Search results

This chapter argues for the unrealised potential value of methodologies derived from a critical realist research philosophy in the field of entrepreneurship studies. Critical realism offers methodological alternatives that, through the generation of new insights into social relations, social structures and key generative mechanisms, can offer significant value for entrepreneurship researchers. Reflecting on their personal experiences researching from a critical realist perspective in entrepreneurship studies, the authors explore how this research philosophy can extend the field of inquiry and promote new perspectives. The chapter explores this in relation to the specific topic of enterprise policy and demystifies some aspects of critical realism by setting out some of its basic principles to demonstrate their potential to develop new insights. Further, this approach can create significant impact, for example, through the development of effective interventions. The chapter concludes by identifying implications for enterprise policy development, implementation and evaluation.

The paper aims to provide a response to commentaries in this issue by Andrew Sayer, and Robert W. Scapens and ChunLei Yang on “Case studies and differentiated realities” a paper by Sue Llewellyn published in Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management Vol. 4 No. 1, 2007.

Discusses issues raised in the commentaries around “differentiated realities”, “pluralist ontology” and the “single reality” of social constructivism.

Reiterates an understanding of the idea of “differentiated realities” and discusses the methodological implications that arise from it.

Clarifies Llewellyn's original discussion of differentiated realities and case studies.

The relationship between ontology, realism, and normativity is complex and contentious. While naturalist and realist stances have tended to ground questions of normativity in ontology and accounts of human nature, critical theories have been critical of the relationship between ontological and normative projects. Queer theory in particular has been critical of ontological endeavors. Exploring the problem of normativity and ontology, this paper will make the case that the critical realist ontology of open systems and complex, contingent, conjunctural causation deeply resonates with queer theory, generating a queer ontology that both allows for and undermines ontological and normative projects.

The chapter proposes that higher education researchers descriptively analyze and evaluate practices regarding university leadership and management through the lens of phronēsis (understood as “practical reasonableness”). It elaborates and develops an emerging orientation, coming from a range of social and organizational theorists, for a “philosophical” or “moral sociology” that derives neo-Aristotelian insights into agency and social practices.

This chapter addresses current trends regarding how the meta-theory of critical realism (CR) frames comparative and international education research and practice. It introduces the key tenets of CR and explores how these ideas have been and can be applied in educational research. It demonstrates how CR provides a valuable alternative to the positivist, interpretivist and constructivist paradigms, and leverages elements of all three to provide new approaches to develop knowledge that is free from the dualisms embedded in their ontological assumptions. I argue that by offering a dialectical understanding of structure and agency, as well as the material and ideational dimension of social reality, CR provides an ontological framework that does not do conceptual violence to the reality we seek to research. This ontological basis is particularly valuable to the social justice agenda of educational research in general because it allows researchers to work beneath the surface of empirical research to disclose the field of possibilities for social action.

The paper's purpose is to provide a commentary on “Case studies and differentiated realities” a paper by Sue Llewellyn published in Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management Vol. 4 No 1, 2007

The approach is to draw upon critical realist and other philosophy of social science to respond constructively to Llewellyn's paper.

Rejects the claim that we need a concept of plural realities rather than a concept of a single, differentiated reality. Endorses Llewellyn's argument that different meanings of objectivity and subjectivity often go unnoticed, undermining their user's arguments. Takes issue with Llewellyn's claim that surveys are better suited to stable situations and case studies for changing situations. Adds support to the defence of case studies against the charge of lack of representativeness, by drawing upon ontological arguments about part‐whole relations and upon defences of practical reason.

The implication of these points is that a still stronger defence of case study approaches can be made.

A major theme of much of the literature on Japanese transplants concerns the construction of employer hegemony on the basis of stringent selection, employee involvement and team‐ working. Many of the more critical contributions to this literature emphasise the tightness of work schedules and the narrow confines of worker initiative, but they nevertheless emphasise the capacity of management to engineer worker compliance and co‐operation, through a sophisticated mix of communications, surveillance and performance monitoring (Morgan and Sayer, 1988; Garrahan and Stewart, 1992; Sewell and Wilkinson, 1992; Graham, 1995). This paper deploys data from current research on a cluster of Japanese manufacturing ‘transplants’ in the Midlands to assess these arguments and to develop a rather different analysis of the problematical management of labour within such workplaces.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how illegal settlers and poor families struggle for basic necessities through land invasions, covert practices and illegal sabotage, examining how fundamental rights to subsistence and dignity are superior to private property claims.

The paper combines two qualitative research projects that examined property rights in Kyrgyzstan, conducting semi‐structured interviews with poor groups, elites and state officials. One project was conducted between 2009‐2010, examining two illegal settlements and a squatted building in the capital Bishkek, and the other project took place between 2007‐2008 in four villages in Osh region.

It was found that illegal settlers and poor families deliberate upon the moral aspects of land and property, though sometimes their judgements are distorted by nationalist feelings and racialised identities. Poor and propertyless groups struggle for basic necessities, lacking access to social rights and facing class contempt and state coercion.

The authors criticise de Soto's ideas on legalising squatters' holdings, suggesting that his property rights approach to land offers a flawed moral vision for society and a mis‐understanding of illegal settlements.

International donors need to re‐think development strategies for increasing growth and reducing poverty, and for Kyrgyzstan to abandon the national residential registration system (propiska).

The authors' moral responsibilities approach on property recognises the importance of land and valuable resources for human capabilities, the competing obligations of the state and the role of moral propriety and sentiments in shaping responsibilities towards vulnerable and poor groups.

The purpose of this paper is to describe a methodological experiment designed to test the potential of an auto/biographical (Stanley, 1992) life history. Could it serve a purpose for which it was not originally intended? Specifically, I consider the extent to which a life history articulates with the literature on migration, even though it was not written for this purpose.

I consider this issue via a series of four narrative vignettes representing the story of this experiment.

I found that the life history does more than articulate with the migration literature on conceptual distinction. It also animates, supplements and interrogates theories therein about the utility and futility of making distinctions. In this respect the experiment has been a success.

This paper has not explicitly engaged with the ethics and politics of employing life history in ways for which it was not intended.

This paper is making a methodological contribution to the area of qualitative research and suggests that multiple analyses might perhaps make life history more attractive to funders.