An empirics-first approach to problem formulation in service research: an illustration using the Cynefin framework

Abstract

Abstract

Purpose Although service research is an applied discipline, much of the field has emphasized confirmatory inquiry in relatively ordered settings. While such research remains valuable, it is often less well suited to emerging, relational and poorly understood service phenomena. This article therefore argues for an empirics-first approach to problem formulation in service research. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on the Cynefin framework, the article distinguishes among clear, complicated, complex and chaotic service problems. Using a conceptual approach, it extends Cynefin to service research methodology by showing how different problem contexts call for different forms of theorizing, methodological fit and research design. Findings The article shows that what constitutes a meaningful contribution in service research depends on the nature of the problem being studied. In relatively ordered contexts, contributions often involve refinement, replication and the specification of contingencies. In complicated contexts, they involve disentangling mechanisms and clarifying trade-offs. In complex contexts, contributions center on sensemaking and explaining emergent practices and processes. In chaotic contexts, contributions often lie in understanding stabilization, adaptation and the restoration of order under turbulent conditions. Originality/value The article challenges service researchers to move beyond an overreliance on abstract literature gaps and theory-led confirmatory designs. Instead, it advocates careful empirical diagnosis of focal problems as the foundation for producing methodologically rigorous, theoretically meaningful and practically relevant research contributions.