Abstract Case and field research studies continue to be rarely published in operations management journals, in spite of increased interest in reporting such types of studies and results. This paper documents the advantages and rigor of case/field research and argues that these methods are preferred to the more traditional rationalist methods of optimization, simulation, and statistical modeling for building new operations management theories. In the process of describing the constructs of inference and generalizability with reference to case research, we find the existing definitions inadequate and thus extend and refine them to better discriminate between alternate research methodologies. We also elaborate on methods for increasing the generalizability of both rationalist and case/field research studies. A major conclusion is that these alternate research methods are not mutually exclusive and, if combined, can offer greater potential for enhancing new theories than either method alone.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1,658 citations exist upstream.