Building an Empirical Body of Evidence: Developing Rapport With Reviewers and Overcoming Skepticism in Strategic Management Research

Abstract

As the field of strategic management has evolved, expectations for the empirical evidence presented in manuscripts have risen substantially. Rather than a single model testing a hypothesis with a p-value below a standard threshold being sufficient, reviewers, editors, and eventual readers now demand additional evidence including multiple tests, advanced statistical models, alternative specifications, interpretation of practical rather than just statistical significance, and more. Reviewers appear to be increasingly skeptical and often raise a seemingly endless number of questions. In this chapter, I outline the idea of a body of evidence and suggest ways authors can build their evidence by anticipating reviewer questions and structuring manuscripts accordingly. Doing so allows authors to overcome skepticism by building positive rapport and trust with reviewers and the ultimate readers of their work. I conclude by discussing the review process where I offer suggestions about how reviewers and editors might adapt to this changing landscape. I specifically argue that all studies are flawed. Rather than asking for a single study to do more to address small inconsistencies or puzzling results, I suggest gatekeepers in the review process should consider the possibility that publishing and allowing research conversations to flourish might result in greater knowledge generation over time.

Citation

Quigley, T.J. (2024), "Building an Empirical Body of Evidence: Developing Rapport With Reviewers and Overcoming Skepticism in Strategic Management Research", O'Kane, P., Busenbark, J.R., McKenny, A.F. and Paroutis, S. (Ed.) Delving Deep (Research Methodology in Strategy and Management, Vol. 15), Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-838720240000015001