Search results

The purpose of this study is to analyze the author’s experience related to several attempts of getting approved a paper of their authorship about gender and organizations by the lens of a researcher trying to meet his goal.

Throughout the endeavor, the author received substantial feedback and evaluations from editors and reviewers that allowed him to understand better the motivation of those that are dedicated to carry out such task; enhance his work whenever was possible; increase his resilience and self-motivation; and identify several inconsistencies of the peer-review process. Furthermore, that ample opinionated material allowed him to conduct the current autoethnographic study.

Accordingly, the author’s findings identified three aggregate dimensions, namely, demotivating assessments, mixed perceptions and motivating assessments. Moreover, the author did not identify any trace of developmental review (help), bill of rights or notion of being an “artist,” as some scholars suggest, from both the reviewers’ or editors’ part, but only from a specific journal’s editor and one of its reviewers. On the one hand, the majority of the reviewers/editors showed a harsh view about the author’s work or even a lack of interest to ponder his arguments and difficulties to carry out that study. Even though the author alluded to the limitations and unsurmountable hurdles that he faced along the way, they showed neither sympathy nor comprehension to his comments. On the other hand, it was not an easy task to the author to sift the hints provided by them.

Nonetheless, the author also recognizes his own limitations that eventually affected his analysis and point of views. It is also worth noting that this method relies on a unique source (the author).

The author believes that his ideas and opinions have some base and merit. Rather, his findings embrace profound implications for reviewers and editors, particularly in terms of how they perform their work.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first endeavor focusing on peer-review system related to organizational studies and grounded in an autoethnography approach. Therefore, their contribution is derived from a researcher that is familiar with the system and its flaws.

The paper will concentrate on the Grounded Theory Methodology (GTM) from the point of view of the contemplative social sciences (CSS). It will analyze how the mind is engaged in the construction of concept and what the role is of the consciousness of the mind's work in creating a theory that is based on the analysis of empirical data. We will review the research and analytical methods that could be inspirations for Contemplative Grounded Theory (CGT): constructivist grounded theory, classic grounded theory, transformational grounded theory, sociological introspection, holistic ethnography, mindful inquiry and transformational phenomenology, and contemplative qualitative inquiry.

We can find in many classical books from grounded theory (GT) some seeds of contemplative thinking, and we can reconstruct them (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Glaser, 1978; Strauss, 1987). We would like to develop the inspirations more and perhaps change the sense of GT after the contemplative turn. We would like to show the possibilities of using CGT in research and also its limitations. Some empirical examples from research and analysis will be given to show how contemplation could be used in GT.

This article explores challenges faced by doctoral candidates using grounded theory (GT) in their theses, focusing on coding, theory development and time constraints. It also examines the impact of doctoral committees on GT dissertations, addressing epistemological clashes and the desire for familiarity over novelty.

Drawing from a multilevel autoethnography and related literature, this study offers pragmatic solutions and strategies for a seamless research journey.

Coding, theory development and time constraints pose universal challenges, requiring mentorship for effective navigation. Addressing committee dynamics is crucial for developing novel theoretical frameworks.

The article empowers researchers to overcome GT challenges, delving into various positions within the GT paradigm, fostering transparency and facilitating original contributions to their fields.

The purpose of this paper is to conduct a general review of the ethnographic method. It uses metaphors to read several pieces of ethnographic research and discuss the different issues encountered during the research process. The review consisted of new articles but also important books that helped to construct and maintain the field of organizational ethnography.

The paper aims to discuss the ethnography research process through the metaphor of the Christian Seven Sins. It proposes a reflection on planning and conducting ethnographic research. The seven sins are used as a metaphor that can lead to more reflexive research for educational and explanatory purposes. Ultimately, the authors encourage organizational scholars to conduct ethnographic research.

The metaphors of the Christian seven sins represent issues that may arise during an ethnographic research. Gluttony is the dive in all topics that may appear; Greed is to lose yourself in the amount of data; Lust is to get too much involved in the field; Wrath is to take the struggles of the subjects as your own; Envy is to judge other's research according to your paradigm; Sloth is to not collect enough ethnographic data and Pride is forgetting to have a critical perspective toward your data. The redemption of these “sins” brings reflexivity to ethnographic research.

The paper opts to treat ethnography as a methodology that can be utilized with different epistemological and ontological approaches which could diminish the degree of reflection. No metaphor would be able to explain all the details of an ethnographic research project, still the seven sins provided a wide range of ideas to be reflected upon when using the methodology.

As a paper on ethnography, researchers and especially PhD students and early careers can get to know the issues that can arise during ethnographic research and put them in contact with good examples of ethnography in Organization and Management Studies.

This paper groups different complexities and discussions around ethnographic research that may entail research reflexivity. These ideas were scattered through various ethnographic publications. With the review their highlights can be read in a single piece. With these discussions, the paper aims to encourage researchers to conduct good quality ethnography.

The purpose of this study is to know the contribution of service-learning (SL) on the awareness-raising and sensitivity with regards to sustainable development goals (SDGs) in physical education teacher education (PETE) programs.

The research used a qualitative methodology with a case study design from an ethnographic-interpretative approach. The participants were 81 higher education level students from the PETE program. For the collection of information, the following techniques and instruments were used: non-participant observation, students’ portfolios, focus groups and group-interviews.

The main findings show the teaching positive features of SL experiences in the PETE students. In alignment with the sustainable development model, the findings suggest that SL can boost and strengthen knowledge, comprehension, sensitivity and compromise in relation to the SDGs. It can be concluded that SL allows teacher educators to train socially critical professionals and to progress toward a sustainable development.

SL emerges as an appropriate pedagogical model to meet the educational needs of higher education and to face global challenges in relation to the sustainable development of the planet.