research mehod in qualiive research管理学定性方法

EvaluatingQualitativeManagementResearch:aContingentCriteriology.WorkshopNumber7ESRCWorkshopsforQualitativeResearchinManagementIdentificationoftrainingneedInappropriateassessmentcriteriaisfrequentlyappliedtoqualitativeresearch.Concernsexistabouthowtoassessqualitativeresearch

Aims

Toillustratehowcompetingphilosophicalperspectivesunderpindifferentwaysofevaluatingmanagementresearchanddifferentresearchagendas;Toillustratethedangersofusingparticularevaluationcriteria,constitutedbyparticularphilosophicalconventions,toassessallmanagementresearch;Todevelopacontingentcriteriologywhereappropriateevaluationcriteriamightbeusedwhichvaryaccordingtothephilosophicalassumptionsinformingtheresearch.ObjectivesBytheendofthesessionyoushouldbeableto:Outlinetheproblemsassociatedwithcriteriologywithregardtocompetingprocessesofresearchevaluation;Explaintheconstitutiveandcontingentrelationshipbetweenphilosophicalassumptionsandthedevelopmentofdifferentevaluationcriteria;

Describethekeyevaluationcriteriarelevanttofourdifferentapproachestomanagementresearch.Historicaldominanceofquantitativemethodologyinanglophonecountries;Neverthelessqualitativemanagementresearchhasalongestablishedpedigree;Qualitativeresearchmanagementresearchcharacterizedby: substantivediversity; competingphilosophicalassumptions.Confusionariseswhenevaluationcriteriaconstitutedbyparticularphilosophicalconventionsareuniversallyappliedtothisheterogeneousfield;

Toavoidmisappropriationthereisaneedforacontingentcriteriology. FourKeyApproachestoManagementResearch:

Knowledgeconstitutingassumptions(1).Positivism

Popper’smodifiedpositivistmethodologyemphasizesobjectivityandunbiaseddatacollectioninordertotesthypothesesagainstanaccessibleindependentsocialrealityinordertoprotectagainst“fancifultheorizinginmanagementresearch”(Donaldson,1996:164).Hence4keyevaluationcriteria:Internalvalidity-whetherwhatareinterpretedasthe“causes”producethe“effects”inagivenpieceofresearch-necessitatescreating,orsimulating,conditionsofclosurewhichallowempiricaltesting;ConstitutingevaluationcriteriainmanagementresearchTestinghypothesesrequirestheoperationalizationofabstractconceptscausallyrelatedbythetheoryintoindicatorsthatmeasurewhattheyaresupposedtomeasure-constructvalidity.Akeyconcernisexternalpopulationvalidity-generalizingfindingstoadefinedpopulationbeyondthoserespondentsparticipatingintheresearch.Needtopreservedistancebetweentheresearcherandtheresearched-reliabilityoffindingsthroughreplication-thisreferstotheconsistencyofresearchfindingsandreferstotheextenttowhichitispossibleforanotherresearcherto(i)replicatetheresearchdesignwithequivalentpopulations;(ii)findthesameresults.Task:Evaluatethedifferentresearchmethodsintermsoftheirrelativestrengthsinregardtothe4criteriabelow:EcologicalValidity

“Doourinstrumentscapturethedailylifeconditions,opinions,values,attitudes,andknowledgebaseofthosewestudyasexpressedintheirnaturalhabitat?”(Cicourel,1982:15)Raisesquestionsaround:theextenttowhichthesocialsettinginwhichdatahasbeencollectedistypicalofinformants’normal“everyday”lives?areresearchfindingsartefactsofthesocialscientist’smethodsofdatacollectionandanalyticaltools?(2)Neo-EmpiricismThroughverstehen,andthecollectionofqualitativedata,aimstoinductivelydevelopthickdescriptionsofthepatternsactorsusetomakesenseoftheirworlds-sometimestoalsogenerategroundedtheory.Butretainspositivistcommitmenttoobjectivityexpressednowasasubject-subjectdualism:“thethird-personpointofview””(Schwandt,1996:62).Thequestionisarethephilosophicaldifferenceswithpositivismseenassignificantwhenitcomestoevaluationsresearch?-ForLecompteandGoetz(1982)no-hencecanuseunreconstructedpositivistcriteria.VS-ForLincolnandGuba(1985)yes-henceemphasizethefollowing.....Internalvaliditywithcredibility(authenticrepresentations);Externalvaliditywithtransferability(extentofapplicability);Reliabilitywithdependability(minimizationofresearcheridiosyncrasies);Objectivitywithconfirmability(researcherself-criticism).MeanwhileMorse(1994)focusesupontheanalysisofqualitativedata....Comprehension(learningaboutasetting);Synthesizing(identifyingpatternsinthedata);Theorizing(explanationsthatfitthedata);Recontextualizing(abstractingemergenttheorytonewsettingandrelatingittoestablishedknowledge).Hammersley(1989;1990;1992)addstothesecriteriabydevelopinginternalreflexivity-Researcher'scriticalscrutinizationoftheimpactoftheirfieldrole(s)uponresearchsettingsandfindingssoastoreducesourcesofcontaminationtherebyenhancingecologicalvalidity(i.e.naturalism).e.g..-avoidoverrapportwithmembers;-treatsettingasanthropologicallystrange;-retainbalancebetweeninsiderandoutsider;-retainsocialandintellectualdistancetopreserveanalyticalspace.AsSeale(1999:161)-throughrevealingaspectsofthemselvesandtheresearchprocessasatraceableaudittrail,thequalitativeresearcherpersuadesreadersthatthey“canrelyonthewriter’shardwonobjectivity”therebyestablishingthecredibility,dependabilityandconfirmabilityoffindings.Butacontradictionwithinneo-empiricistinterpretivestanceandtheir“immaculateperception”-repudiationleadstosocialconstructionistapproaches.(3).CriticalTheoryRejectionoftheoryneutralobservationallanguage;Kantianphilosophicallegacy;Democracyandreflexivityasepistemicstandards-keytoenablingthisisthedevelopmentofacriticalconsciousnesswhere...“...firsttounderstandtheideologicallydistortedsubjectivesituationofsomeindividualorgroup,secondtoexploretheforcesthathavecausedthatsituation,andthirdtoshowthattheseforcescanbeovercomethroughawarenessofthemonthepartoftheoppressedindividualorgroupinquestion”(Dryzek,1995:99).Epistemologicallylegitimateknowledgeariseswhereitistheoutcomeofempowereddemocraticcollectivedialogue.Thisleadstofivekeyevaluationcriteria....e.g.KincheloeandMcLaren(1998)Reflexiveinterrogationbytheresearcheroftheepistemologicalbaggagetheybringwiththem;Throughacriticalethnographyresearchersattempttosensitizethemselvesandparticipantstohowhegemonicregimesoftruthimpactuponthesubjectivitiesofthedisadvantaged;Positivistconceptionofvalidityrejectedinfavourofthecredibilityofsociallyconstructedrealitiestothosewhohavedemocraticallyparticipatedintheirdevelopment;Generalizabilityrejectedinfavourofaccommodation-whereresearchers’usetheirknowledgeofarangeofcomparablecontextstoassesssimilaritiesanddifferences;Catalyticvalidity-extenttowhichresearchchangesthoseitstudiessothattheyunderstandtheworldinnewwaysandusethisknowledgetochangeit-linktopragmatistcriterionofpracticaladequacy.(4).PostmodernismEvaluationacontroversialissuehere-oftenwrittenoffasamodernistanachronism.Postmodernistseclecticaboutwhattheywantwhilstbeingrelativelyclearaboutwhattheyareagainst-e.g.criticaltheory’’sessentialism.Neverthelessanythingdoesnotgo!andwecaninferfromsubjectivistepistemologicalandontologicalstancethefollowing...Arelativistposition-nogoodreasonsforpreferringonerepresentationoverothers...Hencemissionistoundermineanyclaimtoepistemologicalauthority,subvertconventionalwaysofthinkingand...Encouragepluralityandindeterminacy-anormativeagendabydefault..Resultsinseveralpossibleevaluationcriteria:Displayandunsettlethediscursiverulesofthegamethroughdeconstructiontorevealthosemeaningswhichhavebeensuppressed,sublimatedorforgottenandtherebydevelop;Atmostdeconstructioncanonlyevokealternativesocialconstructionsofrealitywithinatextwhichcanthemselvesbedeconstructed-hyper-reflexivity;Paralogy-needtodestabilizetheirownnarrativestoavoidtheacontrivedinvisibilityaroundtheauthorialpresencebehindthetextthatprivilegesthetextandencouragesdiscursiveclosure-decentringtheauthor;Theresult-apreference-lesstolerationofthepolyphonicorheteroglossia-wheremulti-vocalauthorsareempoweredtomanipulatesignifierstocreatenewtextualdomainsofintelligibilitywhicharethendestabilizedadinfinitum.Managementresearchembracesadiversearrayofpracticesdrivenbyvaryingknowledgeconstitutingassumptions;Thislegitimizesdistinctiveperspectives,researchagendasandpromulgatesparticularevaluationcriteria;Thereforetryingtoarticulateanallembracing,indisputable,setofregulativestandardstopolicemanagementresearchisbothaforlornhopeandanunfairpractice;Hencetheneedforacontingentcriteriologythatsensitizesmanagementresearcherstotheparticularqualityissuesthattheirownandothers’researchshouldaddress.Butthereareinstitutionalbarrierstoacontingentcriteriology-henceneedtobeconcernedabouthowandwhyinparticularsocialcontextscertainresearchpracticesaredeemedvaluablewhileothersarediscountedasvaluelessaberrations.ConclusionsFutherreading:Bochner,A.P.(2000)CriteriaAgainstOurselves,QualitativeInquiry,6(2):266-272.Mitchell,T.R.(1985)AnEvaluationoftheValidityofCorrelationResearchConductedinOrganizations,AcademyofManagementReview,2:192-205.Scandura,T.A.andWilliams,E.A.(2000)““ResearchMethodologyinManagement:CurrentPractices,Trends,andImplicationsforFutureResearch”,AcademyofManagementJournal43(6)1248-1264.Cronbach,L.J.&Meehl,P.E.(1955)Constructvalidityinpsychologicaltests.PsychologicalBulletin,52,281-302..Schwab,D.P.(1980)ConstructvalidityinOrganizationalBehaviour,ResearchinOrganizations,2:3-43.Campbell,D.T.&Fiske,D.W.(1959)Converentanddiscriminantvalidationbythemultitrait-multimethodindex.PsychologicalBulletin,56,81-105.Campbell,,D.T.(1957)FactorsRelevanttotheValidityofExperimentsinSocialSettings,,PsychologicalBulletin,54:297-312.Bracht,G.H.andGlass,G.U.(1968)TheExternalValidityofExperiments,AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,5:537-74.Knapp,W.S.(1981)Onthevalidityofaccountsabouteverydaylife,SociologicalReview,29(3):543-526.Cicourel,A.V.(1982)Interviews,Surveys,andtheProblemofEcologicalValidity,AmericanSociologist,17:11-20.Lecompte,M.andGoetz,J.(1982)““ProblemsofreliabilityandValidityinEthnographicResearch””,ReviewofEducationalResearch52(1):31-60.Morse,J.M.(1994)Emergingfromthedata:thecognitiveprocessofanalysisinqualitativeenquiry,inJ.M.MorseCriticalIssuesinQualitativeResearchMethods,London:Sage.Seale,C.(1999)QualityinQualitativeResearch,QualitativeInquiry,5(4):465-478.Kinchloe,J.L.andMcLaren,P.L.(1998)““Rethinkingcriticaltheoryandqualitativeresearch””inDenzin,N.andLincoln,Y.(eds)HandbookofQualitativeResearch,London:SageTsoukas,H.(1989)TheValidityofIdiographicResearchExplanations,AcademyofManagementReview,14(4):551-561.Mabry,L.(2002)PostmodernEvaluation-ornot?AmericanJournalofEvaluation,23(2):141-57.Schwandt,T.A.(1996)““FarewelltoCriteriology”,QualitativeInquiry2(1):58-72.Locke,K.andGolden-Biddle,K.(1997)ConstructingOpportunitiesforContribution:StructuringIntertextualCoherenceand““Problematizing””inOrganizationStudies,AcademyofManagementJournal,40(5):1023-1062.Bedeian,A.G.(2004)PeerReviewandtheSocialCobstructionofKnowledgeintheManagementDiscipline,AcademyofManagementLearningandEducation,3(2):198-216.9、静夜四四无邻，，荒居旧旧业贫。。。1月-231月-23Wednesday,January4,202310、雨中黄叶树树，灯下白头头人。。22:20:2722:20:2722:201/4/202310:20:27PM11、以以我我独独沈沈久久，，愧愧君君相相见见频频。。。。1月月-2322:20:2722:20Jan-2304-Jan-2312、故故人人江江海海别别，，几几度度隔隔山山川川。。。。22:20:2722:20:2722:20Wednesday,January4,202313、乍见见翻疑疑梦，，相悲悲各问问年。。。1月-231月-2322:20:2722:20:27January4,202314、他乡生生白发，，旧国见见青山。。。04一一月202310:20:27下下午22:20:271月-2315、比比不不了了得得就就不不比比，，得得不不到到的的就就不不要要。。。。。。一月月2310:20下下午午1月月-2322:20January4,202316、行行动动出出成成果果，，工工作作出出财财富富。。。。2023/1/422:20:2722:20:2704January202317、做前，能够够环视四周；；做时，你只只能或者最好好沿着以脚为为起点的射线线向前。。10:20:27下午午10:20下下午22:20:271月-239、没没有有失失败败，，只只有有暂暂时时停停止止成成功功！！。。1月-231月-23Wednesday,January4,202310、很多事情努努力了未必有有结果，但是是不努力却什什么改变也没没有。。22:20:2722:20:2722:201/4/202310:20:27PM11、成成功功就就是是日日复复一一日日那那一一点点点点小小小小努努力力的的积积累累。。。。1月月-2322:20:2722:20Jan-2304-Jan-2312、世间成成事，不不求其绝绝对圆满满，留一一份不足足，可得得无限完完美。。。22:20:2722:20:2722:20Wednesday,January4,202313、不知知香积积寺，，数里里入云云