From re‐presentation to re‐creation: Contributing to a radicalisation of linguistically turned interviewing in management studies

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explore the possibilities of letting ideas from ethnomethodology inform a radicalisation (i.e. going to the roots) of interviewing in management and organization studies.

Design/methodology/approach

The argument draws upon insights from discourse and conversation analysis, in particular the acknowledgement of the productive function of language use in social life.

Findings

A radicalised approach to interviews is one that tries to abstain from letting the interview talk represent an organizational reality “out there.” The aim of radicalised interviewing is rather that of trying to identify situations and practices within the organization that resemble the interview situation.

Research limitations/implications

Interview research within management and organization studies needs to take into consideration that the relation between interview accounts and organizational reality is one of the re‐creation rather than re‐presentation. This insight has implications for both the interview practice and the analysis of interview material. The challenge for the interviewer is to contribute to an interview situation that enables the re‐creation of organizational reality.

Practical implications

The practice of interviewing in business practice offers the same kind of problems as the research interview, and thus needs to take into consideration the re‐creational nature of the interview situation.

Originality/value

The paper attempts to complete the linguistic turn and explore the radical consequences for the practice of interviewing. Doing so, the paper contributes to the self‐reflexive methodological debate in a way that tries to avoid pragmatic and inconsistent argumentation.

Citation

Svensson, P. (2009), "From re‐presentation to re‐creation: Contributing to a radicalisation of linguistically turned interviewing in management studies", Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 168-185. https://doi.org/10.1108/17465640910978418