Construct measurement in strategic management research: illusion or reality?

TLDR

Strategic management research has historically placed less emphasis on construct measurement than other management subfields. This study documents the state of the art of measurement in strategic management research and discusses implications for interpreting results in the field. The authors conducted a content analysis of empirical strategic management articles published in leading journals from 1998 to 2000 to assess measurement issues. Few studies discuss reliability and validity, rely on single‑indicator measures, and rarely address attenuation due to measurement error, underscoring concerns for future research. © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Abstract

Strategic management research has been characterized as placing less emphasis on construct measurement than other management subfields. In this work, we document the state of the art of measurement in strategic management research, and discuss the implications for interpreting the results of research in this field. To assess the breadth of measurement issues in the discipline, we conducted a content analysis of empirical strategic management articles published in leading journals in the period of 1998–2000. We found that few studies discuss reliability and validity issues, and empirical research in the field commonly relies on single-indicator measures. Additionally, studies rarely address the problems of attenuation due to measurement error. We close with a discussion of the implications for future research and for interpreting prior work in strategic management. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.