This analysis clarifies the distinction between theory and model in management scholarship, suggesting improved clarity for future research.
People often confuse “theory” and “model” in organizational and management research, which slows scientific progress. A scientific theory is a strong, well-supported explanation built on extensive converging evidence. It provides reliable knowledge for evidence-based practice and supports education that helps professionals adapt over time. A conceptual model, by contrast, is a preliminary idea that proposes how things might relate; it must be tested, critiqued, and refined. When a model's mechanisms are clearly specified and backed by substantial evidence, it can be recognized as a theory. But models are sometimes mistaken for theories—either because long-used models (like Maslow's hierarchy or Lewin's change model) gain assumed legitimacy through familiarity, or because advocates re-label a model as a theory to enhance credibility without adequate evidence. Distinguishing between theories and models guides two research paths: strengthening established theories and rigorously developing models so their explanatory and predictive power can eventually be tested.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Denise M. Rousseau (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: