essential-guide-to-qualitative-in-organizational-research

More documents

Recommendations

Info

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– QUALITATIVE RESEARCH DIARIES –––––––––– 111EVALUATING DIARY STUDIES ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––I have already referred to the many positive benefits of the diary study, which can be foundin the immediacy of the account of events and feelings generated, and the degree of detailwhich can be recorded, which all contribute to an understanding of complex organizationalprocesses. Additionally, the charting of events over time allows the identification of patternsand changes in respondents’ accounts of these processes.A potential drawback is the extent to which respondents are committed to recordingevents, reactions, and so on on a regular basis. I have suggested a number of ways in whichrespondents could be encouraged to provide ‘full’ accounts: by carefully explaining projectobjectives; by keeping in regular contact; by involving respondents in the design; by workingon specifying a regular time and place for completion; and by ensuring the diaries arepersonally useful. However, one must also avoid the situation of ‘forcing’ respondents toprovide ‘answers’ to ‘questions’ that are not really relevant. In my case example, some shorterdiaries were probably an accurate reflection of the respondents’ degree of involvement in theIT project. In this way, diaries may have the advantage over some methods in that they do notnecessarily force participants to respond – depending, of course, on the particular design ofthe diary and the nature of the ‘contract’ between the researcher and the respondent.This leads to another issue which I think should be considered in the design of diarystudies: the degree of structure imposed on diary responses. One could argue that by providingspecific questions I was influencing respondents’ responses too much and structuring theiraccounts for them. Although the participants were free to define ‘activity’, even providingseparate pages for each activity is an assumption on my part of some notion of (relatively)fragmented events. Reflexively, this illustrates for me the ‘implicit theories’ that the researcherbrings to the research process. The diaries indicate some preconceptions on my part (forexample, that activities can be regarded as separate events; and that activities have objectivesand outcomes, and so on), some of which were challenged by the respondents themselves.It is, of course, possible to use much less structured materials (for example, a blank sheet foreach day). In doing this, one may want to be careful about finding a balance betweendepicting participants’ everyday experiences and fulfilling research objectives.There are probably other disadvantages that could be described for the diary approach –and these will differ according to one’s epistemological position. However, while I would notclaim that my case study example is ‘perfect’ (and there are changes I would have made withhindsight), it certainly revealed for me the potential of the qualitative diary as a method ofgaining insight into complex, ongoing organizational processes.CONCLUSION ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––Stewart (1967) and Mintzberg (1973) concluded that diaries were inappropriate tools forgathering the kind of detailed information they were seeking. In this chapter, I have tried toillustrate that this conclusion was based on a rather restricted perception of potential uses ofthe diary method, and that the qualitative diary study can be a very useful and insightfulinformation source.While I have drawn on my use of a qualitative activity diary to demonstrate the potentialof diary studies, there are many more psychological and organizational phenomena which
112 –––––––––– QUALITATIVE METHODS IN ORGANIZATION STUDIES ––––––––––––––––––might benefit from this kind of detailed, longitudinal approach. The guidelines provided hereare not definitive but may act as a starting point for those unfamiliar with the method –particularly, perhaps, from a qualitative perspective. It is certainly my hope that moreresearchers and practitioners may be encouraged to explore the possibilities of diary studiesin their own areas of interest.NOTE ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––1 I have had to provide general terms in some instances in the figures to maintain anonymity.FURTHER READING ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––There are few general reviews of the diary method – most accounts of diary studies are withinreports of specific empirical studies in specific areas. These are usually medical/clinical or socialapplications such as eating habits, stress, alcoholism, and relationships. Those general reviewsthat do exist are usually oriented to the discussion of issues relevant to a normative (positivist)paradigm (namely one based on highly structured designs using quantitative measurements).One of the earliest discussions of the method as a research tool can be found in Allport (1942)The Use of Personal Documents in Psychological Science (New York: Social Science ResearchCouncil) and one of the latest is Bolger et al. (2003) ‘Diary methods: capturing life as it islived’, Annual Review of Psychology, 54: 579–616. (Although this latter discusses design issuesspecifically, again it is largely written from a normative perspective.)REFERENCES ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––Burgoyne, J. (1994) ‘Stakeholder analysis’, in C. Cassell and G. Symon (eds), Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research:A Practical Guide, London: Sage. pp. 187–207.Burt, C. (1994) ‘Prospective and retrospective account-making in diary entries: a model of anxiety reduction and avoidance’,Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 6: 327–40.Carp, F. and Carp, A. (1981) ‘The validity, reliability and generalizability of diary data’, Experimental Aging Research, 7:281–96.Cassell, C. and Symon, G. (1994) ‘Qualitative research in work contexts’, in C. Cassell and G. Symon (eds), Qualitative Methodsin Organizational Research, London: Sage Publications. pp. 1–13.Conway, N. and Briner, R. (2002) ‘A daily diary study of affective responses to psychological contract breach and exceededpromises’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23: 287–302.Jepsen, L., Mathiassen, L. and Nielsen, P. (1989) ‘Back to thinking mode: diaries for the management of information systemsdevelopment projects’, Behaviour and Information Technology, 8: 207–17.Keen, P. (1981) ‘Information systems and organizational change’, Communications of the ACM, 24: 24–33.Kenner, A., Coyne, J., Schaefer, C. and Lazarus, R. (1981) ‘Comparison of two modes of stress measurement: daily hasslesand uplifts versus major life events’, Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4: 1–39.Leadbetter, D. (1993) ‘Trends in assaults on social work staff: the experience of one Scottish department’, British Journal of SocialWork, 23: 613–28.Lindén, J. (1996) ‘Theoretical and methodological questions concerning a contextual approach to psychosocial issues of workinglife’, Science Communication, 18 (1): 59–79.Mintzberg, H. (1973) The Nature of Managerial Work, New York: Harper & Row.Parkinson, B., Totterdell, P., Briner, R. and Reynolds, S. (1996) Changing Moods:The Psychology of Mood and Mood Regulation,Harlow: Longman.Plowman, P. (2002) ‘Personal communication’, PhD thesis pursued at School of Development Studies, University of East Anglia.
Page 4 and 5:
ESSENTIAL GUIDE TO QUALITATIVE METH
Page 6:
This book is dedicated to our child
Page 9 and 10:
viii ---------- CONTENTS ----------
Page 12 and 13:
Notes on ContributorsJohn Benington
Page 14 and 15:
-----------------------------------
Page 16 and 17:
-----------------------------------
Page 18 and 19:
-----------------------------------
Page 20:
AcknowledgementsIt has been 10 year
Page 23 and 24:
2 ---------- QUALITATIVE METHODS IN
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
10 ---------- QUALITATIVE METHODS I
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
4 ---- Life Histories -------------
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82: 60 ---------- QUALITATIVE METHODS I
Page 107 and 108: 8 ---- The Twenty Statements Test -
Page 119 and 120: 9 ---- Qualitative Research Diaries
Page 121 and 122: 100 ---------- QUALITATIVE METHODS
Page 129 and 130: tended to get shovedin the backgrou
Page 131: 110 ---------- QUALITATIVE METHODS
Page 135 and 136: 10 ---- Stories in Organizational R
Page 161 and 162: 12 ---- Group Methods of Organizati
Page 175 and 176: 13 ---- Participant Observation ---
Page 183 and 184:
162 ---------- QUALITATIVE METHODS
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
15 ---- Critical Research and Analy
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
16 ---- Hermeneutic Understanding -
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
18 ---- Talk-in-interaction/convers
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
19 ---- Attributional Coding ------
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
20 ---- Grounded Theory in Organiza
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Quote Code in open coding Concept T
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Table 20.2 Examples of open coding,
Page 273 and 274:
Table 20.3Collective stressors and
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
21 ---- Using Templates in the Them
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Table 22.1Matrix 1: descriptive sum
Page 301 and 302:
Table 22.1 cont1.1 Analysis by colu
Page 303 and 304:
Table 22.2DebbieAndrewMatrix 2: con
Page 305 and 306:
Table 22.2cont.Allan Petrol scam Wa
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
23 ---- Preserving, Sharing and Reu
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
25 ---- Ethnography ---------------
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
27 ---- Soft Systems Analysis: Refl
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
30 ---- The Future Conference -----
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Page 407 and 408:
386 ---------- INDEX --------------
Page 409:
388 ---------- INDEX --------------
show all

essential-guide-to-qualitative-in-organizational-research

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?