ALAS - PHD 201 AR #2

Queenie Marie O.
Alas September 16, 2022

PhD 201: Empirical Analysis for Business Dr. Gilbert M. Gordo
Professor
Matching Method to Paradigm in Strategy Research: Limitations of Cross-Sectional
Analysis and Some Methodological Alternatives
Purpose
Empirical research in strategic management is greatly focused on understanding the
relationships associated with structure–strategy–performance paradigm. The SSP predicts a
firm’s strategy in consideration of environmental factors. Therefore, they have established a
relationship between a firm’s competitive environment, its strategy and performance. Moreover,
how the managers’ strategic choices can influence performance. The researchers believe that
investigators have come to overuse or relied greatly on using cross-sectional method in making
assumptions that these parameters are stable across firms over time. Cross-sectional is a type of
observational study design where researchers measure the outcome of different participants or
subjects at a specific point in time. It is described as a one-time measurement of the exposure and
outcome (Setia, 2016). Despite the fact that there are firm specific aspects, the variation or issue
of parameter instability over time should also be accounted for.
Basically, there are two purposes presented in the paper. The first is to deliberate and
shed light on the limitations of the usage of cross-sectional analysis as a research method in
strategic management. The other is to find the significance of across-firm variation for strategy
research which seems to have been unnoticed. With this, the researchers seek to recommend and
adapt other methods to overcome the discussed limitations to be applied in empirical research in
strategic management for understanding of structure–strategy–performance paradigm. Their
motivation is for those involved in this particular field of study to be more consistent and reliable
in regards to the validity of their investigations.
Theoretical Argument
The paper discusses Bergh’s (1995) worry on failing to represent the time-varying effects
to highlight the true nature of the relationship of the aspects being investigated. It goes the same
for the concerns of Rumelt (1991) on the reliance of a single year of data for testing and
interpretations is a great issue. Bergh (1995;1967) has also raised concern on his review of
empirical research that researchers have failed to include time related change either as a
component or factor. They both emphasize that there are certain variations going on yearly and
that the results can change depending on the time period studied. Therefore, using a single year’s
data is not reliable to cover the true relationship of the study.
The conceptual framework of the study is to discuss and compare other research
strategies such as regression analysis and pooled data analysis. The data collected analyzed and
presented to not just support the assumptions and theories but also to provide recommendations
on how empirical research in strategic management can be improved for consistency and
accuracy.
Methodology
This research was done through synthesizing evidences in a very detailed and extensive
manner based on the work of Lockwood et al (2015) or secondary research method. It is a
qualitative research synthesis for a methodological direction. The authors used references such as
existing research, surveys, books, journals and scholarly articles related to strategic management.
These evidences gathered from different sources were used to be repurposed in their endeavor to
provide an alternative perspective in the subject. There were not just synthesis but also an
overview, illustration and analysis of data and variables to compare results for the conclusion.
The paper examined the analytical and statistical issues in a cross-sectional regression
framework when model parameters vary across firms or over time.
Findings and Contributions

Highlight key findings
The results of the paper backed up the concerns of Bergh and Rumelt, as well as other
mentioned authors and theorists on the reliance of empirical research in strategic management
and their failure to address time-related concerns. It is found that adapting analytical methods
that use pooled time-series and cross-sectional data can help overcome these apprehensions and
limitations.
Research is significant to strategic management. It allows firms and businesses to identify
problems, challenges and issues and insight on actual data that can allow them to make smart and
informed decisions on their long term strategy. However, the purpose of this research can help
firms and researchers realize that these data can change over time. Therefore, their strategy must
be updated as well. If they rely on outdated information, then it may hold them back from
growing as an organization.
Critic: Problems, Limitation and Future Extensions

This theoretical paper is interesting as it does not attempt to discredit the issue but the
researchers are working on how to improve it. The assumptions are plausible in the sense that
theories were not just simply put together to form another theory. The paper presented various
facts including numerical data to reinforce their assumptions. It is also further analyzed and
presented. how interesting and useful is this theory? Are the assumptions plausible? Are the
hypotheses/propositions testable? Does it explain the observed phenomena? For an empirical
paper, how do you find the findings and results? Are the findings novel and interesting? Is the
theory developed? Are there any issues that should have been settled in the paper? How could
the paper be improved?
Additional Sources:
Setia M. S. (2016). Methodology Series Module 3: Cross-sectional Studies. Indian
journal of dermatology, 61(3), 261–264. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5154.182410
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4885177/#:~:text=Cross%2Dsectional%
20study%20design%20is,participants%20at%20the%20same%20time.
Lockwood, C., Munn, Z., & Porritt, K. (2015). Qualitative research synthesis:
Methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation. International
Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13(3), 179–187.
https://journals.lww.com/ijebh/Fulltext/2015/09000/Qualitative_research_synthesis__methodolo
gical.10.aspx

ALAS - PHD 201 AR #2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ALAS - PHD 201 AR #2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ALAS - PHD 201 AR #2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Queenie Marie O.

Alas September 16, 2022

Findings and Contributions

Critic: Problems, Limitation and Future Extensions

You might also like