Methodological practices in international business research: An after-action review of challenges and solutions

Abstract We combine after-action review and needs-assessment frameworks to describe the four most pervasive contemporary methodological challenges faced by international business (IB) researchers, as identified by authors of Journal of International Business Studies articles: Psychometrically deficient measures (mentioned in 73% of articles), idiosyncratic samples or contexts (mentioned in 62.2% of articles), less-than-ideal research designs (mentioned in 62.2% of articles), and insufficient evidence about causal relations (mentioned in 8.1% of articles). Then, we offer solutions to address these challenges: demonstrating why and how the conceptualization of a construct is accurate given a particular context, specifying whether constructs are reflective or formative, taking advantage of the existence of multiple indicators to measure multi-dimensional constructs, using particular samples and contexts as vehicles for theorizing and further theory development, seeking out particular samples or contexts where hypotheses are more or less likely to be supported empirically, using Big Data techniques to take advantage of untapped sources of information and to re-analyze currently available data, implementing quasi-experiments, and conducting necessary-condition analysis. Our article aims to advance IB theory by tackling the most typical methodological challenges and is intended for researchers, reviewers and editors, research consumers, and instructors who are training the next generation of scholars.