• Innovation paper: (10%). Preparation of one “innovation” (doublespaced, 12-point font, 2.5-5 pages permissible). This is a brief
description of novel hypotheses (something not already known or
immediately obvious to researchers in health/nursing services).
Although short, the paper must be logically arranged and wellwritten. You can also use this short paper as a means to developing a
more comprehensive final term paper idea.
-The first page of the paper will have an introduction that articulates
your key contribution to the literature.
– In the remaining pages, you will develop theory for 1 or 2 novel or
interesting hypotheses (you need not propose/discuss methods).
Novel/interesting theoretical models do one of the following:
• Consensus shifting where you delineate widely held
assumptions regarding a phenomenon and go on to challenge them
• Consensus creation where you articulate an absence of
scholarly consensus regarding a phenomenon and seek to either
clarify the lines of debate or resolve the conflict (see Hollenbeck,
2008; Grant & Pollack, 2011. p. 874).
Here are some examples of what you can do:
At macro-level: think of how nursing services in alignment of
Vision2030 objectives, initiatives & programs (such as Healthcare
Transformation Program, Quality of life program).
You can propose a moderator that changes the nature of an
established relationship. For instance, it is received wisdom in the
literature that X is positively related to Y. However, you can
challenge that wisdom by proposing that at high (low) levels of a
moderator Z, the relationship flips direction o becomes insignificant.
You can discuss some competing mediators of a relationship. For
instance, scholars are conflicted about the relationship between X
and Y. Some argue that it is positive; some argue that it is negative;
others expect no significant association.
You can consolidate these perspectives by noting that X is
positively related to a mediator M1 and negatively related to a
mediator M2, where both M1 and M2 are positively related to Y. By
articulating these differential effects of X on the mediators, you
provide an integrative explanation of the relationship that has
eluded the field so far).
-In other words, your paper should aim to surprise the reader
by drawing conceptual conclusions that the reader would not have
arrived at without the theoretical assistance you have provided
(Staw & Sutton, 1995).
Grant, A. M. & Pollack T. G. (2011). Publishing in AMJ—Part 3: Setting
the hook, Academy of Management Journal, 54, 873-879.
Hollenbeck, J. R. (2008). The role of editing in knowledge
development: Consensus shifting and consensus creation. In Y.
Baruch, A. M. Konrad, H. Aguinus, & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Journal
editing: Opening the black box: 16–26. San Francisco: Jossey Bass
Sutton, R.I., & Staw, B.M. 1995. What theory is not. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 40: 371- 384.