Organizational and Management Research Scholar Differentiates Theories From Models

In organizational and management research, the terms theory and model are often confused, which can slow scientific progress. In a new article, a researcher at Carnegie Mellon University seeks to enhance the quality of scholarship in the field by reducing this confusion and offering a constructive path forward. Geared to students as well as scholars who want to build explanations using scientific method, the article is published in Organizational Psychology Review.

"People often treat theories and models as if they mean the same thing, but they play very different roles in research," explains Denise M. Rousseau, professor of organizational behavior and public policy at Carnegie Mellon's Heinz College, who authored the article. "A theory's value to scientists, teachers, and practitioners—as a thoroughly tested and reliable body of knowledge—is too important to blur the line between it and a model."

Both theories and models are abstractions, conceptual tools scientists use to organize, guide, and communicate their thinking and research. But many scholars conflate well-established theories with more tentative conceptual models, says Rousseau.

A scientific theory is a well-tested explanation backed by strong evidence, providing practitioners with reliable knowledge to use in real decisions. A conceptual model is more like a working idea—it shows how concepts might fit together but still needs testing and refinement.

"Problems arise when models are mistakenly treated as theories, either because they have been around a long time or because people relabel them to gain credibility without adequate evidence," says Rousseau.

Keeping the two concepts distinct helps researchers know what steps to take, Rousseau asserts: Theories need testing, refinement, and comparison with other theories, while models need careful development to specify their parts and mechanisms before they can be evaluated. Moreover, theories—not models—provide the stronger foundation for evidence-based education and practice.

In her article, Rousseau outlines different types of theories and models, and explains how they are used and for which audiences they are most useful. She also addresses the question of how models become theories.

More information:
Summarized from an article in Organizational Psychology Review, "Theories and Models: Acting on the Difference Advances Organizational and Management Scholarship," by Rousseau, DM (Carnegie Mellon University). Copyright 2026 The Author. All rights reserved.

Provided by Carnegie Mellon University's Heinz College