All in all we find several

All in all, we find several studies using CSR for different purposes. For instance, in-depth case analysis (e.g., Blaško, Netter, & Sinkey, 2000; Cambra-Fierro, Hart, Polo-Redondo, & Fuster-Mur, 2012; Conklin, 2005; Duncan & Mtar, 2006; Geppert, Dörrenbächer, Gammelgaard, & Taplin, 2013; Halsall, 2008; Knoerich, 2010; Quah & Young, 2005; Singer & Yankey, 1991; Sim, 2006; Ullrich, Wieseke, & Van Dick, 2005; Yip, Rugman, & Kudina, 2006), testing the existing theories/models and propositions/hypotheses (e.g., Fang, Fridh, & Schultzberg, 2004; Kshetri & Dholakia, 2009; Liu & Zhang, 2014; Meyer & Altenborg, 2007, 2008; Nicholson & Kiel, 2007; Sinkovics, Zagelmeyer, & Kusstatscher, 2011), building theories/models and offering propositions/hypotheses (e.g., Boehe, 2011; Deng, 2009; Dieleman & Sachs, 2008; Huang, Hu, & Chen, 2008; Lynes & Andrachuk, 2008; Maguire & Phillips, 2008; Reddy, Nangia, & Agrawal, 2014; Tsamenyi, Qureshi, & Yazdifar, 2013; Wei & Clegg, 2014), and other ideas (Jonsson & Foss, 2011; longitudinal case study: Nadolska & Barkema, 2007; case survey method: Larsson & Lubatkin, 2001; survey-based studies: Bjursell, 2011; Ito, Fujimura, & Tamiya, 2012; Krug & Nigh, 2001; London & Hart, 2004; Meyer et al., 2009; Very & Schweiger, 2001). We purposively summarize these studies for various taxonomies such as institutional setting, scope of the study, goals of the research, sampling area, method, number of cases, industry, data source and theoretical development (Table 2). Hence, our intention is not to evaluate the quality of previous work and highlight any remarks.
Research rigor: issues and opportunities In this Nintedanib section , we specially emphasize on two aspects, namely how do we overcome problems relating to data collection, and how do we improve quality of study within the boundaries of case study method. Captivating this, we discuss the importance of triangulation, case study protocol, and quality and validity. In addition, one may also refer to the inputs suggested in previous conceptual notes and frameworks for reasons including the case selection biases and methodology rigor (Collinson & Rugman, 2010; Hoon, 2013; Reddy, 2015a), and using teaching cases for management research (Reddy & Agrawal, 2012). For instance, Ambrosini, Bowman, and Collier (2010) propose a set of guidelines for increasing the awareness on the use of teaching cases in management research of which they discuss teaching cases whether to-be used as an alternative to field research, and be used as secondary data in ‘when’ and ‘how’ taxonomies.
Conclusions
Acknowledgments Author wishes to thank Editor-in-Chief and anonymous referees of Future Business Journal for their thoughtful comments on previous version of this paper. All remaining errors are the responsibility of the author. The usual disclaimer applies.
Introduction The business environment in which most of the firms operate in is characterized by the cut-throat competition due to globalization. The management of these organizations is working round the clock to make sure that they improve the stakeholders’ welfare now and in the future. The managers are faced with a myriad of challenges in their effort of trying to achieve the set goals. According to Goldratt and Cox (1992), a constraint is any element or factor that blocks the system from achieving more of what it was designed to accomplish (achieving its goal). Bhardwaj, Gupta, and Kanda (2010) in their study on fundamentals of Theory of Constraints (TOC) argued that inconsistencies between goals, measurement systems, and policies are the major problems organizations face. Goldratt (1990) argued that the TOC guides the user through the decision-making process of problem structuring, problem identification, solution building, identification of constraints to be overcome, and implementation of the solution. The TOC thinking processes are crucial in establishing what should be changed, what to change to, and how to carry out the change when an organization wants to introduce changes in their production system. It is also called as problem-solving methodologies. Goldratt (1990) states that it is the weakest link that limits the overall performance of an organization, and for an organization to improve its performance, it must identify the system’s constraints or bottleneck.