HARKing can be good for science: Why, when, and how c/should we Hypothesizing After Results are Known or Proposing research questions After Results are Known

Abstract This provocation challenges the current view that practicing HARKing (Hypothesizing After Results are Known) must be avoided under all circumstances. I explain why and under which circumstances scholars may be allowed, even encouraged, to follow this practice. I use the extant literature and specific cases to show how HARKing can help generate new and worthy knowledge, and why an outright ban on HARKing is wrong for the field of social sciences—and, particularly, for business and management studies. The argument expands the phenomenon to PARKing too (Proposing research questions After Results are Known). The implications for knowledge creation are critical because this practice could hinder research and might defy logic. This provocation is intended as a thought‐provoking exercise, hopefully leading to changes in the approach and mindset of scholars. HARKing could offer a major added value to the field as it helps to develop knowledge that, so far, has been blocked by attempts to ban HARKing, and thereby may help open new avenues for knowledge creation.