All required literature for Advanced Research Methods MAN-
MOD012 Part A Qualitative 2019-2020
Langley, A., & Abdallah, C. (2015). Templates and turns in qualitative studies of strategy and
management. In Research methods for strategic management (pp. 155-184). Routledge.
Abstract: purpose to present four different approaches to qualitative research on different
epistemological foundations. Design/methodology/approach: draw on successful empirical
qualitative research. Findings: two templates on different logics of writings one is positivist and the
second interpretive. Next two turns one practice and one discursive. Value: comparing different
approaches is helpful for researchers thinking about doing qualitative research.
Introduction, how can we deal with phenomena like decision making, learning, strategizing planning
innovating and changing. Qualitative data can understand processes in rich detail. This process data
includes observations, interpretations (e.g. interviews) and artefacts (archival records). The challenge
is making sense of them for valuable contributions. First of all there are different epistemological
assumptions impacting interpretation. Second, challenge of writing it down. Third, two well
established templates and two more recent turns.
A Two templates: common complaint is non uniform rules of qualitative research. Two templates
provide some guidance: the Eisenhardt method and the Gioia method. We focus on logical structure
(method) and the rhetorical structure (published article).
1.The Eisenhardt Template: Credibly Novel Nomothetic Theory from Case Comparisons: Kathleen
Eisenhardt has an impressive history in qualitative research with her method becoming somewhat of
a template in the 90s.
Epistemological foundations and purposes: her method is a positivist in orientation aimed at
developing testable hypothesis. It is turned towards induction, generating formal propositions from
case study evidence. It is especially useful when theory conflict concerning phenomena and case
studies priced novel insights. It creates novel insights but in a very credible way (paradoxical at first
sight).
Logic of the method: the replication logic of Eisenhardt demands multiple cases (4 to 10)
because you want to abstract common constructs to describe generic process components across all
the cases which can be linked to some kind of performance. The choice for cases is gaining access to
promising phenomena where new knowledge might emerge. You want to compare some differences
that are complete opposite form one another while differences for other dimensions are controlled.
Usually novel information in fields that have not been research in a process-oriented way. Credibility
is raised by sampling multiple perspectives within each case with an emphasis on collecting multiple
sources of data, not just interviews (triangulation). Transcripts are used for enhancing validity and
reliability. Data analysis is seen as a two-stage process; first the construction of complete within case
narratives and followed by iterative processes of case comparison until explaining constructs for
differences and similarities begin to emerge.
Rhetoric of the writing: Eisenhardt has perfected a model of writing to ensure maximal
chances of novelty. The first move involves establishing novelty in which a contrast is drawn between
findings and the expectations from existing literature. This creates surprises and tension that needs
to be resolved. Second move is then representing evidence in two steps, first presenting an overall
semi-qualitative portrait of evidence for the relationship you just proposed in a table. And secondly
providing some qualitative narratives of for example two low and two high performing. The final
1
,move is explaining why the observed relationship might hold. It is the beginning of theoretical
contributions by already discussing data and prior research. Further theory building might occur if
the findings can be coherent to a theoretical story beyond individual components, but this is
challenging and not always possible with the need for novelty and credibility.
Assessing the limitations and variations: very successful approach to strategy process
research and many have drawn on its template. However, there are some limitations: 1. The
empirical process tends to variance rather than process theorizations which tries to explain more
why some perform different from others than explaining patterns evolving over time. Variance
models assume there is something like a final outcome, but performance is not fixed, and you just
take some moment in time. Performance is more an input for ongoing processes of evaluating and
interpretation that can have an effect on next actions. But there I no reason why multiple case
analyses are not able of analysing process models however the logic differs because you do not look
for explaining differences as described above but you look for temporal patterns across cases.
Interview methodology limits the depth of evolutionary process detail that can be captured in these
studies. 2. The rhetoric of surprising finding might be overemphasised. Researcher might argue
instead of theory development for more focus on theory elaboration. 3. Positivist in orientation
attempting to gain factual data about an objectively observable phenomena in the real world.
2.The Gioia Method: Interpretive Modelling of Informant Understandings over Time: some saw the
Eisenhardt method as a distortion of the principles of interpretive case method that emphasises
depth of understanding of unique situations. However, these single case methods have very different
objectives and contributions. A perfected approach for successfully publishing and doing single in-
depth interpretive case studies is that of Gioia. He has done work in sensemaking/giving, identity
change and even received rewards for it leading to a new emerging template.
Epistemological foundations and purposes: Gioia describes himself as a grounded theorist
(see chapter 23) within an interpretive philosophy. They want to understand how people understand
change, generating narratives. These are first order participant perspectives plus second order
interpretation of these perspective by researchers. A tension remains between novelty and
plausibility.
Logic of the method: Yin says you can choose with three different logics, the extreme case
(exceptional), the critical case (particular theory testing), or revelatory case with a high potential for
developing new insight into an understudied phenomenon. Gioia seems to be working from a
revelatory case logic. Besides these technical criteria, in depth ethnographic studies of change are in
need of good access to provide richness of data (Gioia studied his own university a lot). Combination
of insider and outsider perspectives provide access to richness and can contribute to trustworthiness
as long as you keep confidentiality and independence in mind. Data collection will be interviews in
multiple round at multiple levels and positions and observational data. Methodology will entail a
highly disciplined coding and analysis process with as central point a hierarchical data structure
(Strauss and Corbin, 1990). They start with open coding using words of participants grouping them n
first order concepts through constant comparison. Axial coding is then used to link these first order
concepts in second order concepts at a higher level of abstraction. Through further comparison
researchers come to aggregate dimensions or core categories that summarise elements of the
emerging theoretical theory. The process is iteratively, moving back and forth between codes and
data and additional data collection from emerging ideas. They use different criteria than validity and
reliability and look more to trustworthiness (member checking and multiple researchers). You need
to find the twist that pulls it al together.
Rhetoric of writing: not as uniform as the Eisenhardt method but have instructive
commonalities. First the contribution comes from establishing a gap within the existing research on
2
, understanding processes (not contradiction as seen with Eisenhardt). Presentation of findings start
with a data structure diagram with the three orders we just discussed. Then elaborate on the main
themes which is done in two ways: per theme elaborate as part of narrative account with multiple
references and secondly additional quotations for each theme are displayed in a large accompanying
table. You put striking quotes in your text and the additional proof in the table. After presenting the
findings, the authors return to the overall model and elaborate its contributions, maybe with
propositions.
Assessing limitation and variations: several elements have been used by others especially in
the field or organisational identity, but the diagram data structure has become very common.
However, it has limitations as well. 1. Challenge of convincing readers of the transferability and
relevance of findings from the single case study. It is difficult even when clear generic characteristics
are seen and without any form of comparison theory building becomes challenging. 2. Easy to fall for
just telling boring narratives without any theoretical insights with obvious value. This is skill is very
vital for researchers. 3. It leads to process models of how people make sense but can be at a high
level of aggregation losing out on a complete understanding of how and why things occur.
B Two turns: now more recent and less tradition approaches to qualitative studies which are more
broader and less codified but have generated a great deal of interest.
3.Practice turn: studying strategy as a social practice.
Epistemological foundations: see strategy as something people do so empirical focus begins
with activity on micro level activities that practitioners engage with. Some say it ends where it starts
with doing of strategy with examples of works by Gioia and Eisenhardt. It has renewed interests in
human and practical elements of strategy making. Becomes deeper and more distinctive when
commitment to social practices is included where practices are the primary building blocks of social
reality. Social practice theory is not a unified theory but a collection of authors and approaches. What
are the implications for empirical research: 1. Practice theory emphasizes the way in which
knowledge is embedded in and regenerated through practical activity (implicit). This is not available
through interviews, but you need to see what people do which needs ethnographic observations (see
chapter 19). 2. Material objects ranging from advanced technologies to everyday tools are deeply
intertwined in everyday practices mediating what and how is accomplished and therefore qualified
as socio-material. Need to look at nonhuman agency as well and how these material elements impact
practice. 3. An important notion is that practices are recursive. Ongoing activities create stabilization
and reification of social orders which become resources for subsequent activity. These can be
enabling and constraining for these subsequent activities, this research requires long time frames.
Doing and writing research from the practice turn: ethnography has been favoured as
research method enabling the nonarticulated knowledge of participants and to see how material
objects are mobilised within practice. Observation over long time periods require to capture the
recursive nature of practices. This immense database of different kinds of information needs to be
communicated in the context of journal articles. Two ways of describing, first is detailed elaboration
and unfurling of highly specific but powerful vignettes to build in depth analysis. Explicitly showing
how described practises are manifested in everyday elements add to credibility. Second is a
representation of the recursive nature of actions and institutions where the realm of action and
institutions are shown as horizontal parallel lines that interact. It shows how institutions impact
actions that are reproduced and adapted which over time can shift institutions as well.
Assessing limitations and variations: potential to understand doing of strategy differently
showing light on its implicit, socio-material and recursive nature, largely absent in the two templates
3
