1932

Abstract

I explore how qualitative research has evolved in organizational research by examining developments in two major areas: how we do qualitative research and how we evaluate it. In particular, I track broad changes in case study, grounded theory, and ethnographic methods, as well as changes in various analytic practices or “moves” common across each as they relate to study design and data collection, coding and analysis, and writing and publishing. In reviewing where the field has been, I discuss areas where qualitative methods have been particularly strong and where there are opportunities for growth. I conclude by discussing the future of qualitative methods as they pertain to the global proliferation of qualitative research, the ongoing challenges to positivist science, and the emergence of artificial intelligence.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111722-032953
2025-01-21
2025-02-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/orgpsych/12/1/annurev-orgpsych-111722-032953.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111722-032953&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Akemu O, Abdelnour S. 2020.. Confronting the digital: doing ethnography in modern organizational settings. . Organ. Res. Methods 23:(2):296321
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  2. Alvesson M, Sandberg J. 2011.. Generating research questions through problematization. . Acad. Manag. Rev. 36:(2):24771
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Alvesson M, Sandberg J. 2013.. Constructing Research Questions: Doing Interesting Research. London:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Amis JM, Silk ML. 2008.. The philosophy and politics of quality in qualitative organizational research. . Organ. Res. Methods 11:(3):45680
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bamberger PA. 2018.. AMD—clarifying what we are about and where we are going. . Acad. Manag. Discov. 4:(1):110
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bansal P, Corley K. 2012.. Publishing in AMJ—part 7: What's different about qualitative research?. Acad. Manag. J. 55:(3):50913
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  7. Barros A, Alcadipani R. 2023.. Decolonizing journals in management and organizations? Epistemological colonial encounters and the double translation. . Manag. Learn. 54:(4):57686
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bartunek JM, Rynes SL, Ireland RD. 2006.. What makes management research interesting, and why does it matter?. Acad. Manag. J. 49:(1):915
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  9. Bechky BA, O'Mahoney S. 2015.. Leveraging comparative field data for theory generation. . In Handbook of Qualitative Organizational Research: Innovative Pathways and Methods, ed. KD Elsbach, RM Kramer , pp. 16876. New York:: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Behfar K, Okhuysen GA. 2018.. Discovery within validation logic: deliberately surfacing, complementing, and substituting abductive reasoning in hypothetico-deductive inquiry. . Organ. Sci. 29:(2):32340
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  11. Bolade-Ogunfodun Y, Soga LR, Laker B. 2023.. Entwined positionality and interpretive frames of reference: an autoethnographic account. . Organ. Res. Methods 26:(4):678704
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  12. Charmaz K. 2014.. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Chidlow A, Plakoyiannaki E, Welch C. 2014.. Translation in cross-language international business research: beyond equivalence. . J. Int. Bus. Stud. 45::56282
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  14. Cunliffe AL, Karunanayake G. 2013.. Working within hyphen-spaces in ethnographic research: implications for research identities and practice. . Organ. Res. Methods 16:(3):36492
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  15. Dumont G. 2023.. Immersion in organizational ethnography: four methodological requirements to immerse oneself in the field. . Organ. Res. Methods 26:(3):44158
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  16. Dundon T, Ryan P. 2010.. Interviewing reluctant respondents: strikes, henchmen & Gaelic games. . Organ. Res. Methods 13:(3):56281
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  17. Eisenhardt KM. 1989.. Building theories from case study research. . Acad. Manag. Rev. 14:(4):53250
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  18. Eisenhardt KM. 2021.. What is the Eisenhardt Method, really?. Strateg. Organ. 19:(1):14760
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  19. Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME. 2007.. Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. . Acad. Manag. J. 50:(1):2532
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  20. Feldman MS, Bell J, Berger MT. 2004.. Gaining Access: A Practical and Theoretical Guide for Qualitative Researchers. Walnut Creek, CA:: AltaMira
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Gehman J, Glaser VL, Eisenhardt KM, Gioia D, Langley A, Corley KG. 2018.. Finding theory–method fit: a comparison of three qualitative approaches to theory building. . J. Manag. Inq. 27:(3):284300
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  22. Gibbert M, Ruigrok W. 2010.. The “what” and “how” of case study rigor: three strategies based on published work. . Organ. Res. Methods 13:(4):71037
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  23. Gioia DA, Corley KG, Hamilton AL. 2012.. Organizational research. . Organ. Res. Methods 16:(1):1531
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  24. Gioia DA, Corley KG, Hamilton AL. 2013.. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: notes on the Gioia methodology. . Organ. Res. Methods 16:(1):1531
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  25. Glaser B. 1992.. Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press:
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Glaser B, Strauss A. 1967.. Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York:: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Golden-Biddle K, Locke K. 1993.. Appealing work: an investigation of how ethnographic texts convince. . Organ. Sci. 4:(4):595616
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  28. Golden-Biddle K, Locke K. 1997.. Composing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Grodal S, Anteby M, Holm AL. 2021.. Achieving rigor in qualitative analysis: the role of active categorization in theory building. . Acad. Manag. Rev. 46:(3):591612
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  30. Gylfe P, Franck H, Lebaron C, Mantere S. 2016.. Video methods in strategy research: focusing on embodied cognition. . Strateg. Manag. J. 37:(1):13348
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  31. Halme M, Piekkari R, Matos S, Wierenga M, Hall J. 2024.. Rigour versus reality: contextualizing qualitative research in the low-income settings in emerging markets. . Br. J. Manag. 35:(1):3651
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  32. Harley B, Cornelissen J. 2022.. Rigor with or without templates? The pursuit of methodological rigor in qualitative research. . Organ. Res. Methods 25:(2):23961
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  33. Hassard J, Burns D, Hyde P, Burns JP. 2018.. A visual turn for organizational ethnography: embodying the subject in video-based research. . Organ. Stud. 39:(10):140324
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  34. Hoon C. 2013.. Meta-synthesis of qualitative case studies: an approach to theory building. . Organ. Res. Methods 16:(4):52256
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  35. Jarrett M, Liu F. 2018.. “ Zooming with” a participatory approach to the use of video ethnography in organizational studies. . Organ. Res. Methods 21:(2):36685
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  36. Jarzabkowski P, Bednarek R, Cabantous L. 2015.. Conducting global team-based ethnography: methodological challenges and practical methods. . Hum. Relat. 68:(1):333
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  37. Jonsen K, Fendt J, Point S. 2018.. Convincing qualitative research: What constitutes persuasive writing?. Organ. Res. Methods 21:(1):3067
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  38. Köhler T. 2016.. From the editors: on writing up qualitative research in management learning and education. . Acad. Manag. Learn. Edu. 15:(3):40018
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  39. Köhler T, Lambert LS, eds. 2022.. Templates in qualitative research methods. . Organ. Res. Methods 25:(2):183429
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  40. Köhler T, Rumyantseva M, Welch C. 2023.. Qualitative restudies: research designs for retheorizing. . Organ. Res. Methods 2023::10944281231216323
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Langley A. 1999.. Strategies for theorizing from process data. . Acad. Manag. Rev. 24:(4):691710
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  42. Langley A, Abdallah C. 2011.. Templates and turns in qualitative studies of strategy and management. . In Research Methods for Strategic Management, ed. G Battista Dagnino, MC Cinici , pp. 13766. London:: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Langley A, Klag M. 2019.. Being where? Navigating the involvement paradox in qualitative research accounts. . Organ. Res. Methods 22:(2):51538
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  44. Langley A, Ravasi D. 2019.. Visual artifacts as tools for analysis and theorizing. . In The Production of Managerial Knowledge and Organizational Theory: New Approaches to Writing, Producing and Consuming Theory (Research in the Sociology of Organizations). Vol. 59, ed. TB Zilber, JM Amis, J Mair , pp. 17399. Leeds, UK:: Emerald Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. LeBaron C, Jarzabkowski P, Pratt MG, Fetzer G. 2018.. An introduction to video methods in organizational research. . Organ. Res. Methods 21:(2):23960
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  46. Leitch CM, Hill FM, Harrison RT. 2010.. The philosophy and practice of interpretivist research in entrepreneurship: quality, validation, and trust. . Organ. Res. Methods 13:(1):6784
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  47. Lincoln YS, Guba EG. 1985.. Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Locke K. 1996.. Rewriting the discovery of grounded theory after 25 years?. J. Manag. Inq. 5:(3):23945
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  49. Locke K. 2001.. Grounded Theory in Management Research. London:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Locke K, Feldman M, Golden-Biddle K. 2015.. Discovery, validation, and live coding. . In Handbook of Qualitative Organizational Research: Innovative Pathways and Methods, ed. KD Elsbach, RM Kramer , pp. 37180. New York:: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Locke K, Feldman M, Golden-Biddle K. 2022.. Coding practices and iterativity: beyond templates for analyzing qualitative data. . Organ. Res. Methods 25:(2):26284
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  52. Locke K, Golden-Biddle K. 1997.. Constructing opportunities for contribution: structuring intertextual coherence and ‘problematizing’ in organizational studies. . Acad. Manag. J. 40:(5):102362
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  53. Locke K, Golden-Biddle K. 2002.. An introduction to qualitative research: its potential for industrial and organizational psychology. . In Handbook of Research Methods in Industrial and Organizational Psychology, ed. SG Rogelberg , pp. 99118. Malden, MA:: Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Locke K, Golden-Biddle K, Feldman MS. 2008.. Making doubt generative: rethinking the role of doubt in the research process. . Organ. Sci. 19:(6):90718
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  55. Locke K, Velamuri SR. 2009.. The design of member review: showing what to organization members and why. . Organ. Res. Methods 12:(3):488509
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  56. Marcus GE. 1995.. Ethnography in/of the world system: the emergence of multi-sited ethnography. . Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 24::95117
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  57. Martin PY, Turner BA. 1986.. Grounded theory and organizational research. . J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 22:(2):14157
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  58. McGrath JE. 1981.. Dilemmatics: the study of research choices and dilemmas. . Am. Behav. Sci. 25:(2):179210
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  59. Mees-Buss J, Welch C, Piekkari R. 2022.. From templates to heuristics: how and why to move beyond the Gioia methodology. . Organ. Res. Methods 25:(2):40529
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  60. O'Kane P, Smith A, Lerman MP. 2021.. Building transparency and trustworthiness in inductive research through computer-aided qualitative data analysis software. . Organ. Res. Methods 24:(1):10439
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  61. O'Reilly K, Paper D, Marx S. 2012.. Demystifying grounded theory for business research. . Organ. Res. Methods 15:(2):24762
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  62. Outila V, Piekkari R, Mihailova I. 2019.. A discursive void in a cross-language study on Russia: strategies for negotiating shared meaning. Manag. . Organ. Rev. 15:(2):40327
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  63. Peticca-Harris A, DeGama N, Elias SR. 2016.. A dynamic process model for finding informants and gaining access in qualitative research. . Organ. Res. Methods 19:(3):376401
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  64. Piekkari R, Welch C. 2018.. The case study in management research: beyond the positivist legacy of Eisenhardt and Yin. . In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods, ed. C Cassell, G Grandy, AL Cunliffe , pp. 34558. London:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Prasad P. 2005.. Crafting Qualitative Research: Working in the Post-Positivist Traditions. New York:: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Pratt MG. 2008.. Fitting oval pegs into round holes: tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals. . Organ. Res. Methods 11:(3):481509
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  67. Pratt MG. 2009.. For the lack of a boilerplate: tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. . Acad. Manag. J. 52:(5):85662
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  68. Pratt MG. 2015.. Crafting and selecting research questions and contexts in qualitative research. . In Handbook of Qualitative Organizational Research: Innovative Pathways and Methods, ed. K Elsbach, RM Kramer , pp. 17785. New York:: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Pratt MG. 2023.. General coding and analysis in qualitative research. . In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology. Oxford, UK:: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Pratt MG, Bonaccio S. 2016.. Qualitative research in IO psychology: maps, myths, and moving forward. . Ind. Organ. Psychol. 9:(4):693715
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  71. Pratt MG, Kaplan S, Whittington R. 2020.. Editorial essay: the tumult over transparency: decoupling transparency from replication in establishing trustworthy qualitative research. . Admin. Sci. Q. 65:(1):119
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  72. Pratt MG, Köhler T, Welch C, Rumyantseva M. 2024.. Trustworthiness in qualitative research: reconsidering replication. . In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research Quality, ed. U Flick . Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Pratt MG, Sala G. 2021.. A researcher's toolkit for observational methods. . In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management. Oxford, UK:: Oxford Univ. Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.283
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Pratt MG, Sonenshein S, Feldman MS. 2022.. Moving beyond templates: a bricolage approach to conducting trustworthy qualitative research. . Organ. Res. Methods 25:(2):21138
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  75. Rockmann KW, Vough HC. 2023.. Using quotes to present claims: practices for the writing stages of qualitative research. . Organ. Res. Methods 2023::129
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Rynes S, Bartunek J. 2015.. Qualitative research: It just keeps getting more interesting! In Handbook of Qualitative Organizational Research: Innovative Pathways and Methods, ed. KD Elsbach, RM Kramer , pp. 923. New York:: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Sætre AS, Van de Ven A. 2021.. Generating theory by abduction. . Acad. Manag. Rev. 46:(4):684701
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  78. Saldaña J. 2021.. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Sandberg J. 2005.. How do we justify knowledge produced within interpretive approaches?. Organ. Res. Methods 8:(1):4168
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  80. Seale C. 1999.. Quality in qualitative research. . Qual. Inq. 5:(4):46578
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  81. Shortt HL, Warren SK. 2019.. Grounded visual pattern analysis: photographs in organizational field studies. . Organ. Res. Methods 22:(2):53963
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  82. Smets M, Burke G, Jarzabkowski P, Spee P. 2014.. Charting new territory for organizational ethnography: insights from a team-based video ethnography. . J. Organ. Ethnogr. 3:(1):1026
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  83. Spradley J. 1979.. The Ethnographic Interview. New York:: Holt Rinehart & Winston
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Stake RE. 1995.. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Strauss A, Corbin J. 1998.. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Suddaby R. 2006.. From the editors: what grounded theory is not. . Acad. Manag. J. 49:(4):63342
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  87. Thorpe A. 2014.. Doing the right thing or doing the think right: implications of participant withdrawal. . Organ. Res. Methods 17:(3):25577
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  88. Tietze S, Dick P. 2013.. The victorious English language: hegemonic practices in the management academy. . J. Manag. Inq. 22:(1):12234
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  89. Turner B. 1983.. The use of grounded theory for the qualitative analysis of organizational behaviour. . J. Manag. Stud. 20:(3):33348
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  90. Van Maanen J, ed. 1979.. Qualitative methodology. . Admin. Sci. Q. 24:(4):520706
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  91. Van Maanen J. 1988.. Tales of the Field: On Writing Ethnography. Chicago:: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Van Maanen J. 2010.. A song for my supper: more tales of the field. . Organ. Res. Methods 13:(2):24055
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  93. Welch C, Piekkari R. 2017.. How should we (not) judge the ‘quality’ of qualitative research? A re-assessment of current evaluative criteria in International Business. . J. World Bus. 52:(5):71425
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  94. Welch C, Piekkari R, Plakoyiannaki E, Paavilainen-Mäntymäki E. 2011.. Theorising from case studies: towards a pluralist future for international business research. . J. Int. Bus. Stud. 42::74062
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  95. Whiting R, Symon G, Roby H, Chamakiotis P. 2018.. Who's behind the lens? A reflexive analysis of roles in participatory video research. . Organ. Res. Methods 21:(2):31640
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  96. Xian H. 2008.. Lost in translation? Language, culture and the roles of translator in cross-cultural management research. . Qual. Res. Organ. Manag. 3:(3):23145
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  97. Yin RK. 1984.. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA:: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Yin RK. 2003.. Designing case studies. . Qual. Res. Methods 5:(14):35986
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Zilber TB, Zanoni P. 2022.. Templates of ethnographic writing in organization studies: beyond the hegemony of the detective story. . Organ. Res. Methods 25:(2):371404
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111722-032953
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-111722-032953
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error