Professor Luiz Moutinho Foundation Chair of Marketing School of Business and Management

1. Phenomenological or Ideographic Research:A Multiplicity of Methods Applied to Scholarly Research in Management Professor Luiz Moutinho Foundation Chair of Marketing School of Business and Management University of Glasgow, Scotland

2. ONTOLOGY • The object and subject dyad

3. Scientific Research Criteria • Relevance • Compatibility with theoretical underpinnings • Generalisability • Reproduction/ Replication • Precision • Rigour • Verificability

4. . . . NO to second-rate research overloaded with truisms and tautologies, lacking rigour and practical theories . . .

5. When to use a qualitative methodology • When nature of problem cannot be understood by an objective, distant approach • When little is known or understood about the topic • When complex processes of interaction are to be understood • When the researcher believes that reality is socially constructed and knowledge is neutral

6. Why use a qualitative methodology • When you need to ‘get close’ to participants • When you need to interpret participants’ realities and perspectives • When you want to generate an understanding which ‘fits and works’ with the substantive area

7. Constructivism, broadly conceived, is the thesis that knowledge can not be a passive reflection of reality, but has to be more of an active construction by an agent. Although this view has its roots in the ideas of Kant, the term was first coined by Piaget (1954) to denote the process whereby an individual constructs its view of the world.

8. Grounded Theory • Is a phenomenological phylosophical perspective, subjective and constructivist. • Gives priority to the context and emphasises the meaning of occurrences or events • Uses inductive methods to develop theory • Develops theory through the study of social phenomena • Utilises qualitative methods, undertakes a systematic collection of data, especially through the use of semi-structured interviews • Does not start from established theories, but formulates research questions or research propositions • Any proposed a priori development of theory can contaminate the collection, analysis and interpretation of data

9. Grounded Theory • Purpose: to build theory that is faithful to the area under study. • The theoretical framework is developed by the researcher, alternating between inductive and deductive thought – i) inductively gains information and ii) deductive approach which allows the researcher to turn away from the data and think rationally about missing information and form conclusions based on logic. When conclusions are drawn, then he/she reverts back to an inductive approach. By reverting back to the data, deductions can be supported, refuted or modified • The constant reference to the data, helps ground the theory!

10. Grounded theory – distinctive features: are its commitment to research and “discovery” through direct contact with the social world studied coupled with a rejection of a priori theorizing. It also encompasses “analytical generalisation”

11. Grounded Theory • The notion of theory as a process • The researcher should enter the research setting with as few predetermined ideas as possible • An initial attempt to develop categories which illuminate the data

12. Bitty Go by frequency Objectivity Deductive Testing “hypotheses” (qualitative) Holistic Go by feel Closer to the data, open much longer Inductive Testing out themes, developing patterns Content AnalysisGrounded Theory Differences between “content analysis” and “grounded theory”

13. Ethnographic Research is not one technique but an approach which draws on a variety of techniques. Generally it seeks to see the world through the eyes of those being researched.

14. Ethnographic Research • Derives from anthropology, tries to describe and interpret OR explain what people do within a particular context, through research interactions. • Specific understanding and knowledge is shared with the participants which guides behaviour with the specific context of the research (the culture of the group) • Ethnography describes the culture of a group of people • The main goal of ethnographic research is to obtain a “dense” description (complete)

15. Ethnographic Research • Immediate perspectives of subjects – ethnographic comparison • The object of ethnography is to find a cluster of “significants” from which events, facts, actions and contexts are produced, understood and interpreted. Without these, there is no “cultural category” • It does not follow a rigid or predetermined patterns • A Radically Inductive Method . . . but induction and deduction are in constant dialogue in terms of the analytical procedure

16. Ethnographic Research • The categories and themes selected for observation are not set a priori • At each “moment of reflexivity”, the fieldwork is altered. Data collection has its own “movement”. • Ethnographic Research encompasses a number of techniques – social research, participant observation, interpretative research, analytical research and hermeneutics research • Direct observation of a group of subjects within their “living conditions” and context

17. Ethnographic Research • Mostly, is the study of anticipated patterns of thought and human behaviours manifested in a daily routine. • An interactive context • An holistic approach in order to reveal the “daily signifier” in which people act upon. The objective is to find the meaning of action.

18. In phenomenological research, the participant observation tries to find the meaning of the experiences of a group – object of study, from each of the many perspectives raised within the group.

19. Participant Observation • Technique seeking in-depth knowledge • No a priori assumptions • To study day-to-day activities of a group under observation • To study interpersonal dynamics of the group/sociometrics • Gets first-hand information, not intentions or preferences of the object studied • Immersed in the real environment • Highly subjective measurement • Data contamination. Lack of objectivity through the investigator’s eyes . . . Better to have investigator triangulation

20. Participant Observation • Non-systematic data collection. Erratic • Highly context dependent. “Biases” – context-skewed. “Acquaintance’s” meetings . . . not the crucial ones • Immersion of the researcher in the object of the study in order to better understand and document how events occur • More in-depth knowledge than survey research • Perspectives derived from the values of a community, internal relations, structures and conflicts, more through the observations of actions than normative declarations by subjects.

21. Participant Observation • There are no preconceived ideas about what is important to observe • Inductive method • Appropriate technique for studies of interpersonal processes within a group • Real participation – even by learning a new language or jargon live in a particular context, etc. • Lack of objectivity • Subjective measurement • Possible ethical problems • Contextual observation at a reduced scale leads to “localised” and specific results. No generalisation. No external validity

22. Reflexive Methodology • The development of a reflexive methodology shows how culture, language, selective perception and ideology all, in complicated ways, permeate scientific activity • Focus on the interpretative nature, politics and rhetoric of empirical research • Reflexivity in research as a complete recognition of the ambivalent relation between the researcher’s text and the investigated reality. Reflexivity means to interpret our own interpretations. Meta-interpretation • How the researcher thinks about his/her own thinking process

23. Reflexive Methodology • How the different types of linguistic, social, political and theoretical elements intertwine within the process of knowledge development, in which the empirical material is constructed, interpreted and written. • The importance of language • The reflexivity orientates the attention towards “inside” the researcher. Self-reflexivity • “The interpretation of the interpretation” . . . Active interpretation • The self-explanation, critical of one’s own interpretations and construction

24. Reflexive Methodology • Considers perceptual, cognitive, theoretical, linguistic, intertextual political and cultural circumstances • The critical interpretation of unconscious processes and ideologies • The meaning is constructed by meaningful events/acts • Metatheory • The construction of social reality in which the researchers interact with the studied agents • Hermeneutics

25. Semiotics • The study of the systems of signs. A sign is an entity that is utilised to represent something. Language, gestures, documents, art, fashion are examples of systems that contain signs used to communicate a meaning • Semiotics is, therefore, also the study of the structure of meanings focused on communication from something, either directly or indirectly, within either an intentional or no-intentional format • Modern Semiotics – Ferdinand de Saussure (Semiology) – the science that studies the signs in a society. Focused on wording and language as complex systems or signs of a human nature which are learned through semiotic socialisation processes.

26. Semiotics • To read the signs which transmit (organisational) discourse • Narrative structures. Cultural artefacts • Ontological position – semiotics has a perception of reality as a social construction phenomenon which is comprised by a system of signs, where language assumes an important role • This philosophy (close to structuralism) sees human beings as the creators of the structure • The systems of signs lack learning and are socially limited by a culture or context

27. Semiotics Ferdinand de Saussure characterised a sign as the relationship between a significant (word) and a signifier (object/concept). The flow of communication and its meaning is transmitted through the association of a significant to a signifier through a system of signs. He has distinguished the study of synthagmatic relations (words’ sequence) from associative relations (choice of a work in relation to other words). Charles Pierce introduced a third dimension in the semiotic process as a human experience – the interpreter. He has also expanded the concept of semiotics to also encompass the inclusion of a system of nonverbal signs.

28. Semiotics Roland Barthes introduced the concept of “layers of meaning” – a language is not only utilised in a denotative literal sense, but also in a conotative/symbolic sense. • Epistemological position – semiotics has, as its objective, to identify codes as well as patterns in a system of signs, in order to comprehend the construction and communication of the particular system • The existence of multiple senses. Semiotics tries to “penetrate” into the different layers of meanings. To uncover the deep structure of meaning. • Methodology: to select data representative of the problem in a “closed way” with a view to apply a synchronic (static, distinctive and self-sufficient) perspective. Uses a mapping approach as well.

29. Semiotics Limitations “Stuck in the middle” • Positivists – how do you validate the conclusions if you do not have a definite methodology? • Poststructuralists and postmodernists – they are too focused on finding characteristics and fixed structures. Also, it is over - formalised.

30. Defining the Case Study • ‘an empirical inquiry that: • Investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real life context: when • The boundaries between the phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which • Multiple sources of evidence are used’ (Yin, 1989)

31. Case Inquiry is . . . . . . . . . • An object of study (Stake, 1995) ‘the case’; example • A qualitative methodology (Merriam, 1988) • An exploration of a ‘bounded system’ over time through detailed, in-depth, multiple source, contextual data’ (Cresswell, 1988)

32. Critique of the Case Study Approach • Regarded as an undeveloped field • Soft research • The Easy Option

33. Limitations of the Case Study • Gaining access (to and within organisations) • Triangulation of all data • Time-consuming • Lack of universality

34. Types of Case Study • Intrinsic Case Study • Focus on uniqueness of case (inductive approach to data analysis) • Instrument Case Study • Illustration of an issue (deductive, theory-laden) • Collective Case Studies • Comparative Case Studies

35. Case Study Selection • Case Research is not sampling research • Primary function is not to understand other cases

36. Case Study Demands • Time • Access issues • Ethics • Organisation of data • Focus • Objectivity and selectivity • Interview skills

37. Eisenhardt (1989) advocates within-case analysis followed by a cross-case pattern search or explanation building. Eisenhardt suggests that this process is facilitated by the selection of pertinent categories, followed by a search for within-group similarity and inter-group differences. These categories can be those suggested by the literature or can simply be chosen by the researcher. • The major themes discovered through the cross-case analysis are then compared with both similar and conflicting literature in an attempt to build theoretical consistency. Eisenhardt refers to this stage as “enfolding literature”. This process helps to build internal validity and shape the theoretical contribution of the findings.

38. Report on cross-case analysis Cross-case analysis 1 Case Select Cases Individual Reports Modify theory Design process of data collection 2 Cases Individual Reports Theoretical implications Design process of data collection Other cases Individual Reports Case Study Process

39. Summary Assertion In social science research the case method is valid, relevant and useful.

40. Action Research • When you want to achieve understanding and change at the same time • Some important information is not obtainable unless something is given in exchange to the examined object. Social change perspective • The participation in a process of organisational change and the implementation of the change • It is the social question which orientates and legtimatises the definition and conceptualisation of the problem • Model of relationship : client-researcher

41. In researcher-dominated, the researcher determines the research question or hypothesis, the way data will be collected, the analytic method, and how the conclusions will be shaped. In participative research, the population to be served or helped determine these. In the former, the primary learning is achieved by the researchers and their audience; in the latter, the primary learning is achieved by the participants and their constituencies.

42. It is interesting that we call those people in a traditional research study “subjects”, while we use the term “participants” in action research.

43. The term “participant” suggests the relative proactivity and spontaneity allowed in PAR, while the term “subject” suggests the control and constraint provided in more traditional research.

44. In PAR, the participants, their issues, their action, and their learning are highlighted, and become the centrepiece of the action/study.

45. From its early origins, AR has been researcher-dominated rather than participative.

46. Mode 2 • Mode 1 distinguishes between fundamental and applied, a theoretical core and application / key consumer = academia • Mode 2 emphasises knowledge produced in the context of application, constant flow back and forth between the theoretical and the practical, more socially and politically accountable knowledge production process

47. Characteristics of Mode 2 Knowledge Production • Knowledge produced in the context of application • A transdisciplinary approach • Heterogeneous and dynamic research teams • A socially accountable and reflexive process • A broad range of quality controls

48. Mode 2 research • Dual approach to knowledge production • Integrating “discipline” knowledge and world of practice • Integrating well-founded knowledge and knowledge of use • Double hurdle – embeddedness in social science and worlds of policy and practice

49. Five Key Features of Mode 2 Management Research • The research problem is framed in the context of application • Research is transdisciplinary • Diffusion of outcomes occurs DURING the process of production • Research is undertaken by a heterogeneous group with mixed skills and experience • It is a more socially accountable knowledge production process. (After Pettigrew: 1995)

50. Mode 2 Research • Objectives: i) to combine academics and practitioners in order to define the problem and methodology to adopt in a particular context. To make academic language accessible to practitioners. ii) to construct an organisational model and explicative “laws”. iii) to construct or test theory that can be replicated in time and space • Focus on how theory is tested and how this theory related to other existing theories. • Data is aggregate in a fashion to develop theories • Knowledge is “consumed”subsequently to its “Production” . . . • A type of Action Research