"What, Really, Constitutes a Theoretical Contribution?"

Much has been written about the value and use of theory in management and organizational studies. Many have also complained about the lack of clarity associated with a concept so central to our field. In response we engage in reflexive theorizing—the practice of examining the meaning and use of theory. To assess the level of shared understanding of “things theoretical” in our field, including the expectation that empirical research should make theoretical contributions, we examined how theory is actually used in in 246 articles published in the Academy of Management Journal, from 1999 to 2012. In addition we offer a definition of theory and three key distinctions and demonstrate their utility in our empirical investigation. The distinctions are: general and middle-range theory, contributions to theory and contributions of theory, and X- focused and Y-focused propositions. Combining these analytical tools with a detailed examination of statements in AMJ’s Information to Contributors regarding the journal’s expectations about the use of theory in research and their long- standing requirement that research results should contribute to theory, we formulate and test hypotheses about the attributes we would expect to see in deductive empirical studies governed by these standards. In the end, the implications of our research for clarifying the meaning of theory and the associated professional norms about the use of theory in empirical research, as well as the contribution research results can make to our collective theoretical predictions of important management and organizational outcomes, are discussed.