Embrace•Perform•Model: Complexity Theory, Contrarian Case Analysis, and Multiple Realities
dc.contributor.author | Woodside, Arch | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-01-30T13:50:23Z | |
dc.date.available | 2017-01-30T13:50:23Z | |
dc.date.created | 2015-07-16T06:21:50Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2014 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Woodside, A. 2014. Embrace•Perform•Model: Complexity Theory, Contrarian Case Analysis, and Multiple Realities. Journal of Business Research. 67 (12): pp. 2495-2503. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/35555 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.07.006 | |
dc.description.abstract |
This essay describes tenets of complexity theory including the precept that within the same set of data X relates to Y positively, negatively, and not at all. A consequence to this first precept is that reporting how X relates positively to Y with and without additional terms in multiple regression models ignores important information available in a data set. Performing contrarian case analysis indicates that cases having low X with high Y and high X with low Y occur even when the relationship between X and Y is positive and the effect size of the relationship is large. Findings from contrarian case analysis support the necessity of modeling multiple realities using complex antecedent configurations. Complex antecedent configurations (i.e., 2 to 7 features per recipe) can show that high X is an indicator of high Y when high X combines with certain additional antecedent conditions (e.g., high A, high B, and low C)-. and low X is an indicator of high Y as well when low X combines in other recipes (e.g., high A, low R, and high S), where A, B, C, R, and S are additional antecedent conditions. Thus, modeling multiple realities-configural analysis-is necessary, to learn the configurations of multiple indicators for high Y outcomes and the negation of high Y. For a number of X antecedent conditions, a high X may be necessary for high Y to occur but high X alone is almost never sufficient for a high Y outcome. | |
dc.publisher | Elsevier | |
dc.subject | Model | |
dc.subject | Antecedent | |
dc.subject | Contrarian case | |
dc.subject | FsQCA | |
dc.subject | Configuration | |
dc.subject | Necessary | |
dc.title | Embrace•Perform•Model: Complexity Theory, Contrarian Case Analysis, and Multiple Realities | |
dc.type | Journal Article | |
dcterms.source.volume | 67 | |
dcterms.source.number | 12 | |
dcterms.source.startPage | 2495 | |
dcterms.source.endPage | 2503 | |
dcterms.source.issn | 0148-2963 | |
dcterms.source.title | Journal of Business Research | |
curtin.accessStatus | Open access |