This paper addresses the proposal that the Unique Adequacy (UA) requirement of methods should be employed as a criterion for research evaluation. Initially, four types of research are identified. The UA concept is employed to distinguish between these different approaches to construction management research according to their relationship to theory. It is found that the distinction between strong and weak forms of the UA requirement, combined with the distinction between empirically and theoretically driven generate a cross-classification matrix which can accommodate a wide range of approaches. It is shown that action research can resolve a paradox generated by an empty class in the matrix
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.