A critical evaluation of alternative methods and paradigms for conducting mediation analysis in operations management research

Mediation as a theory testing approach has witnessed considerable adoption among Operations Management (OM) researchers. Although mediation-testing methods have evolved tremendously in the past decade, their dissemination in the OM field has not seen parallel growth. These advanced techniques facilitate the testing of existing and complex hypotheses in a more precise manner. With the intent of critically evaluating existing and alternative methods for conducting mediation analysis needed to support sophisticated empirical research, this paper first reviews OM studies that tested for mediation in the past eleven years (2002–2012) from top-tier OM journals. Four commonly used mediation approaches were identified. Based on principles of good theory building, type of mediation model, and properties of empirical data, we evaluate the existing methodologies and make recommendations on how to improve the rigor of OM mediation testing. Using published OM studies in top journals as examples, we then illustrate the relevance and advantages of these recommendations, as well as their ease of use. Furthermore, we empirically show that more robust and insightful results can be achieved by adopting these techniques, which in turn have the promise of leading to better theory building and testing in the field of operations management.