Evaluative Practices in Qualitative Management Research: A Critical Review

International Journal of Management Reviews

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2018, Pages 134-154

  Symon, Gillian ^a   Cassell, Catherine ^b   Johnson, Phil ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84994056279     PISSN: 14608545     EISSN: 14682370     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ijmr.12120     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Aguinis, H., Pierce, C.A., Bosco, F.A. and Muslin, I.S. (2009). First decade of Organizational Research Methods: trends in design, measurement and data-analysis topics. Organizational Research Methods, 12, pp. 69–112.
2. Alvesson, M. and Karreman, D. (2001). Odd couple: making sense of the curious concept of knowledge management. Journal of Management Studies, 38, pp. 995–1018.
3. Alvesson, M. and Sandberg, J. (2012). Has management studies lost its way? Ideas for more imaginative and innovative research. Journal of Management Studies, 50, pp. 128–152.
4. Alvesson, M and Willmott, H (2002). Identity regulation as organizational control: producing the appropriate individual. Journal of Management Studies, 39, pp. 619–644.
5. Amis, J. M. and Silk, M. L. (2008). The philosophy and politics of quality in qualitative organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 11, pp. 456–480.
6. Bansal, P. and Corley, K. (2011). The coming of age for qualitative research: embracing the diversity of qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 54, pp. 233–237.
7. Bansal, P. and Corley, K. (2012). Publishing in AMJ – Part 7: what's different about qualitative research? Academy of Management Journal, 55, pp. 509–513.
8. Bedeian, A.G. (2003). The manuscript review process: the proper roles of authors, referees, and editors. Journal of Management Inquiry, 12, pp. 331–338.
9. Bengtsson, L., Elg, U. and Lind, J-I (1997). Bridging the transatlantic publishing gap: how North American reviewers evaluate European idiographic research. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13, pp. 473–492.
10. Bettis, R.A., Gambardella, A., Helfat, C. and Mitchell, W. (2015). Qualitative empirical research in strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 36, pp. 637–639.
11. Blackler, F., Crump, N. and McDonald, S. (1998). Knowledge, organization and competition. In von Krogh, G., Roos, J. and Kleine, D. (eds), Knowing in Firms: Understanding, Managing and Measuring Knowledge. London: Sage, pp. 67–86.
12. Bluhm, D.J., Harman, W., Lee, T.W. and Mitchell, T.R. (2011). Qualitative research in management: a decade of progress. Journal of Management Studies, 48, pp. 1866–1891.
13. Cassell, C.M., Bishop, V., Symon, G., Johnson, P. and Buehring, A. (2009). Becoming a qualitative management researcher. Management Learning, 40, pp. 1–21.
14. Cepeda, G. and Martin, D. (2005). A review of case studies publishing in Management Decision 2003–2004: guides and criteria for achieving quality in qualitative research. Management Decision, 43, pp. 851–876.
15. Cicourel, A.V. (1982). Interviews, surveys and the problem of ecological validity. American Sociologist, 17, pp. 11–20.
16. Clark, T., Floyd, S. and Wright, M. (2006). On the review process and journal development. Journal of Management Studies, 43, pp. 655–664.
17. Clark, T. and Wright, M. (2009). So, farewell then … Reflections on editing the Journal of Management Studies. Journal of Management Studies, 46, pp. 1–9.
18. Colquitt, J. (2013). The last three years at AMJ – Celebrating the big purple tent. Academy of Management Journal, 56, pp. 1511–1515.
19. Cornelissen, J. and Floyd, S. (2009). The future ahead: imagination, rigour and the advancement of management studies. Journal of Management Studies, 46, pp. 10–15.
20. Cornelissen, J., Gajewska-de Mattos, H., Piekari, R. and Welch, C. (2012). Writing up as a legitimacy-seeking process: alternative publishing recipes for qualitative research. In Symon, G. and Cassell, C.M. (eds), Qualitative Organizational Research: Core Methods and Key Challenges. London: Sage, pp. 185–203
21. Correa, F. (2013). The evaluation of qualitative research: a reflection from a justice perspective. Qualitative Inquiry, 19, pp. 209–218.
22. Daft, R. and Lewin, A. (2008). Rigor and relevance in organization studies: idea migration and academic journal evolution. Organization Science, 19, pp. 177–183.
23. Davison, J., McLean, C. and Warren, S. (2012). Exploring the visual in organizations and management. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 7, pp. 5–15.
24. Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
25. DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, pp. 147–60.
26. Duberley, J., Johnson, P. and Cassell, C. (2012). Philosophies underpinning qualitative research, in Symon, G. and Cassell, C. M. (eds), Qualitative Organizational Research: Core Methods and Key Challenges. London: Sage, pp. 15–34.
27. Easterby-Smith, M., Golden-Biddle, K. and Locke, K. (2008). Working with pluralism: determining quality in qualitative research, Organizational Research Methods, 11, pp. 419–429.
28. Economic and Social Research Council (2013). Quantitative methods initiative. Available at: http://www.esrc.ac.uk/funding-and-guidance/tools-and-resources/research-resources/initiatives/qmi.aspx (accessed 13 June 2013).
29. Eriksson, P. and Kovalainen, A. (2008). Qualitative Methods in Business Research. London: Sage.
30. Finch Report (2012). Accessibility, Sustainability, Excellence: How to Expand Access to Research Publications. Report of the Working Group on Expanding Access to Published Research Findings. London: Research Information Network UK.
31. Fendt, J. and Sachs, W. (2008). Grounded theory method in management research: users’ perspectives. Organizational Research Methods, 11, pp. 430–455.
32. Gabriel, Y. (2010). Organization Studies: a space for ideas, identities and agonies. Organization Studies, 31, pp. 757–75.
33. Gardner, W., Lowe, K., Moss, T. et al. (2010). Scholarly leadership of the study of leadership: a review of The Leadership Quarterly’s second decade 2000–2009, Leadership Quarterly, 21, pp. 922–958.
34. Gendon, Y. (2008). Constituting the academic performer: the spectre of superficiality and stagnation in academia. European Accounting Review, 17, pp. 97–127.
35. Gephart, R.P. (2004). Qualitative research and the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 47, pp. 454–462.
36. Gibbert, M., Ruigrok, W. and Wicki, B. (2008). What passes for a rigorous case study? Strategic Management Journal, 29, pp. 1469–1474.
37. Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
38. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York, NY: Anchor Books.
39. Golden-Biddle, K. and Locke, K. (1993). Appealing work: an investigation of how ethnographic texts convince. Organization Science, 4, pp. 595–616.
40. Gordon, J. and Patterson, J. (2013). Response to Tracy's under the ‘big tent’: establishing universal criteria for evaluating qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 19, pp. 689–695.
41. Greenwood, R. and Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: the big five accounting firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49, pp. 27–48.
42. Grey, C. (2010). Organization studies: publications, politics and polemic. Organization Studies, 31, pp. 677–694.
43. Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
44. Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 105–117.
45. Humphrey, C. and Lukka, K. (2011). (AC)Counting research: the value of an holistic understanding. In Cassell, C.M. and Lee, B. (eds), Challenges and Controversies in Management Research. London: Routledge.
46. Jasti, N. and Kodali, R. (2014). A literature review of empirical research methodology in lean manufacturing. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 34, pp. 1080–1122.
47. Johnson, P., Buehring, A., Cassell, C. and Symon, G. (2006). Evaluating qualitative management research: towards a contingent criteriology. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8, pp. 131–156.
48. Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49. Lee, T.W. (1999). Using Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
50. Lee, T. (2001). On qualitative research in AMJ. Academy of Management Journal, 44, pp. 215–216.
51. Lee, J. (2014). Genre-appropriate judgments of qualitative research. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 44, pp. 316–348.
52. Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
53. Lowery, D. and Evans, K.G. (2004). The iron cage of methodology. The vicious circle of means limiting ends limiting means. Administration and Society, 36, pp. 306–27.
54. McGrath, J. (1982). Dilemmatics: the study of research choices and dilemmas. In Mcgrath, J.E., Mart, J. and Kulka, R.A. (eds), Judgment Calls in Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 69–102.
55. Mingers, J. and Willmott, H. (2013). Taylorizing business school research: on the ‘one best way’ performative effects of journal ranking lists. Human Relations, 66, pp. 1051–1073.
56. Morrison, E. (2010). OB in AMJ: what is hot and what is not? Academy of Management Journal, 53, pp. 932–936.
57. Morrow, S. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, pp. 250–260.
58. Myers, M. (2012). Qualitative Research in Business and Management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59. Pidd, M. and Broadbent, J. (2015). Business and management studies in the 2014 Research Excellence Framework. British Journal of Management, 26, pp. 569–581.
60. Pfeffer, J. (1993). Barriers to the advance of organizational science: paradigm development as a dependent variable. Academy of Management Review, 18, pp. 599–620.
61. Plowman, D.A. and Smith, A.D. (2011). The gendering of organizational research methods: evidence of gender patterns in qualitative research. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 6, pp. 64–82.
62. Podsakoff, P.M. and Dalton, D.R. (1987). Research methodology is organizational studies. Journal of Management, 13, pp. 419–441.
63. Power, M. (1999). The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64. Pratt, M. (2008). Fitting oval pegs into round holes: tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals. Organizational Research Methods, 11, pp. 481–509.
65. Pratt (2009). For the lack of a boilerplate: tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52, pp. 856–62.
66. Ravenek, M. and Rudman, D. (2013). Bridging conceptions of quality in moments of qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 12, pp. 436–456.
67. Ritzer, G. (2009). The McDonaldization of Society. Los Angeles, CA: Pine Forge Press
68. Rynes, S. (2005). Taking stock and looking ahead. Academy of Management Journal, 48, pp. 9–15.
69. Savall, H, Zardet, V, Bonnet, M. and Peron, M. (2008). The emergence of implicit criteria actually used by the reviewers of qualitative research articles: the case of a European journal. Organizational Research Methods, 11, pp. 510–540.
70. Scandura, T.A. and Williams, E.A. (2000). Research methodology in management: current practices, trends and implications for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 43, pp. 1248–1264.
71. Scheurich, J. J. (1997). Research Method in the Postmodern. London: Falmer Press.
72. Schwandt, T.A. (1996). Farewell to criteriology. Qualitative Inquiry, 2, pp. 58–72.
73. Seale, C. (1999). The Quality of Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
74. Smith, J. and Hodkinson, P. (2005). Relativism, criteria, and politics. In Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 915–932.
75. Sparkes, C. (2001). Myth 94: qualitative health researchers will agree about validity. Qualitative Health Research, 11, pp. 538–552.
76. Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J. and Dillon, L. (2003). Quality in Qualitative Research: A Framework for Assessing Research Evidence. London: National Centre for Social Research.
77. Symon, G., Buehring, A., Johnson, P. and Cassell, C. (2008). Positioning qualitative research as resistance to institutionalisation in the academic labour process. Organization Studies, 29, pp. 1315–1336.
78. Symon, G. and Cassell, C. (eds) (2012). Qualitative Organizational Research: Core Methods and Current Challenges. London: Sage.
79. Tracy, S. (2010). Qualitative quality: eight ‘big-tent’ criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, pp. 837–851.
80. Tracy, S. (2012). The toxic and mythical combination of a deductive writing logic for inductive qualitative research. Qualitative Communication Research, 1, pp. 109–42.
81. Tsang, E. (2012). Is this referee really my peer? A challenge to the peer-review process. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22, pp. 166–71.
82. Tsang, E. (2014). Ensuring manuscript quality and preserving authorial voice: a balancing act of editors. Management and Organization Review. 10, pp. 191–197.
83. Üsdiken, B. (2014). Centres and peripheries: research styles and publication patterns in ‘top’ U.S. journals and their European alternatives, 1960–2010. Journal of Management Studies, 51, pp. 764–789.
84. Van Maanen, J. (2011). Ethnography as work: some rules of engagement, Journal of Management Studies, 48, pp. 218–234.
85. Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E. and Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E. (2011). Theorising from case studies: towards a pluralist future for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 42, pp. 740–762.
86. Welch, C., Plakoyiannaki, E., Piekkari, R. and Paavilainen-Mäntymäki, E. (2013). Legitimizing diverse uses for qualitative research: a rhetorical analysis of two management journals. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15, pp. 245–264.