strategies. The paper concludes with a discussion of the potential contribution of mixed research programmes, combining positivist and interpretivist research. The paper should be of interest to early researchers and to scholars concerned with the ongoing development of construction research as an academic field.

Exploring Third-Party Logistics and Partnering in Construction : A Supply Chain Management Perspective

“…A researcher's epistemological orientation does not have to coincide with the predominant view in the environment the research is conducted. Different epistemologies exist within a research discipline and construction is such an example (Schweber, 2016). This is especially true when the field of research is interdisciplinary.…”

“…Furthermore, two of the papers in the thesis have been co-authored by two authors and reflect both researchers' epistemological orientation. Academic research has much to gain from more multi-research agendas, combining the strengths of different epistemologies (Schweber, 2016).…”

Being careful what we wish for? Challenges and opportunities afforded through engagement with business and management research

“…The corollary of this is not that paradigmatic eclecticism should be the norm; but that there is a need perhaps for continual critical awareness and interrogation of the weaknesses as well as strengths of particular perspectives (cf. Schweber 2015). It also suggests there may be some value in continuing institutional work (Lawrence et al 2011) or praxis (Seo and Creed 2002) that can help challenge prevailing assumptions and so help ensure that research remains fresh, rigorous and relevant.…”

“…people, operations, finance), as well as major discursive differences in the forms of management knowledge that are deemed valid (cf. Schweber 2015).…”

“…Raftery et al 1997). There has also been more recent examination of the role of theory in CMR and the use of positivist and interpretivist epistemologies (Schweber 2015). However, any specific examination of fundamental the effects of institutions and institutionalization were in construction management (Kadefors 1995).…”