Purpose – This chapter presents four different approaches to doing and writing qualitative research in strategy and management based on different epistemological foundations. It describes two well-established “templates” for doing such work, and introduces two more recent “turns” that merit greater attention.
Design/Methodology/Approach – The chapter draws on methodological texts and a detailed analysis of successful empirical exemplars from the strategy and organization literature to show how qualitative research on strategy processes can be effectively carried out and written up.
Findings – The two “templates” are based on different logics and modes of writing. The first is based on a positivist epistemology and aims to develop nomothetic theoretical propositions, while the second is interpretive and more concerned to capture and gain insight from the meanings given to organizational phenomena. The two “turns” (the practice turn and the discursive turn) are not as well defined but are generating innovative contributions based on new ways of considering the social world.
Originality/Value – The chapter should be helpful to researchers considering qualitative methods for the study of strategy processes. It contributes by comparing different approaches and by recognizing that part of the challenge of doing qualitative research lies in writing it up to communicate its insights in a credible way. Thus while describing the different methods, the chapter also draws attention to effective forms of writing. In addition, it introduces and assesses two more recent “turns” that offer promising routes to novel insight as well as having particular ontological and epistemological affinities with qualitative research methods.
Accounting for organizational history is essential to any change process. We argue, however, that the intentional revision of that history also can be important. We treat…
Accounting for organizational history is essential to any change process. We argue, however, that the intentional revision of that history also can be important. We treat history as malleable, because events and actions from the past are susceptible to reinterpretation as organizations try to align with the way they see themselves in the present and want to see themselves in the future. Because change is a prospective, future‐oriented process, whereas sensemaking is a retrospective, past‐oriented process, making sense of the future requires an ability to envision the future as having already occurred, i.e. to think in the future perfect tense. We offer an initial conceptual exploration of organizational change from a revisionist history perspective that turns on future perfect thinking, a view that enlarges our conceptualization of the ways in which history affects organizational adaptation and change.
Some research suggests that the higher a manager rises, the less likely it is that the manager will receive quality feedback. Reports on a survey which shows that executives want feedback. Several fallacies about appraisal are outlined before a case (or appraisal) is presented.
Examines the construct of ethics in general and of business ethics in particular. Provides a conceptual discussion of the dynamics of ethics in society and the dynamics of…
Examines the construct of ethics in general and of business ethics in particular. Provides a conceptual discussion of the dynamics of ethics in society and the dynamics of business ethics in the marketplace. Ethics and business ethics constructs are dependent upon two principal parameters – time and culture. Eventually, ethics and business ethics are about what is perceived as acceptable or unacceptable at a specific time and in a specific cultural setting. What was ethical yesterday may not be ethical today, and what is ethical today may not be ethical tomorrow. Furthermore, both the company’s view and the views of others may determine what is acceptable or unacceptable in business ethics. This is a social construction that may differ between the parties involved in a specific context. The discussion is supported by two brief and different cases from the automobile industry. This research contributes a set of generic models that examine business ethics dynamics.
Attempts to consider how a founder has reduced equivocality in relation to support networks and reducing risks, especially in an international environment. Presents the…
Attempts to consider how a founder has reduced equivocality in relation to support networks and reducing risks, especially in an international environment. Presents the case studies of five Danish and Australian born global companies. Considers different global models and their limitations. Presents the findings of recent surveys in this area. Concludes that internationalization has not been the primary objective in the founding process and gives direction for further research.
In this volume, we take the baton from previous editors Dave Ketchen and Don Bergh in the Research Methodology in Strategy and Management series. Our approach is to stand…
In this volume, we take the baton from previous editors Dave Ketchen and Don Bergh in the Research Methodology in Strategy and Management series. Our approach is to stand on the shoulders of these editors and authors who have published in the series. So, we begin, in this chapter, by highlighting innovative work published in this volume that has provided actionable and practical suggestions for problems researchers face in their work. We briefly describe the chapters, including the first two chapters in this volume from Kathleen M. Eisenhardt and Dennis Gioia, and introduce new methodologies and tools to guide researchers in their efforts to build high quality, publishable work. We also describe future work that, in our view, needs to be addressed for the fields of strategic management in particular and management more generally to continue to evolve.
Seeking an answer to the question “how does organizational identity change?” we analyze the visual identity marker of universities, namely logos, as time-related artifacts…
Seeking an answer to the question “how does organizational identity change?” we analyze the visual identity marker of universities, namely logos, as time-related artifacts embodying visual scripts. Engaging with the Stinchcombe hypothesis, we identify five processes to the creation of visual identities of organizations: In addition to (1) imprinting (enactment of the contemporary script) and (2) imprinting-cum-inertia (persistent enactment of epochal scripts), we also identify (3) renewal (enactment of an up-to-date epochal script), (4) historization (enactment of a recovered older epochal script), and (5) multiplicity (simultaneous enactment of multiple epochal scripts). We argue that these processes work together to produce contemporary heterogeneity of visualized identity narratives of universities. We illustrate this, first, with a survey of the current-day logos of 814 university emblems in 20 countries from across the world. Second, drawing on archival and interview materials, we analyze the histories of exemplar university logos to illustrate the various time-related processes. Therefore, by interjecting history – as both time and process – into the analysis of the visualization of organizational identity, we both join with the phenomenological and semiotic analysis of visual material as well as demonstrate that history is not merely a fixed factor echoing imprinting and inertia but rather also includes several forms of engagement with temporality that are less deterministic. Overall, we argue that enactment engages with perceptions of time (imaginations of the past, present, and future) and with perceptions fixed by time (epochal imprinting and inertia) to produce heterogeneity in the visualization of organizational identity.
While qualitative work has a long tradition in the strategy field and has recently regained popularity, we have not paused to take stock of how such work offers…
While qualitative work has a long tradition in the strategy field and has recently regained popularity, we have not paused to take stock of how such work offers contributions. We address this oversight with a review of qualitative studies of strategy published in five top-tier journals over an extended period of 15 years (2003–2017). In an attempt to organize the field, we develop an empirically grounded organizing framework. We identify 12 designs that are evident in the literature, or “designs-in-use” as we call them. Acknowledging important similarities and differences between the various approaches to qualitative strategy research (QSR), we group these designs into three “families” based on their philosophical orientation. We use these designs and families to identify trends in QSR. We then engage those trends to orient the future development of qualitative methods in the strategy field.