Theoretical perspectives in operations management: An analysis of the literature

Abstract

Purpose
– It is important to advance operations management (OM) knowledge while being mindful of the theoretical developments of the discipline. The purpose of this paper is to explore which theoretical perspectives have dominated the OM field. This analysis allows the authors to identify theory trends and gaps in the literature and to identify fruitful areas for future research. A reflection on theory is also practical, given that it guides research toward important questions and enlightens OM practitioners.

Design/methodology/approach
– The authors provide an analysis of OM theory developments in the last 30 years. The study encompasses three decades of OM publications across three OM journals and contains an analysis of over 3,000 articles so as to identify which theories, over time, have been adopted by authors in order to understand OM topics.

Findings
– The authors find that the majority of studies are atheoretical, empirical, and focussed upon theory testing rather than on theory development. Some theories, such as the resource-based view and contingency theory, have an enduring relevance within OM. The authors also identify theories from psychology, economics, sociology, and organizational behavior that may, in the future, have salience to explain burgeoning OM research areas such as servitization and sustainability.

Research limitations/implications
– The study makes a novel contribution by exploring which main theories have been adopted or developed in OM, doing so by systematically analyzing articles from the three main journals in the field (the Journal of Operations Management, Production and Operations Management , and the International Journal of Operations and Production Management ), which encompass three decades of OM publications. In order to focus the study, the authors may have missed important OM articles in other journals.

Practical implications
– A reflection on theories is important because theories inform how a researcher or practicing manager interprets and solves OM problems. This study allows the authors to reflect on the collective OM journey to date, to spot trends and gaps in the literature, and to identify fruitful areas for future research.

Originality/value
– As far as the authors are aware, there has not been an assessment of the main theoretical perspectives in OM. The research also identifies which topics are published in OM journals, and which theories are adopted to investigate them. The authors also reflect on whether the most cited papers and those winning best paper awards are theoretical. This gives the authors a richer understanding of the current state of OM research.

Full text

International Journal of Operations & Production Management
Theoretical perspectives in operations management: an analysis of the literature
Helen Walker Daniel Chicksand Zoe Radnor Glyn Watson
Article information:
To cite this document:
Helen Walker Daniel Chicksand Zoe Radnor Glyn Watson , (2015),"Theoretical perspectives
in operations management: an analysis of the literature", International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 35 Iss 8 pp. 1182 - 1206
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-02-2014-0089
Downloaded on: 15 July 2015, At: 04:14 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 105 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 76 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Roberta S. Russell, Dana M. Johnson, Sheneeta W White, (2015),"Patient perceptions of quality:
analyzing patient satisfaction surveys", International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 35 Iss 8 pp. 1158-1181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-02-2014-0074
Tun-Chih Kou, Bruce C. Y. Lee, Chiou-Fong Wei, (2015),"The role of product lean launch in customer
relationships and performance in the high-tech manufacturing industry", International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, Vol. 35 Iss 8 pp. 1207-1223 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/
IJOPM-08-2013-0397
Jing Shi, Ergin Erdem, Yidong Peng, Peter Woodbridge, Christopher Masek, (2015),"Performance
analysis and improvement of a typical telephone response system of VA hospitals: A discrete event
simulation study", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 35 Iss 8
pp. 1098-1124 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-01-2014-0016
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by
Token:JournalAuthor:69661B37-CCEB-42F4-8494-3E34A6154E27:
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

*Related content and download information correct at time of
download.
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Theoretical perspectives in
operations management: an
analysis of the literature
Helen Walker
Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
Daniel Chicksand
Aston Business School, Aston University, Birmingham, UK
Zoe Radnor
School of Business and Economics, Loughborough University,
Loughborough, UK, and
Glyn Watson
Birmingham Business School,
University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
Abstract
Purpose –It is important to advance operations management (OM) knowledge while being mindful of
the theoretical developments of the discipline. The purpose of this paper is to explore which theoretical
perspectives have dominated the OM field. This analysis allows the authors to identify theory trends
and gaps in the literature and to identify fruitful areas for future research. A reflection on theory
is also practical, given that it guides research toward important questions and enlightens
OM practitioners.
Design/methodology/approach –The authors provide an analysis of OM theory developments in
the last 30 years. The study encompasses three decades of OM publications across three OM journals
and contains an analysis of over 3,000 articles so as to identify which theories, over time, have been
adopted by authors in order to understand OM topics.
Findings –The authors find that the majority of studies are atheoretical, empirical, and focussed upon
theory testing rather than on theory development. Some theories, such as the resource-based view and
contingency theory, have an enduring relevance within OM. The authors also identify theories from
psychology, economics, sociology, and organizational behavior that may, in the future, have salience to
explain burgeoning OM research areas such as servitization and sustainability.
Research limitations/implications –The study makes a novel contribution by exploring which
main theories have been adopted or developed in OM, doing so by systematically analyzing articles
from the three main journals in the field (the Journal of Operations Management,Production and
Operations Management, and the International Journal of Operations and Production Management),
which encompass three decades of OM publications. In order to focus the study, the authors may have
missed important OM articles in other journals.
Practical implications –A reflection on theories is important because theories inform how a
researcher or practicing manager interprets and solves OM problems. This study allows the authors to
reflect on the collective OM journey to date, to spot trends and gaps in the literature, and to identify fruitful
areas for future research.
Originality/value –As far as the authors are aware, there has not been an assessment of the main
theoretical perspectives in OM. The research also identifies which topics are published in OM journals,
and which theories are adopted to investigate them. The authors also reflect on whether the most cited
papers and those winning best paper awards are theoretical. This gives the authors a richer
understanding of the current state of OM research.
Keywords Operations management, Literature review, Theory
Paper type Literature review
International Journal of Operations
& Production Management
Vol. 35 No. 8, 2015
pp. 1182-1206
© Emerald Group PublishingLimited
0144-3577
DOI 10.1108/IJOPM-02-2014-0089
Received 27 February 2014
Revised 16 May 2014
17 July 2014
Accepted 8 September 2014
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0144-3577.htm
1182
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

1. Introduction
The field of operations management (OM) has developed as an academic discipline in the last
30 years, as can be observed by the growing number of academic journals and articles that
focus on it. During this time, some theories have been developed among OM researchers
to explain aspects of OM. Some theories have been borrowed from other disciplines such
as economics, psychology, and sociology, in order to further our understanding of OM. This
research explores theoretical developments in the OM discipline by analyzing the theories
adopted or developed by authors in three OM journals.
In the first year that the Journal of Operations Management (JOM) launched, it was
observed that “OM research does not draw upon management theory to any noticeable
degree”(Chase, 1980). Over the years, it seems that OM research has increasingly drawn
from management theory and from other sources, given that “[…] there is increasing
recognition of the benefit to be gained from exploring contemporary operations practice
through alternative lenses and frameworks”(Taylor and Taylor, 2009). We provide a
systematic literature analysis of theory use in the OM field over the past 30 years.
This research attempts to answer three key research questions:
RQ1. Which theories have been developed or adopted in OM research?
RQ2. Which theories are adopted most widely in OM?
RQ3. To which topics have theories been applied in OM research?
This paper makes several contributions. First, the study makes a novel contribution by
exploring which main theories have been adopted or developed in OM, doing so by
systematically analyzing articles from the three main journals in the field (the JOM,
Production and Operations Management (POM), and the International Journal of
Operations and Production Management (IJOPM)), which encompass over three decades
of OM publications. To date, as far as we are aware, there has not been an assessment of
the main theoretical perspectives in OM. Second, the research identifies which topics are
published in OM journals, and which theories are adopted to investigate them. This gives
us a richer understanding of the current state of OM research.
This paper is structured as follows. The theoretical trends in OM are debated first.
The method for the study is described next, including details of the data-collection
process. The findings are then presented, including descriptions of the main theories
identified and of the pattern of theories over time. A discussion follows that reflects on
theoretical contributions in OM. The conclusion explains the implications of the study for
future research and for theory development in OM.
2. Literature review
2.1 What is a theory?
Theory has been described by Gioia and Pitre (1990) as “a coherent description,
explanation and representation of observed or experienced phenomena”(p. 587), and by
Bacharach (1989) as “a statement of relations among concepts within a set of boundary
assumptions and constraints. It is no more than a linguistic device used to organize a
complex empirical world”(p. 496).
Theories help us make sense of the world around us. They can serve a function beyond
description, in that they allow us to predict the nature of relationships between
phenomena. The phenomena of interest in OM might be topics (as we refer to them in this
paper) that have a practical relevance, such as production management, inventory control,
or supply chain management (SCM). We seek to understand such topics more effectively
1183
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

by viewing them through a theoretical lens. Sometimes theories come from a new idea
or metaphor that leads to the development of a conceptual model, which, in turn, helps to
better explain the topic. This is also termed “theory building”(Colquitt and Zapata-Phelan,
2007). Sometimes theories that are already established are applied in a new way or context
in order to help understand a topic, which is termed “theory testing.”
Distinctions can be made between what theory is and what theory is not (Bacharach,
1989). Table I has guided our data collection of theories in OM journals. There is
a difference between the primary goal of description, which is to answer “What”
research questions, and the primary goal of theory, which is to answer “How,”“Why,”
and “When”questions. Bacharach’s distinctions have helped us to assess which
theories used in the OM field are theories and which are, instead, descriptions of
phenomena and thus might be precursors to theory development. We do, however,
acknowledge that it is inherently difficult to define theory. For example, although it is
widely agreed that theory has predictive capabilities, Amundson (1998) argued that it
is still possible to devise “predictive models, with strong forecasting abilities that are
not viewed as theories”(p. 343).
Our aim in this paper is not to review how theories are developed and tested, which is
done excellently elsewhere (Bacharach, 1989; Dubin, 1978; Kaplan, 1964; Van de Ven, 1989;
Whetten, 1989). Nor is our aim to conduct a literature review for a single OM topic
or theory as has been done previously, such as the strategic role of operations from a
Explanation Examples from OM
What theory is “A statement of relationships between
units observed or approximated in the
empirical world. Approximated units
mean constructs, which by their very
nature cannot be observed directly (e.g.
centralization, satisfaction, or culture).
Observed units mean variables, which
are operationalized empirically by
measurement”(Bacharach, 1989, p. 498)
For example, resource-based view
(Barney, 1991; Wernerfelt, 1984)
suggests that a firm’s resources and
competencies affect its competitive
position and organizational performance
What theory is not Description of objects or events:
description can be grounds for theory
building. Examples of description
include:
Categorization (What are the
phenomena?)
For example, purchasing portfolio model
(Kraljic, 1983) distinguishes between
different categories of purchased
products and services, depending on
their strategic important and supply risk
Typologies (What is the most
important aspect of the
phenomenon?)
For example, manufacturing strategy
(Hayes and Wheelright, 1984; Skinner,
1969) is a typology of competitive
priorities including quality, speed,
dependability, flexibility, and cost
Metaphors (How is the phenomenon
similar to another, often unrelated,
phenomenon?). Can lead to theory
building
For example, metaphor of comparing
organizations as a “system,”was
developed into systems theory
(Checkland, 1981)
Source: Adapted from Bacharach (1989)
Table I.
What is theory?
1184
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

resource dependency theory perspective (Lillis and Lane, 2007), a consideration of supply
structures (Webster, 2002) or performance measurement (Bititci et al., 2012).
Our aim is to look at the range of theories across the OM field. This study falls into
what Bacharach (1989) would describe as a descriptive categorization of OM theories.
We are particularly interested in which theories are most commonly adopted, whether
some theories have endured for a long time, and whether other theories are more transient.
2.2 The development and adoption of theories in OM
Many authors have reflected on the state of theory in OM. The general view tends to be
that theory development is emerging within the discipline (Flynn et al., 1990; Melnyk
and Handfield, 1998; Schroeder, 2008), although some OM researchers may have
“theory envy”of more mature fields of inquiry (Schmenner and Swink, 1998). In 1998,
Schmenner and Swink (1998) debated about whether OM had theories of its own. In
total, 11 years later, in 2009, when considering whether theory in the field had
advanced, they were “underwhelmed”at the progress made to date (Schmenner et al.,
2009).
OM as a discipline lacks a strong theoretical base. Westbrook (1994) stated, “OM
remains a subject with a poor conceptual base, and theory building through empirical
research methods will become an increasingly important strand of OM research
activity in future years”(p. 22). It seems that this view was echoed by Schmenner
and Swink (1998) when they wrote, “[…] operations management suffers in at least
some quarters because there is no recognized theory on which it rests or for which it
is famous”(p. 97). It could be argued that OM lacks theoretical foundations because it is
an applied discipline that addresses practical problems. However, theories can
be quite practical (Van de Ven, 1989), and good theory “advances knowledge in a
discipline, guides research towards crucial questions, and enlightens the profession”
(p. 486).
Sometimes, researchers tend to borrow from other theoretical perspectives rather than
“reinvent the wheel.”To counter the lack of theoretical development in the field, OM
researchers appear to have been theoretical magpies, seeing shiny theories in other
disciplines and stealing them for the OM nest. It has been argued that OM researchers
have imported theories that are “transplant”(Melnyk and Handfield, 1998) or “alien”
(Amundson, 1998) from other disciplines, and our study investigates the extent to which
this occurs. It has been suggested that the disciplines most commonly drawn on by
management academics are economics and sociology (Adner et al., 2009). The importing
of theory may be appropriate given the lack of an established base of theory and given
the early stage of theory building within the field, which is, in part, due to its relatively
new tradition of field-based empirical research (Flynn et al.,1990).
Within the management discipline, other fields influence and are influenced by OM
(Schroeder, 2007). OM draws on theories from related fields, including finance,
management science, organizational behavior, marketing, and strategy (Melnyk and
Handfield, 1998; Schroeder, 2007). This makes sense because real-world management
problems often do not belong to a single discipline but are inter-disciplinary in nature
(Amundson, 1998; Van de Ven, 2007).
Some scholars have argued that it is healthy for a discipline to develop a plurality of
theories, all competing to explain a given phenomenon (Van de Ven, 1989). Others have
argued against the proliferation of theories (Kaplan, 1964) and state that it is necessary
to develop a single strong paradigm in order to speed up the scientific understanding of
managerial behavior (Pfeffer, 1993).
1185
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

We would argue in favor of a plurality of theoretical perspectives in OM and that there
is no need to tear down existing OM theories merely to be replaced by others (Schmenner
et al., 2009). Instead, the OM community should strive to either develop or import new
theoretical perspectives if they provide a more compelling explanation of OM problems.
3. Methodology
3.1 Journal choice
A review panel of four OM academics was established to design the method for data
collection. Three journals were chosen from which we would find evidence to answer the
research questions. These were the JOM,POM, and the IJOPM. The review panel chose
the three journals for the following reasons:
(1) Highly ranked: these journals are classified in the field of “operations and
technology management,”as identified by the Association of Business Schools’
journal-quality list (Harvey et al., 2010). All are ranked as Grade 3 (“highly regarded
journals”)andGrade4(“top journals in the field”) journals. It has been suggested
that top-ranked journals should communicate, diffuse, and archive scholarly
knowledge more effectively than other journals ( Judge et al., 2007; Linderman and
Chandrasekaran, 2010).
(2) Specialist OM journals: it is acknowledged that other journals (e.g. Strategic
Management Journal,Administrative Science Quarterly,Academy of Management
Journal,Management Science) also feature occasional articles from the field of
OM. However, these journals are general management journals more than they
are specifically OM journals. A Scopus database search for “operations
management”articles confirmed that the top three journals are POM,theIJOPM,
and the JOM. Previous research has also analyzed these journals in order to
assess contemporary OM research topics (Barman et al., 1991; Pilkington and
Meredith, 2009; Wacker, 1998).
(3) Practical reasons: because we wanted to analyze articles beginning from each
journal’s inception, it would only be possible to complete three full-journal reviews,
given the time, and resource constraints. The JOM commenced in 1980, the IJOPM
in 1980, and POM in 1992. Articles were analyzed from 1980 to 2013. Of the 3,475
articles analyzed, 948 were from the JOM, 1,782 were from the IJOPM, and 745 were
from POM.
3.2 Developing the coding structure
First, categories were identified from a review of the literature and from in-depth
discussions by the review panel. As highlighted in Table II, the aim was to collect rich
data about every article. Information for each category was recorded in detail, including
the method of data collection, whether a conceptual model was developed, the topic
(from keywords or title), and the dominant theory.
The review panel discussed theories and their likelihood of arising across these OM
journals and generated a list of fifteen main theories that could be used to code the articles,
guided by the categorization of theory that we developed from Bacharach (1989). The
theories were agency theory, behavioral theories, contingency theory, equity theory, game
theory, goal systems theory, industrial organizational theory, property rights theory,
queuing theory, RBV, resource dependence theory, systems theory, theory of constraints,
theory of swift even flow, and transaction cost theory. If the theory underpinning an
1186
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Journal Year Volume Issue Method Topic
Literature review
length in pages
Conceptual
model
Dominant
theory
I“other,”what
theory? Country Sector
JOM 1980 1 1 Survey Planning and
control
2+Y Contingency
theory
USA Manufacturing
JOM 1980 1 1 Conceptual Productive system
performance
2+Y Other Expectancy
equity
USA Manufacturing
JOM 1980 1 1 Lit. Review OM 2+Y None None None
JOM 1980 1 2 Simulation MRP 0 Y None None Manufacturing
JOM 1980 1 2 Simulation Fuel utilization 0 N None None Metals and
minerals
Note: Not all categories listed
Table II.
Data analysis table
1187
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

article was not on the list, it was added to an “other theory”columnanddescribedbythe
researcher. In this way, we had a dual strategy of categorizing from a list of key theories
while also allowing unlisted theories to emerge from the data.
3.3 Coding the articles
Each article was subject to content analysis by visually scanning the entire document for
discussions of theory and conceptual frameworks. Data were recorded in an Excel
spreadsheet. The panel and an additional four OM researchers coded the papers
independently. To ensure inter-rater reliability, researchers went through an initial joint-
learning period. Samples of coded papers were swapped and re-coded by members of the
research team to see if there was agreement. The lead researcher randomly chose
a sample of papers from each researcher, coded them independently, and then discussed
any further anomalies with the researchers. After this process, the inter-rater reliability
of coding using the categories was found to be 79 percent, which is an acceptable level of
agreement (Carey et al., 1996).
Articles were scanned for any discussions of theory, usually found in the literature
review or front part of the article. If the article was available electronically as a Portable
Document Format (PDF) file, an additional search for theory was conducted by typing
“theory”and “theoretical”into Adobe Reader’s“Find”search bar. Instances in which one
theory was dominant were recorded, and where several theories were combined in a study,
we attempted to identify the dominant theory in the collection, if possible, and recorded the
additional theories.
4. Findings
4.1 Which theories have been developed or adopted in OM research?
The majority of early articles across all three journals are atheoretical, focussing on
describing practical issues.
This is illustrated in Figure 1 and Table III, which show that as the number of articles
containing a dominant theory has increased over time, there have also been more articles
that contain a conceptual model and proportionally fewer atheoretical articles.
Table III gives details of the theoretical analysis. Out of the articles analyzed, 54
percent are not underpinned by one specific theory and do not develop a conceptual
model. Some authors develop their own conceptual models from the literature
(31 percent). Articles that do develop new conceptual models may be more influential
and more likely to be cited ( Judge et al., 2007) in the OM field.
Tables III and IV summarize the nineteen most prevalent theories in OM journals
during the period 1980-2013, which represents 15 percent of all articles. Table III shows
% of articles with theory
100
60
80
20
0
40
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
% of articles with conceptual
model
% of articles with no theory or
conceptual model
Figure 1.
Theoretical content
of OM articles in
POM,IJOPM, and
JOM (1980-2013)
1188
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Year
Resource-
based
view
Industrial
organizational
theory
Contingency
theory
Queuing
theory
Transaction
cost theory
Game
theory
Resource
dependency
theory
Theory of
constraints
Goal
systems
theory
Institutional
theory
Systems
theory
Property
rights theory
Social
exchange
theory
Behavioral
theory
1980 1
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986 1 1
1987 2 1 1 1 1 1
1988 1 1 11
1989 12
1990 1 1 2
1991 3 1 2 1
1992 2 1 1 1
1993 1 1 1
1994 2 1 1
1995 1 1 1 1
1996 1 2 1 1 3 1 2
1997 1 1 1 3
1998 1 1 1 2 2 3
1999 4 7 6 2 2 1 2
2000 1 1 4 2 2 3
2001 4 3 2 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1
2002 1 6 4 2 1 2 5 2 1 1
2003 8 4 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 2 1
2004 2 2 2 1 7 1 2 1
2005 2 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1
2006 3 3 3 1 2 3 2 1 1 1 3 4
2007 3 3 4 5 7 4 4 1 3 3 1
2008 6 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1
2009 1 1 1 4 2 1
2010 2 2 1 1 3 3 1
2011 1 3 1 1 1
2012 1 2 1 4
2013 1 3 1 1 1 1 1
Total (n)52 42 42 29 29 28 27 18 17 16 14 9 9 9
Total (%) 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2
(continued )
Table III.
Theoretical content
of OM articles in
POM,IJOPM, and
JOM (1980-2013)
1189
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Year
Control
theory
Network
theory
Equity
theory
Agency
theory
Theory of
swift even
flow
Other
theories (in
under five
articles)
Total theory
articles (n)
Total
theory
articles
(%)
No theory
but
conceptual
model (n)
No theory
but
conceptual
model (%)
No theory
and no
conceptual
model (n)
No theory
and no
conceptual
model (%) Total (n) Total (%)
1980 1 2 15 2 15 9 70 13 100
1981 0 0 1 6 16 94 17 100
1982 1 1 4 2 8 21 88 24 100
1983 0 0 8 38 13 62 21 100
1984 0 0 0 0 27 100 27 100
1985 0 0 7 18 31 82 38 100
1986 2 5 19 43 23 52 44 100
1987 7 16 9 21 27 63 43 100
1988 4 8 28 54 20 38 52 100
1989 3 5 11 17 49 78 63 100
1990 1 5 6 36 47 36 47 77 100
1991 1 7 8 30 33 53 59 90 100
1992 5 5 28 29 63 66 96 100
1993 1 1 5 6 37 44 42 50 84 100
1994 1 4 4 33 30 71 66 108 100
1995 1 1 6 5 36 30 76 65 118 100
1996 11 9 30 26 75 65 116 100
1997 1 1 9 7 37 30 77 63 123 100
1998 1 6 17 14 44 38 62 48 123 100
1999 4 28 24 36 33 36 33 110 100
2000 1 3 3 20 16 52 41 55 43 127 100
2001 1 2 11 34 23 53 35 63 42 150 100
2002 1 4 30 22 41 31 63 47 134 100
2003 1 9 37 29 27 21 63 50 127 100
2004 1 1 9 29 24 30 25 61 51 120 100
2005 1 17 38 24 52 32 71 44 161 100
2006 3 1 13 44 32 49 35 46 33 139 100
2007 3 2 14 57 31 51 27 77 44 185 100
2008 4 24 20 26 22 70 58 120 100
2009 1 5 16 14 32 29 64 57 112 100
2010 1 1 21 36 25 56 39 50 35 142 100
2011 1 8 16 10 76 47 69 43 161 100
2012 1 5 14 7 68 35 112 58 194 100
2013 1 1 3 14 7 66 31 136 29 216 100
Total (n) 8 6 6 5 5 142 525 1,113 1,827 3,475 100
Total (%) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 4.2 15 32 53 100
Table III.
1190
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Main theories Description Origin of theory
Top topics to which
theory is applied (if low
n, top topic given) Key authors
RBV theory The resource-based view suggests that organizations should
focus on the firm’s strengths through its resources rather than
the environmental opportunities and threats. Firms should be
considered as portfolios of core competencies rather than
portfolio of distinct businesses
Strategic
management
SCM (7)
Resource allocation (4)
Human resources (3)
Barney, (1991),
Wernerfelt (1984)
Industrial
organizational
theory
A firm’s main strategic focus should be orientated at locating
the best competitive market position relatively to the industrial
forces of its operating environment
Organizational
economics
SCM (8)
Prod development (5)
Learning (5)
Porter (1980)
Contingency theory Efficiency of an organization depends on “fit”of internal
organizational structure with environmental contingencies
Organizational
sociology
Manufacturing
flexibility (7)
Prod development (5)
SCM (5)
Service (1)
Burns and Stalker
(1961), Lawrence and
Lorsch (1967),
Woodward (1965)
Queuing theory The issue in queue management is not only the actual amount
of time that the customer waits in a queue, but also the
customer’s perception of that wait and his or her associated
level of satisfaction
Operations research Service operations (5)
Scheduling (4)
Staffing (2)
Erlang (1909),
Larson (1987)
Transaction cost
theory
Focus on the make-or-buy decision and the appropriateness of
different governance forms
Economics SCM (11)
Purchasing (4)
Outsourcing (3)
Williamson (1975),
(1991)
Game theory Game theory applies a formal modeling approach to social
situations where multiple players attempt to maximize their
returns, one such “game”is the prisoner’s dilemma
Mathematical
economics
SCM (11)
E-business (3)
Production mgt (3)
Von Neumann et al.
(1944)
Resource
dependency theory
Organizations will respond to demands made by external actors
or organizations upon whose resources they are heavily
dependent and that organizations will try to minimize that
dependence when possible
Organizational
studies
SCM (3)
Ops strategy (3)
NPD (2)
Pfeffer (1982), Pfeffer
and Salancik (1978)
(continued )
Table IV.
Most frequently
adopted theories in
OM articles in POM,
IJOPM, and JOM
(1980-2013)
1191
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Main theories Description Origin of theory
Top topics to which
theory is applied (if low
n, top topic given) Key authors
Theory of
constraints
According to TOC, every organization has one key constraint,
internal or external, which limits the systems performance
relative to its goal. In order to manage the performance of the
system, the constraint must be identified and managed
correctly
Operations
management
Scheduling (4)
Project man (2)
Ops management (2)
SCM (1)
Goldratt and Cox
(1984)
Goal systems theory Goal systems represent stored mental representations capable
of being learned, altered, or activated which affect individuals’
motivations
Social psychology Goal setting (2)
Cellular manuf (2)
Capacity utilization (2)
Bourgeois, (1985),
Mitchell and Zhang
(2005)
Institutional theory Institutional theory considers the processes by which social
structures influence social behavior
Sociology SCM (6)
TQM (4)
Sustainability (1)
R&D (1)
DiMaggio and
Powell (1983)
Systems theory Systems theory suggests that all phenomena can be viewed as a
web of relationships among elements, i.e. a system, and that all
such systems have common patterns, behaviors, and properties,
such as adaptive capacity and entropy
Cybernetics Ops management (3)
RFID (1)
Checkland (1981)
Property rights
theory
Formally modeled the hold-up problem, in the face of incomplete
contracts, specificity and opportunistic behavior integration can
help promote ex ante (pre-contractual) investment incentives
Organizational
economics
SCM (3) Grossman and Hart
(1986)
Social exchange
theory
Social exchange theory explains social change and stability as a
process of negotiated exchanges between parties
Sociology SCM (5) Autry and Whipple
(2013), Schaltegger
and Burritt (2014)
Behavioral theories Behavioral theories can be used to address individual human-
level aspects of OM. This literature and its central theories have
been developed and applied in a wide variety of business
contexts to understand, for example, consumer behavior,
negotiation techniques and management decision making
Organizational
psychology
SCM (4)
Service (2)
Leadership (1)
Payne et al. (1993)
(continued )
Table IV.
1192
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Main theories Description Origin of theory
Top topics to which
theory is applied (if low
n, top topic given) Key authors
Control theory Control theory deals with the behavior of dynamic systems,
with a controller manipulating the inputs of a system to have
the desired effect on the outputs
Engineering Planning (3)
SCM (2)
Chan et al. (2012),
Walker et al. (2014)
Network theory Network theory considers the relationships between (social)
entities in a network
Sociology SCM (3) Granovetter (1992),
Huatuco et al. (2013)
Equity theory Equity theory describes the relationship between an employees’
motivation to do a job and their perception of being treated
fairly. The theory suggests that employees ascribe values to
their inputs and outputs. An employee will consider that s/he is
treated fairly if he perceives the ratio of his inputs to his
outcomes to be equivalent to those around him
Organizational
psychology
Quality (2) Adams (1963),
Kabanoff (1991)
Agency theory Agency theory looks at the consequences of and managerial
implications of a number of forms of information asymmetry
Sociology SCM (3)
Quality (1)
Eisenhardt (1989),
Jensen and Meckling
(1976)
Theory of swift even
flow
The productivity of any process rises with the speed by which
materials flow through the process
Operations
management
Manuf. history (3) Schmenner and
Swink (1998)
Table IV.
1193
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

the number of articles published per year for different theories. The resource-based
view (52 articles) was the most prevalent theory. Table IV gives a description of the
theories, the origins of the theories, the key authors associated with the theory, and
which topics have been investigated utilizing the theories.
It is clear that the OM academic community has imported theories from other
disciplines more than it has developed its own theories. Looking at the origins of the
theories employed in OM journals in Table IV, three theories have their origins within
OM and operations research. The other theories have been borrowed from other
disciplines: five theories have been borrowed from sociology, four theories from
economics, three from psychology, and one each from organizational studies, strategic
management, engineering, and cybernetics.
4.2 Which theories are adopted most widely in OM?
Figure 2 shows whether a theory has endured over time in the three OM journals we
analyzed.
Contingency theory (Burns and Stalker, 1961; Lawrence and Lorsch, 1967; Woodward,
1965), for example, has endured since the start of OM journals and still has a saliency
today. It is also evident that there is usually a lag between a theory being published in
a book or journal, and its first appearance in an OM journal, which is also shown in
Figure 2. Prior to 1980, the three journals did not exist, so any lag between the emergence
of theories pre-dating the journals and such theories’appearances within the journals is
arbitrary. However, it is interesting to note that some theories pre-date the first issues of
the journals, and the start of our data set, by decades. Control theory has the biggest lag,
with the theory having its origins in the nineteenth century (Maxwell, 1867-1868), and
then emerging in 1995 in OM articles within the journals we analyzed. Other theories
have a short gap between their emergence and application in OM, such as the resource-
based view, which was first articulated in 1984 (Wernerfelt, 1984) and then was referred
to two years later in the OM journals we studied (Goodridge, 1986). The average lag
between theory emergence and its subsequent application in the three OM journals we
determined to be 17.5 years.
Some theories, such as property rights theory, exhibit popularity for a time and then
seem to be adopted less, at least in the three journals that we analyzed. Further, Figure 2
does not represent the myriad of theories that are developed or tested in fewer than five
articles in the OM journals that we studied.
4.3 To which topics have theories been applied in OM research?
Figure 3 shows the number of articles published on different topics across the three
journals, showing only topics that turn up in at least ten articles. SCM as a topic is in the
majority, with 313 articles, followed by production management, with 143 articles
published. Some topics have been popular for several decades, such as lot sizing and
materials planning, with their first articles both being published in 1980. Other topics
have understandably emerged more recently, such as e-commerce, with the first article
being published in 2001.
We also scrutinized which theories were adopted to investigate the most popular
topics, shown in Table IV. SCM is the topic addressed most frequently, with SCM having
been investigated using 13 of the 19 theories identified. It is also interesting to note that
theories in OM are tested in a variety of contexts to address different topics, which may
contribute to their generalizability.
1194
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Contingency theory
RBV/Competence theory
Industrial organizational theory
Goal systems theory
Property rights theory
Queuing theory
Game theory
Checkland (1981)
Wernerfelt (1984)
Bourgeois (1985)
Larson (1987)
1980 - Start of
OM journals
Payne et al. (1993)
Schmenner and Swink (1998)
Social
exchange
Institutional theory
Behavioral theory
Swift
TCE theory
Resource dependency theory
Network theory
Theory of constraints
Equity theory
Systems theory
Agency theory
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1986
1987
1988
1990
1989
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
2000
1999
2001
2002
2003
2004
2006
2005
2007
2008
2009
2010
2012
2011
1985
Adams (1963)
Goldratt and Cok (1984)
DiMaggio (1993)
Granovetter (1992)
Williamson (1975)
Emerson
(1976)
Von Neumann et al. (1944)
Jensen and Meckling (1976)
Porter (1980)
Burns and Stalker (1961)
Pfeffer and Salancik (1978)
Control theory
Figure 2.
Emergence of
theories in articles in
POM,IJOPM, and
JOM (1980-2013)
1195
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Supply chain management
Production management / scheduling / planning
Inventory control / mgt
JIT
Materials resource planning / mat man / ERP
Flex manuf systems
Purchasing / procurement
Adv manufact technologies
E-commerce / e-business / e-procurement
Capacity
Learning / knowledge management
Cellular manufacturing
Customers
Globalisation / international / cultural
New product development
Competitiveness
Remanufacturing / reverse logistics
Assembly
Lot sizing
Decision making / support
Project management
Process management
Outsourcing
BPR
Computer Integrated Manuf
Organisational change / design
Forecasting
Innovation
Demand
Cost
HRM
Benchmarking
Customization
Strategic manufacturing
Heuristics
Distribution
Data mgt / envelopment / bases
Productivity
Agile production
Marketing
Lean
Operations Strategy
Environmental / sustainability
Pricing
Product design / development / variety
IT / IS / Internet
Perform measurement / management
Quality management / TQM
Manufact mgt, strategy, systems
Operations management
Services
Number of articles on topics
Figure 3.
Topics addressed in
articles in POM,
IJOPM, and JOM
(1980-2013)
1196
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

5. Discussion and conclusions
Recent OM research has reflected on those topics that have been represented in the
main OM journals over the last 20 years or so, as well as on co-citation among OM
authors (Craighead and Meredith, 2008; Pilkington and Fitzgerald, 2006; Pilkington and
Meredith, 2009; Taylor and Taylor, 2009). While these articles reflect on the changing
topics in OM, to our knowledge there has been no research that has focussed on
identifying theoretical trends in OM.
Our research aimed to answer several research questions concerning theoretical
development and research patterns in OM. In considering which theories have been utilized
in OM research, it appears that the most commonly adopted theory in OM articles is RBV
theory (Barney, 1991; Wernerfelt, 1984). We also investigated which topics have been
researched in OM and identified a range of topics, such as SCM, manufacturing strategy,
OM, quality management, services, production management, planning, inventory
management, just in time, performance measurement, and product development.
It is interesting to consider which theories are most relevant across the major
streams of OM literature (see Table IV). SCM is the most prevalent topic across
the journals, and has been investigated through the theoretical lenses of RBV, TCE,
game theory, industrial organizational theory, and social exchange theory. Product
development has been explored utilizing industrial organizational theory, contingency
theory, and resource dependency theory. Service operations has benefited from
queuing theory and behavioral theories. Scheduling has been examined through the
theory of constraints and queuing theory. TQM has benefited from studies adopting an
institutional theory perspective. Such theory adoption suggests that there is a plurality
of theoretical perspectives being adopted by OM researchers to investigate the major
streams of OM literature, and we hope that this continues and diversifies over time.
5.1 Why do OM theories and topics change over time?
Theoretical perspectives in OM have changed over time, and our analysis enables us to
identify enduring, classic theories, and to trace fashions in OM theory (Abrahamson, 1991;
Carson et al., 2000; Gibson and Tesone, 2001). There may be a variety of explanations for
the apparent popularity or waning of theories and topics in OM. Theories may be
influenced at the level of the OM community, such as journals dedicating special issues to
a topic, or influential OM writers adopting a particular theory. Journal editors may have
preferences for certain theories over others, or changes in OM practice may influence
which topics are the subject of OM research. The fact that a special issue of a journal
addresses a particular topic may also indicate the practical need for the editors to look for
fresh theoretical approaches and topics for their audience that are more interesting.
Macro changes also influence the topics on which the OM community focusses, and it
follows that the theories explored to help explain those topics will vary. Such macro
factors include economic trends of expansion and recession, globalization and increased
transportation, changes in consumer expectations, advances in technology, and shifts in
the world’s manufacturing base. The advent of new processes, as well as new information
and communication technologies, has changed the nature of OM practices over time, and
theoretical developments have needed to respond accordingly. The world is a very
different place from what it was 30 years ago, when these OM journals began. Against
that changing background, some theories appear to be timeless (e.g. the RBV). Given the
continuing interest of the OM community in efficient and effective resource allocation,
the enduring appeal of such theories is understandable. However, the OM community
continues to address quite practical, physical issues in research, which may present
1197
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

challenges to theorizing, compared to disciplines that focus on less tangible aspects of
business and management such as business strategy or organizational behavior.
5.2 On importing theories from other disciplines
Our research indicates that most of the top theories utilized to conduct OM research
have been borrowed from other disciplines, rather than being developed within the
field. Disciplines such as economics, sociology, and psychology have proved rich
sources of theories applied to OM problems. Such disciplines have a longer history than
OM and greater maturity in terms of theoretical development, so it seems sensible to
borrow from them. This should be done when the theory coalesces with the OM topic
under investigation. Using theories from other fields to investigate OM problems
entails challenges, including ensuring a match between the phenomena of interest, the
concepts being examined, and the underlying assumptions of the theory and those of
OM (Amundson, 1998).
However, the successful importing of theories to OM does not negate the importance
of the OM community’s need to develop its own theories. It has been argued that OM
needs to improve its theory-building capabilities if it is to progress as a discipline (Binder
and Edwards, 2010a; Colquitt and Zapata-Phelan, 2007; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007;
Flynn et al., 1998; Lynham, 2002; Mario and John, 2010; Storberg-Walker, 2006;
Swamidass, 1991; Torraco, 2002; Zahra and Newey, 2009).
5.3 Does theoretical research get recognition?
In order to further reflect on our findings, we have considered whether the most cited or
best papers are theoretical or atheoretical. We performed a SCOPUS analysis of the top
20 cited articles from JOM,IJOPM,andPOM (n¼60). Figure 4 shows that the majority
of top cited articles are atheoretical (72 percent). Of the remaining 28 percent of most cited
articles that do include theory, the most prevalent theories are the RBV, game theory,
TCE, and queuing theory. However, the most cited articles often date from the 1990s,
when arguably the requirement for a manuscript’s theoretical contribution had less
emphasis among journal editors.
We also investigated the best papers, honorable mention papers and highly
commended papers for each journal, being mindful that each started their awards in
different years ( JOM in 2002, IJOPM in 2007, and POM in 2009). Within JOM, best papers
None (n=43)
RBV (n=3)
Game theory (n=3)
TCE (n=2)
Queuing theory (n=2)
Manufacturing strategy (n=1)
Complexity theory (n=1)
Socio technical systems (n=1)
Note: n = 60
Figure 4.
Theories in the
top 20 cited
papers in each
of IJOPM,POM,
and JOM
1198
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

are clearly theoretical, with 77 percent adopting a specific theoretical perspective such as
RBV, industrial organizational theory, and TCE. With IJOPM, just over half the best
papers tend to have a conceptual framework (53 percent) but none adopt a specific theory.
With POM, the best paper awards are relatively new so it is premature to attempt to
identify a pattern for the years covered in our data set.
Finally, we need to consider whether theoretical articles have an influence upon
practitioners. It is very hard to judge the extent to which theory is put into practice,
although JOM,IJOPM, and POM are meant to be for academic AND practitioner
audiences, so the most highly cited papers may be influential for practitioners as well.
However, future research could usefully explore which theories and papers are most
influential on practitioners, and actually make a difference to their day to day OM.
5.4 The future of theory in the OM field
In terms of theory development, it is encouraging to see that an increasing number of
articles develop a conceptual model (31 percent). This is especially true among the most
popular articles. Our analysis of the top 20 cited articles from each of the journals (POM,
IJOPM,andJOM) revealed that 62 percent contain conceptual frameworks. It would seem
therefore that the most cited authors aim to make conceptual advances, which is something
for aspiring authors to be mindful of as they submit their research to these journals.
So how can we make progress in developing theory in OM? Conceptual models, such
as those in the most highly cited articles, may be the forerunners to more formally
articulated theories, and may contribute toward theory building in the future (see Table III
and Figure 1). There are increasing signs of theory building in OM through grounded
theory (Binder and Edwards, 2010b; Hanson et al., 2011; Schoenherr et al., 2010), building
theory from observations in the field and from the ground up. Rich qualitative research
and field research can also contribute to theory building that draws on management
practice (DeHoratius and Rabinovich, 2011).
OM academics might benefit from learning more about theory development and testing,
from influential social scientists, and scholars in the management field (Bacharach, 1989;
Dubin, 1978; Kaplan, 1964; Van de Ven, 1989; Whetten, 1989). Bacharach (1989) suggested
that metaphors can lead to theory development, and metaphors are being developed in
operations and SCM (Chen et al., 2013; Foropon and McLachlin, 2013). Cross-disciplinary
collaborations can also contribute to the importing of new theoretical lenses to OM, and to
the development of new theory. Attending theory sessions at conferences could be helpful,
both within OM and across different management disciplines. Such efforts will inform the
OM scholarly community as we seek to increase the theoretical diversity in our field.
It has been suggested by Pfeffer (1993) that theory proliferation leads to “aweed-
patch, rather than a well tended garden”(p. 197), and that theoretical diversity is only
useful if it can be resolved. Similarly, authors have argued over whether paradigms
within a discipline should unite, whether there should be a plurality of views (Kuhn, 1970;
Poole and Van de Ven, 1989), or whether there should be a continuous flux of expansion
and contraction of views within a discipline (Abbott, 2001). It seems the OM field has a
growing collection of conceptual frameworks, and in the future, replication studies and
meta-analyses may help to rigorously test and refine existing theories (Eden, 2002).
In order to develop as a discipline, it seems sensible to adopt a dual strategy of
appropriately importing and testing established theories from other disciplines while
also developing theories that draw on observation of OM practice. This research found
that theories are being applied and tested across a variety of OM topics, which adds to
a theory’s generalizability.
1199
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

In order to inform future OM theory development, it is helpful to reflect on where the
gaps are in current theoretical perspectives and to contemplate what sorts of theories
might be suitable to import for different topics. The following discussion is not meant
to be an exhaustive list; rather, it is more a consideration of potential theories that may
have saliency for OM and that have doubtless already been applied but which our
analysis reveals have yet to become widespread.
There seems to be a lack of theories identified to date that help to explain certain aspects
of OM practices. For example, behavioral theories have recently been adopted to investigate
the human aspects of OM practices. This interest in behavioral theories could be extended
by borrowing from theories about organizational behavior and psychology, such as
sense-making theory (Weick, 1979) and Argyris’s theories of personality and organization
(Argyris, 1957). Sense-making theory might assist researchers to conceptualize how people
within and across organizations develop a shared understanding of OM practices, and
Argyris’s theories may help to tease out the individual, team, organizational, and external
factors that influence behavior in OM practices, contributing to research concerning the
behavioral aspects of OM.
In service sector OM research, where customer perceptions are important, it may be
useful to borrow theories from cognitive and social psychology, such as motivation theory
(McClelland, 1987) and attributional theory (Heider, 1958). Such theories may be of benefit
for studies that straddle the boundary between marketing research and OM research. These
theories may help researchers to understand what motivates customers and how customers
perceive quality and attribute meaning to the services that organizations provide.
The burgeoning interest in how OM can contribute to sustainability may benefit
from psychological theories, such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Maslow, 1954), from
organizational-change theories for corporate sustainability (Dunphy et al., 2003), and
from extensions of economics theories, such as natural capitalism (Hawken et al., 1999).
Given that the RBV was found to be a commonly adopted theory in our research,
there is potential for related literature from the management-practice field to be drawn
upon more extensively, including dynamic capabilities (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000;
Teece et al., 1997), routines (Feldman and Pentland, 2003), and absorptive capacity
(Levinthal and March, 1993).
Understanding the external pressures put upon organizations to change might be helpful
for understanding the operations strategy of firms, drawing on theories from sociology, and
organizational behavior, such as social construct theory (Berger and Luckmann, 1966),
structuration theory (Giddens, 1984), and stakeholder theory (Freeman, 1984). Other
economic theories may also be of use for understanding the economic interactions between
organizations, such as evolutionary economics theory (Hodgson, 1993). The field of OM is so
broad that it is appropriate to seek out multiple theories to understand different phenomena.
5.5 Next steps
In the preceding discussion we have considered the implications of our research, and we
acknowledgethatthestudyhasseverallimitations,thatcouldbeimproveduponinfuture
research on theory in the OM field. There is an intrinsic limitation in content analysis
whenever there are multiple topics from which to choose (Taylor and Taylor, 2009), and our
study suffers from including a plethora of topics and theories, as well as multiple researchers,
which cannot be avoided in such a large study concerning literature-content analysis.
We identified those articles that adopt an existing theory, develop a conceptual model,
or are atheoretical. It would be helpful to develop a more nuanced way of classifying
1200
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

theory in articles (Colquitt and Zapata-Phelan, 2007; Judge et al., 2007; Newman
and Cooper, 1993). However, because the coding task already consumed a significant
amount of timeand resources, a more extensive approach to coding theory was not viable
in this study.
In terms of future research, it would be insightful to explore the factors affecting
theoretical popularity in more depth by conducting interviews with OM scholars. This
study was limited to three OM journals, and it would be interesting to see if the same
trends in OM theory are observed across a wider range of OM articles both from other OM
journals and from general management journals. It would also be helpful to conduct an
investigation of which theoretical articles have influenced practitioners, which theories are
perceived as most relevant to real OM problems, and whether theoretical or atheoretical
research has more impact among OM practitioners. More broadly, future OM research
would benefit from increased theory development and from continuing to draw on the
wealth of theories in other fields that have yet to been brought to bear on OM problems.
We need to ensure that any advances in OM theories lead to research that is both
scholarly and relevant.
For the OM community, it is useful to consider the future of the OM discipline while
being mindful of our OM past. Prior to this study, as far as we are aware, there has not
been an analysis of the main theoretical trends in OM. A reflection on theories is
important because theories inform how a researcher or practicing manager interprets and
solves OM problems (Amundson, 1998). This study allows us to reflect on our collective
OM journey to date, to spot trends and gaps in the literature, and to identify fruitful areas
for future research and OM theory development.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to dedicate this paper to Professor Bob Johnston. Bob was not
only an exceptional scholar in the operations management field and, an outstanding
colleague, mentor, and friend but, he contributed to supporting the data collection and
framing some of the ideas within this paper. Bob’s vision was for the authors to develop
a set of papers to situate operations management as a theoretical discipline. The
authors hope this paper reflects Bob’s vision and in its publication some of Bob’s final
academic contribution will not be forgotten.
References
Abbott, A. (2001), Chaos of Disciplines, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Abrahamson, E. (1991), “Managerial fads and fashions: the diffusion and rejection of
innovations”,Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 586-612.
Adams, J.S. (1963), “Towards an understanding of inequity”,The Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 5, pp. 422-436.
Adner, R.O.N., Pólos, L., Ryall, M. and Sorenson, O. (2009), “The case for formal theory”,Academy
of Management Review, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 201-208.
Amundson, S.D. (1998), “Relationships between theory-driven empirical research in operations
management and other disciplines”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 16 No. 4,
pp. 341-359.
Argyris, C. (1957), Personality and Organization: The Conflict Between System and the Individual,
Harper and Row, New York, NY.
Autry, C.W. and Whipple, J.M. (2013), “Sustainability and resource scarcity”,International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 43 Nos 5-6, pp. 351-501.
1201
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Bacharach, S.B. (1989), “Organizational theories: some criteria for evaluation”,Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 496-515.
Barman, S., Tersine, R.J. and Buckley, M.R. (1991), “An empirical assessment of the perceived
relevance and quality of POM journals by academicians”,Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 194-212.
Barney, J.B. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”,Journal of
Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 99-120.
Berger, P.L. and Luckmann, T. (1966), The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise its the
Sociology of Knowledge, Anchor Books, Garden City, New York, NY.
Binder, M. and Edwards, J.S. (2010a), “Using grounded theory method for theory building in
operations management research a study on inter-firm relationship governance”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 30 Nos 3-4, pp. 232-259.
Binder, M. and Edwards, J.S. (2010b), “Using grounded theory method for theory building in
operations management research: a study on inter-firm relationship governance”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 232-259.
Bititci, U., Garengo, P., Dörfler, V. and Nudurupati, S. (2012), “Performance measurement:
challenges for tomorrow”,International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 14 No. 3,
pp. 305-327.
Bourgeois, L.J. III (1985), “Strategic goals, perceived uncertainty, and economic performance in
volatile environments”,The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 548-573.
Burns, T. and Stalker, G. (1961), The Management of Innovation, Tavistock, London.
Carey, J.W., Morgan, M. and Oxtoby, M.J. (1996), “Intercoder agreement in analysis of responses
to open-ended interview questions: examples from tuberculosis research”,Cultural
Anthropology Methods, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 1-5.
Carson, P.P., Lanier, P.A., Carson, K.D. and Guidry, B.N. (2000), “Clearing a path through the
management fashion jungle: some preliminary trailblazing”,Academy of Management
Journal, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 1143-1158.
Chan, H.K., He, H. and Wang, W.Y.C. (2012), “Green marketing and its impact on supply chain”,
Industrial Marketing Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 557-724.
Chase, R.B. (1980), “A classification and evaluation of research in operations management”,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 9-14.
Checkland, P. (1981), Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Wiley, New York, NY.
Chen, Y.-S., Rungtusanatham, M.J., Goldstein, S.M. and Koerner, A.F. (2013), “Theorizing
through metaphorical transfer in OM/SCM research: divorce as a metaphor for strategic
buyer-supplier relationship dissolution”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 31
Nos 7-8, pp. 579-586.
Colquitt, J.A. and Zapata-Phelan, C.P. (2007), “Trends in theory building and theory testing: a five
decade study of the academy of management journal”,Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 1281-1303.
Craighead, C. and Meredith, J. (2008), “Operations management research: evolution and
alternative future paths”,International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
Vol. 28 No. 8, pp. 710-726.
DeHoratius, N. and Rabinovich, E. (2011), “Field research in operations and supply chain
management”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 371-375.
DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W. (1983), “The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and
collective rationality in organizational fields”,American Sociological Review, Vol. 48 No. 2,
pp. 147-160.
1202
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Dubin, R. (1978), Theory Development, Free Press, New York, NY.
Dunphy, D., Griffiths, A. and Benn, S. (2003), Organisational Change for Corporate Sustainability,
Routledge, London.
Eden, D. (2002), “From the editors: replication, meta-analysis, scientific progress, and AMJ’s
publication policy”,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 841-846.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989), “Agency theory: an assessment and review”,Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 57-74.
Eisenhardt, K. and Graebner, M. (2007), “Theory building from cases: opportunities and
challenges”,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Martin, J. (2000), “Dynamic capabilities: what are they?”,Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 21 Nos 10-11, pp. 1105-1121.
Erlang, A.K. (1909), “The theory of probabilities and telephone conversations”,Nyt Tidsskrift for
Matematik B, Vol. 20 No. B, pp. 33-39.
Feldman, M.S. and Pentland, B.T. (2003), “Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source
of flexibility and change”,Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 94-118.
Flynn, B.B., Flynn, E.J. and Shrader, C.B. (1998), “Cross-discipline theory as a foundation for
research in operations management”,Decision Sciences Institute 1998 Proceedings,
Vols. 1-3, pp. 1280-1282.
Flynn, B.B., Sakakibara, S., Schroeder, R.G., Bates, K. and Flynn, E.J. (1990), “Empirical research
methods in operations management”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 9 No. 2,
pp. 250-284.
Foropon, C. and McLachlin, R. (2013), “Metaphors in operations management theory building”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 181-196.
Freeman, R.E. (1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman, Marshfield, MA.
Gibson, J.W. and Tesone, D.V. (2001), “Management fads: emergence, evolution, and implications
for managers”,Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 122-133.
Giddens, A. (1984), The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, University
of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Gioia, D.A. and Pitre, E. (1990), “Multiparadigm perspective on theory building”,Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 584-602.
Goldratt, E. and Cox, J. (1984), “The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement”North River Press,
Croton-on-Hudson, New York, NY.
Goodridge, M. (1986), “Operations management of human resources in the 1990s”,International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 42-60.
Granovetter, M. (1992), Networks and Organizations: Structure Form and Action, Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Grossman, S.J. and Hart, O.D. (1986), “The costs and benefits of ownership: a theory of lateral and
vertical integration”,Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 94 No. 4, pp. 691-719.
Hanson, J.D., Melnyk, S.A. and Calantone, R.A. (2011), “Defining and measuring alignment in
performance management”,International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 1089-1114.
Harvey, C., Kelly, A., Morris, H. and Rowlinson, M. (2010), Academic Journal Quality Guide,
The Association of Business Schools, London.
Hawken, P., Lovins, A.B. and Lovins, L.H. (1999), Natural Capitalism: The Next Industrial
Revolution, Earthscan, London.
1203
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Hayes, R. and Wheelright, S. (1984), Restoring Our Competitive Edge, John Wiley & Sons,
New York, NY.
Heider, F. (1958), The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, Wiley, New York, NY.
Hodgson, G.M. (1993), Economics and Evolution: Bringing Life Back Into Economics,
UK Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Huatuco, L., Montoya-Torres, J., Shaw, N. and Calinescu, A. (2013), “Performance measurement of
sustainable supply chains”,International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 62 No. 8.
Jensen, M.C. and Meckling, W.H. (1976), “Theory of firm-managerial behaviour, agency costs and
ownership structure”,Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 305-360.
Judge, T.A., Cable, D.M., Colbert, A.E. and Rynes, S.L. (2007), “What causes a management article
to be cited –article, author or journal?”,Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 3,
pp. 491-506.
Kabanoff, B. (1991), “Equity, equality, power and conflict”,Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 416-441.
Kaplan, A. (1964), The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioural Science, Chandler
Publishing Company, San Francisco, CA.
Kraljic, P. (1983), “Purchasing must become supply management”,Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 61 No. 5, pp. 109-117.
Kuhn, T.S. (1970), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Larson, R.C. (1987), “Perspectives on queues: social justice and the psychology of queuing”,
Operations Research, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 895-905.
Lawrence, P. and Lorsch, J. (1967), Organisation and Environment: Managing Differentiation and
Integration, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.
Levinthal, D.A. and March, J.G. (1993), “The myopia of learning”,Strategic Management Journal,
Vol. 14 No. S2, pp. 95-112.
Lillis, B. and Lane, R. (2007), “Auditing the strategic role of operations”,International Journal of
Management Reviews, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 191-210.
Linderman, K. and Chandrasekaran, A. (2010), “The scholarly exchange of knowledge in
operations management”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 357-366.
Lynham, S.A. (2002), “The general method of theory-building research in applied disciplines”,
Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 221-241.
McClelland, D. (1987), Human Motivation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Mario, B. and John, S.E. (2010), “Using grounded theory method for theory building in operations
management research: a study on inter-firm relationship governance”,International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 232-259.
Maslow, A.H. (1954), Motivation and Personality, 2nd ed., Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Maxwell, J.C. (1867-1868), “On governors”,Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 16,
pp. 270-283.
Melnyk, S.A. and Handfield, R.B. (1998), “May you live in interesting times …the emergence of
theory-driven empirical research”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 16 No. 4,
pp. 311-319.
Mitchell, A. and Zhang, M. (2005), “The application of goal systems theory to consumer
behavior”,Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 17-20.
Newman, J.M. and Cooper, E. (1993), “Determinants of academic recognition: the case of the
Journal of Applied Psychology”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78 No. 3, pp. 518-526.
1204
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Payne, J.W., Bettman, J.R. and Johnson, E.J. (1993), The Adaptive Decision Maker, Cambridge
University Press, New York, NY.
Pfeffer, J. (1982), Organizations and Organization Theory, Pitman, Marshfield, MA.
Pfeffer, J. (1993), “Barriers to the advance of organizational science: paradigm development as a
dependent variable”,The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 599-620.
Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. (1978), The External Control of Organizations, Harper and Rowe,
New York, NY.
Pilkington, A. and Fitzgerald, R. (2006), “Operations management themes, concepts and
relationships: a forward retrospective of IJOPM”,International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 26 No. 11, pp. 1255-1275.
Pilkington, A. and Meredith, J. (2009), “The evolution of the intellectual structure of operations
management –1980-2006: a citation/co-citation analysis”,Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 185-202.
Poole, M.S. and Van de Ven, A.H. (1989), “Using paradox to build management and organization
theories”,The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 562-578.
Porter, M.E. (1980), Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analysing Industries and Competitors,
Free Press, New York, NY.
Schaltegger, S. and Burritt, R. (2014), “Measuring and managing sustainability performance of
supply chains: review and sustainability supply chain management framework”,Supply
Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 232-241.
Schmenner, R.W. and Swink, M.L. (1998), “On theory in operations management”,Journal of
Operations Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 97-113.
Schmenner, R.W., Wassenhove, L.V., Ketokivi, M., Heyl, J. and Lusch, R.F. (2009), “Too much
theory, not enough understanding”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 27 No. 5,
pp. 339-343.
Schoenherr, T., Hilpert, D., Soni, A.K., Venkataramanan, M.A. and Mabert, V.A. (2010),
“Enterprise systems complexity and its antecedents: a grounded-theory approach”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 639-668.
Schroeder, R.G. (2007), Operations Management: Contemporary Concepts and Cases, McGraw-Hill
Irwin, New York, NY.
Schroeder, R.G. (2008), “Introduction to the special issue on theory development in operations
management”,Production & Operations Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 354-356.
Skinner, W. (1969), “Manufacturing –missing link in corporate strategy”,Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 136-145.
Storberg-Walker, J. (2006), “From imagination to application: making the case for the general
method of theory-building research in applied disciplines”,Human Resource Development
International, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 227-259.
Swamidass, P.M. (1991), “Empirical science: new frontier in operations management research”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 793-314.
Taylor, A. and Taylor, M. (2009), “Operations management research: contemporary themes,
trends and potential future directions”,International Journal of Operations and Production
Management, Vol. 29 No. 12, pp. 1316-1340.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997), “Dynamic capabilities and strategic management”,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 509-533.
Torraco, R. (2002), “Research methods or theory building in applied disciplines: a comparative
analysis”,Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 355-376.
1205
Theoretical
perspectives
in operations
management
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)

Van de Ven, A.H. (1989), “Nothing is quite so practical as a good theory”,Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 486-489.
Van de Ven, A.H. (2007), Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organisational and Social Research,
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O. and Kuhn, H.W. (1944), Theory of Games and Economic
Behavior, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Wacker, J.G. (1998), “A definition of theory: research guidelines for different theory-building
reseach methods in operations management”,Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 16
No. 4, pp. 361-385.
Walker, H., Seuring, S., Klassen, R. and Sarkis, J. (2014), “Sustainable operations management”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 34 No. 5.
Webster, M. (2002), “Supply system structure, management and performance: a conceptual
model”,International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 353-369.
Weick, K. (1979), The Social Psychology of Organizing, Addison Wesley, Wokingham.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984), “A resource-based view of the firm”,Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 5
No. 2, pp. 171-180.
Westbrook, R. (1994), “Priority management: new theory for operations management”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 4-24.
Whetten, D.A. (1989), “What constitutes a theoretical contribution?”,Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 490-495.
Williamson, O.E. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies, Free Press, New York, NY.
Williamson, O.E. (1991), “Comparative economic organization: the analysis of discrete structural
alternatives”,Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 269-296.
Woodward, J. (1965), Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice, Oxford Press, Oxford.
Zahra, S.A. and Newey, L.R. (2009), “Maximizing the impact of organization science: theory-
building at the intersection of disciplines and/or fields”,Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 46 No. 6, pp. 1059-1075.
About the authors
Professor Helen Walker is a Chair of Operations and Supply Management at the Cardiff Business
School, and the Director of Postgraduate Research Studies. Her main research interests are
sustainable procurement, sustainable supply chain management, collaborative procurement, and
supply strategy. Professor Helen Walker is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
WalkerHL@cardiff.ac.uk
Dr Daniel Chicksand joined the Aston Business School in September 2013 as a Senior Lecturer
having spent the previous five years as a lecturer in Operations and Supply Management in the
Operations Management Group at the Warwick Business School. Daniel’s key area of research
and interest is in field of relationship management.
Professor Zoe Radnor holds a Chair of Service Operations Management at the Loughborough
School of Business and Economics. Her area of interest is in performance and process
improvement and, service management in public sector organizations.
Dr Glyn Watson first joined the University of Birmingham as a Doctoral Candidate in 1992,
and is now a Senior Lecturer. Glyn’s areas of interest are inter and intra-organizational conflict,
economics and law, business management theory, and political risk analysis.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
1206
IJOPM
35,8
Downloaded by Professor Zoe Radnor At 04:14 15 July 2015 (PT)