(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)"> (This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)">
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/stratm/v37y2016i1p116-132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Field experiments in strategy research

Author

Listed:
  • Ashish Arora
  • Michelle Gittelman
  • Sarah Kaplan
  • John Lynch
  • Will Mitchell
  • Nicolaj Siggelkow
  • Aaron K. Chatterji
  • Michael Findley
  • Nathan M. Jensen
  • Stephan Meier
  • Daniel Nielson
Abstract
Strategy research often aims to empirically establish a causal relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable such as firm performance. For many important strategy research questions, however, traditional empirical techniques are not sufficient to establish causal effects with high confidence. We propose that field experiments have potential to be used more widely in strategy research, leveraging methodological innovations from other disciplines to address persistent puzzles in the literature. We first review the advantages and disadvantages of using field experiments to answer questions in strategy. We define two types of experiments, "strategy field experiments" and "process field experiments," and present an original example of each variety. The first study explores the liability of foreignness and the second study tests theories regarding corporate culture.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Ashish Arora & Michelle Gittelman & Sarah Kaplan & John Lynch & Will Mitchell & Nicolaj Siggelkow & Aaron K. Chatterji & Michael Findley & Nathan M. Jensen & Stephan Meier & Daniel Nielson, 2016. "Field experiments in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 116-132, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:stratm:v:37:y:2016:i:1:p:116-132
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/smj.2449
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angus Deaton, 2010. "Instruments, Randomization, and Learning about Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(2), pages 424-455, June.
    2. Bruno S. Frey & Iris Bohnet, 1999. "Social Distance and Other-Regarding Behavior in Dictator Games: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 335-339, March.
    3. Nicholas Bloom & Luis Garicano & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2014. "The Distinct Effects of Information Technology and Communication Technology on Firm Organization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2859-2885, December.
    4. Duflo, Esther & Glennerster, Rachel & Kremer, Michael, 2008. "Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit," Handbook of Development Economics, in: T. Paul Schultz & John A. Strauss (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 61, pages 3895-3962, Elsevier.
    5. Lilach Nachum, 2003. "Liability of foreignness in global competition? Financial service affiliates in the city of London," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(12), pages 1187-1208, December.
    6. Lynch, John G, Jr, 1982. "On the External Validity of Experiments in Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 9(3), pages 225-239, December.
    7. Dean Karlan & Jonathan Zinman, 2009. "Observing Unobservables: Identifying Information Asymmetries With a Consumer Credit Field Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(6), pages 1993-2008, November.
    8. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    9. Zaheer, Srilata, 2002. "The liability of foreignness, redux: a commentary," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 351-358.
    10. Jens Ludwig & Jeffrey R. Kling & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2011. "Mechanism Experiments and Policy Evaluations," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(3), pages 17-38, Summer.
    11. repec:feb:artefa:0087 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Abhijit V. Banerjee & Esther Duflo, 2009. "The Experimental Approach to Development Economics," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 151-178, May.
    13. Oriana Bandiera & Iwan Barankay & Imran Rasul, 2011. "Field Experiments with Firms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(3), pages 63-82, Summer.
    14. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2007. "Estimating Risk Attitudes in Denmark: A Field Experiment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 109(2), pages 341-368, June.
    15. Levitt, Steven D. & List, John A., 2009. "Field experiments in economics: The past, the present, and the future," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Lynch, John G, Jr, 1983. "The Role of External Validity in Theoretical Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(1), pages 109-111, June.
    17. Lorenz Goette & David Huffman & Stephan Meier & Matthias Sutter, 2012. "Competition Between Organizational Groups: Its Impact on Altruistic and Antisocial Motivations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(5), pages 948-960, May.
    18. Xinshu Zhao & John G. Lynch & Qimei Chen, 2010. "Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 197-206, August.
    19. Raghuram G. Rajan & Julie Wulf, 2006. "The Flattening Firm: Evidence from Panel Data on the Changing Nature of Corporate Hierarchies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 759-773, November.
    20. Calder, Bobby J & Phillips, Lynn W & Tybout, Alice M, 1982. "The Concept of External Validity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 9(3), pages 240-244, December.
    21. Guilhem Bascle, 2008. "Controlling for endogeneity with instrumental variables in strategic management research," Post-Print hal-00576795, HAL.
    22. Robert Gibbons & Rebecca Henderson, 2012. "Relational Contracts and Organizational Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1350-1364, October.
    23. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1996. "What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 502-518, October.
    24. French, Kenneth R & Poterba, James M, 1991. "Investor Diversification and International Equity Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 222-226, May.
    25. Hutchinson, J Wesley & Kamakura, Wagner A & Lynch, John G, Jr, 2000. "Unobserved Heterogeneity as an Alternative Explanation for "Reversal" Effects in Behavioral Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(3), pages 324-344, December.
    26. Srilata Zaheer & Elaine Mosakowski, 1997. "The Dynamics Of The Liability Of Foreignness: A Global Study Of Survival In Financial Services," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(6), pages 439-463, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Brent B Allred & Michael G Findley & Daniel Nielson & J C Sharman, 2017. "Anonymous shell companies: A global audit study and field experiment in 176 countries," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(5), pages 596-619, July.
    2. Stefan Dimitriadis & Rembrand Koning, 2022. "Social Skills Improve Business Performance: Evidence from a Randomized Control Trial with Entrepreneurs in Togo," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 8635-8657, December.
    3. Vania Vigolo & Rezarta Sallaku & Federico Testa, 2018. "Drivers and Barriers to Clean Cooking: A Systematic Literature Review from a Consumer Behavior Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-21, November.
    4. Markku Maula & Wouter Stam, 2020. "Enhancing Rigor in Quantitative Entrepreneurship Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(6), pages 1059-1090, November.
    5. Meissner, Philip & Poensgen, Christian & Wulf, Torsten, 2021. "How hot cognition can lead us astray: The effect of anger on strategic decision making," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 434-444.
    6. Santiago Kopoboru & Gloria Cuevas-Rodríguez & Leticia Pérez-Calero, 2020. "Boards that Make a Difference in Firm’s Acquisitions: The Role of Interlocks and Former Politicians in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, January.
    7. Christoph Grimpe & Ulrich Kaiser & Wolfgang Sofka, 2019. "Signaling valuable human capital: Advocacy group work experience and its effect on employee pay in innovative firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 685-710, April.
    8. Vanessa C. Burbano, 2021. "The Demotivating Effects of Communicating a Social-Political Stance: Field Experimental Evidence from an Online Labor Market Platform," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 1004-1025, February.
    9. Hunt Allcott & Richard L. Sweeney, 2017. "The Role of Sales Agents in Information Disclosure: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(1), pages 21-39, January.
    10. Keding, Christoph & Meissner, Philip, 2021. "Managerial overreliance on AI-augmented decision-making processes: How the use of AI-based advisory systems shapes choice behavior in R&D investment decisions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    11. Lude, Maximilian & Prügl, Reinhard, 2021. "Experimental studies in family business research," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 12(1).
    12. Ha Ta & Terry L. Esper & Travis Tokar, 2021. "Appealing to the Crowd: Motivation Message Framing and Crowdsourcing Performance in Retail Operations," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(9), pages 3192-3212, September.
    13. Vera Ferrón‐Vílchez & Jesus Valero‐Gil & Inés Suárez‐Perales, 2021. "How does greenwashing influence managers' decision‐making? An experimental approach under stakeholder view," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 860-880, March.
    14. Heinz, Matthias & Khashabi, Pooyan & Zubanov, Nick & Kretschmer, Tobias & Friebel, Guido, 2017. "Heterogeneous Effects of Performance Pay with Market Competition: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 12474, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Rigtering, J.P.C. (Coen) & Weitzel, G.U. (Utz) & Muehlfeld, K. (Katrin), 2019. "Increasing quantity without compromising quality: How managerial framing affects intrapreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 224-241.
    16. Hönl, Andreas & Meissner, Philip & Wulf, Torsten, 2017. "Risk attribution theory: An exploratory conceptualization of individual choice under uncertainty," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 20-27.
    17. Jennifer Oetzel & Chang Hoon Oh, 2021. "A storm is brewing: Antecedents of disaster preparation in risk prone locations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(8), pages 1545-1570, August.
    18. Matthew Lee & Arzi Adbi & Jasjit Singh, 2020. "Categorical cognition and outcome efficiency in impact investing decisions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 86-107, January.
    19. Leigh McAlister, 2016. "Rigor versus method imperialism," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 565-567, September.
    20. Jasjit Singh & Nina Teng & Serguei Netessine, 2019. "Philanthropic Campaigns and Customer Behavior: Field Experiments on an Online Taxi Booking Platform," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 913-932, February.
    21. Sofia Bapna & Martin Ganco, 2021. "Gender Gaps in Equity Crowdfunding: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2679-2710, May.
    22. Felix Reimann & Tobias Kosmol & Lutz Kaufmann, 2017. "Responses to Supplier-Induced Disruptions: A Fuzzy-Set Analysis," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 53(4), pages 37-66, October.
    23. Jane W. Lu & Hao Ma & Xuanli Xie, 2022. "Foreignness research in international business: Major streams and future directions," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(3), pages 449-480, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brent B Allred & Michael G Findley & Daniel Nielson & J C Sharman, 2017. "Anonymous shell companies: A global audit study and field experiment in 176 countries," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(5), pages 596-619, July.
    2. Baldwin Kate & Bhavnani Rikhil R., 2015. "Ancillary Studies of Experiments: Opportunities and Challenges," Journal of Globalization and Development, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 113-146, June.
    3. Eric Floyd & John A. List, 2016. "Using Field Experiments in Accounting and Finance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 437-475, May.
    4. Jörg Peters & Jörg Langbein & Gareth Roberts, 2018. "Generalization in the Tropics – Development Policy, Randomized Controlled Trials, and External Validity," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 33(1), pages 34-64.
    5. Peters, Jörg & Langbein, Jörg & Roberts, Gareth, 2016. "Policy evaluation, randomized controlled trials, and external validity—A systematic review," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 51-54.
    6. Handberg, Øyvind Nystad & Angelsen, Arild, 2015. "Experimental tests of tropical forest conservation measures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 346-359.
    7. John List & Michael Price, 2013. "Using Field Experiments in Environmental and Resource Economics," Artefactual Field Experiments 00447, The Field Experiments Website.
    8. Belot, Michèle & James, Jonathan, 2016. "Partner selection into policy relevant field experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 31-56.
    9. John A. List & Michael K. Price, 2016. "Editor's Choice The Use of Field Experiments in Environmental and Resource Economics," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 206-225.
    10. Kevin J. Boudreau & Karim R. Lakhani, 2016. "Innovation Experiments: Researching Technical Advance, Knowledge Production, and the Design of Supporting Institutions," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 135-167.
    11. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
    12. Mariia I. Okuneva & Dmitriy B. Potapov, 2015. "The Effectiveness of Individual Targeting Through Smartphone Application in Retail: Evidence from Field Experiment," HSE Working papers WP BRP 47/MAN/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    13. Hasan Bakhshi & John Edwards & Stephen Roper & Judy Scully & Duncan Shaw & Lorraine Morley & Nicola Rathbone, 2013. "An Experimental Approach to Industrial Policy Evaluation: The case of Creative Credits," Research Papers 0004, Enterprise Research Centre.
    14. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
    15. Donovan, Kevin P., 2018. "The rise of the randomistas: on the experimental turn in international aid," SocArXiv xygzb, Center for Open Science.
    16. Guido Friebel & Matthias Heinz & Miriam Krueger & Nikolay Zubanov, 2017. "Team Incentives and Performance: Evidence from a Retail Chain," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(8), pages 2168-2203, August.
    17. Pedro Carneiro & Sokbae Lee & Daniel Wilhelm, 2020. "Optimal data collection for randomized control trials," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(1), pages 1-31.
    18. Majid Ahmadi & Nathan Durst & Jeff Lachman & John A. List & Mason List & Noah List & Atom T. Vayalinkal, 2022. "Nothing Propinks Like Propinquity: Using Machine Learning to Estimate the Effects of Spatial Proximity in the Major League Baseball Draft," NBER Working Papers 30786, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Bouma, J.A. & Nguyen, Binh & van der Heijden, Eline & Dijk, J.J., 2018. "Analysing Group Contract Design Using a Lab and a Lab-in-the-Field Threshold Public Good Experiment," Discussion Paper 2018-049, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    20. Delfgaauw, Josse & Dur, Robert & Non, Arjan & Verbeke, Willem, 2014. "Dynamic incentive effects of relative performance pay: A field experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 1-13.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:stratm:v:37:y:2016:i:1:p:116-132. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/0143-2095 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.