As researchers, we all want to produce interesting and influential theories. The dominant view is that a theory becomes influential if it is regarded as true. However, in his seminal study Davis (1971) showed that what makes a theory notable, and sometimes even famous (Davis, 1986), is not only that it is seen as true but also, and more important, that it is seen as challenging the assumptions underlying existing theories in some significant way. During the last four decades, a large number of researchers within management and the social sciences have confirmed and elaborated Davis's original thesis in various ways (e.g., Astley, 1985; Bartunek, Rynes, & Ireland, 2006; Black, 2000; Campbell, Daft, & Hulin, 1982; Daft, 1983; Daft, Griffin. & Yates, 1987; Daft & Lewin, 1990; Davis, 1999; Hargens, 2000; Lundberg, 1976; Miner, 1984; Mohr. 1982; Weick, 1989, 2001; Wicker, 1985). For example, McKinley, Mone, and Moon (1999) showed that for a theory to receive attention and establish a new theoretical school, it must differ significantly from, and at the same time be connected to, established literature in order to be seen as meaningful. Likewise Bartunek al's study of ingredient the assumptions underlying existing theories, therefore appears to be a central ingredient in the development of more interesting and influential theories within management studies. However, established ways of generating research questions rarely express more ambitious and systematic attempts to challenge the assumptions underlying existing theories (Barrett & Walsham. 2004; Bartunek et al., 2006; Clark & Wright, 2009; Johnson, 2003; Locke & Golden-Biddle. 1997; Sandberg & Alvesson, 2011). Instead, they mainly try to identify or create gaps in existing literature that need to be filled. It is common to refer either positively or mildly critically to earlier studies in order to "extend . . . this literature" (Westphal & Khanna. 2003: 363), to "address this gap in the literature" (Musson & Tietze. 2004: 1301), to "fill this gap" (Luscher & Lewis. 2008: 221), to point at themes that others "have not paid particular attention to" (Thorn-borrow & Brown, 2009: 356), or to "call for more empirical research" (Ewenstein & Whyte, 2009: 7).
This paper introduces the importance of a well-articulated, research-worthy problem statement as the centerpiece for any viable research. The aim of this work is to help novice researchers understand the value of problem-based research by providing a practical guide on the development of a well articulated and viable statement of a research-worthy problem as the starting point for all research. Additionally, this paper explores the interaction of the problem with the other fundamental elements of scholarly research including the research topic, goals, research questions, methodology, results, and conclusions. Scaffolding for articulating a 'research-worthy problem is provided in the form of a deconstruction of the expression into definitions of its component terms, followed by a discussion of what is not a research-worthy problem. A roadmap on locating problems that could support scholarly research is provided. The theoretical foundation is placed into practice by examining some problem statements and proposing a template for crafting an effective statement.
Introduction
The importance or basing research on a well-articulated problem statement is well accepted across disciplines such as information systems, education, and engineering (Creswell, 2005: Hicks & Turner, 1999; Sekaran, 2003). Unfortunately, just what constitutes a research-worthy problem is not readily apparent, in particular for novice researchers. Although most scholars would agree that not everything that is problematic could serve as the starting point for meaning of research, it is not easy to identify just what does constitute such a problem According to Ker linger and Lee (2000), the identification
Read the two articles above. You should reflect on possible researchable issues &/or questions from within your specialization content area and develop two (2) Problem Statements (each different than the other) that reflect your research interests.
• Each problem statement should be no more than 1-2 complete sentences in length.
• For each problem statement, formulate an answer to the relevancy test's "so what?" question.