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

–––––––––––––––––––––– GROUP METHODS OF ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS–––––––––– 143lacking. Group simulations and role-playing have been used in the applied context for gaininghuman understanding, for example role-playing in conflict handling (Hare, 1985) and ineducational and training situations (Eiben and Milliren, 1976). In the personnel context, groupsimulations and discussions are used during selection procedures and especially in assessmentcentres (Blanksby and Iles, 1990).The gaining of information through groups for intervention activities has been used inteam-building (Dyer, 1995) and in organizational development programmes (Lundberg, 1990).For learning purposes in particular (individual and organizational), the group (both the created[3] and the natural [4]) has been accorded a prominent place (Srivastva et al., 1977). But alsowithin the context of action research, groups form the context where insights and newpossibilities are generated on the collective level, as has been broadly explored in the‘appreciative inquiry’ approach (Cooperrider and Srivastva, 1987) and in search conferences(Emery, 1996). In the group intervention context, a group is answering the questions: ‘Whereare we now, where do we want to go, and how do we bridge this gap?’ The ‘natural’ interplaybetween the different voices is questioned, and the intervention aims at revitalizing theorganizational dialogue that has become impeded or fixated.Finally, the observation of groups for exploring (6) and generating (5) concepts and modelsof organizational processes has been used in organizational ethnography (Rosen, 1991),although groups do not have a privileged position compared to other kinds of observationcontexts. This form is, in our view, the least known and applied, and is one of the forms wediscuss in more detail.A social constructionist approach to the group methodIn this chapter we will document more in detail two types of group method: the classical formof group interview and the study of meetings for generating theory. We illustrate thus botha so-called ‘natural’ and created context, and both an exploratory and generative context.How does a social constructionist view facilitate data generation and data-processing inthese research illustrations of group method? First, the group interview or group discussiongives the opportunity to hear different accounts or voices at the ‘same’ time on the ‘same’phenomenon or problem. Individuals are asked to tell their stories concerning the problemhighlighted by the researcher. Each story can be aligned to or expand the story of anotherparticipant or can contrast a previous story. The aim is to catch in a condensed way the rangeof different voices. The group situation makes the differences and similarities between thedifferent participants, and also the dynamics between the perspectives on a problem, directlyvisible.Second, the observation of ‘natural’ group meetings goes one step further. It is comparableto the group interview in the way that organizational members give their view on the subjectof the meeting. So, the natural mix of differences can be ‘caught’ there as well. But theresearcher also comes in contact with the evolution of the different voices as they develop andemerge in a living social context, expressing the construction and deconstruction of sharedmeaning.For us, using each of these different methods has been a tentative learning process. Thereis no single form of using a specific method, since it is a creative and context-boundedapplication. The methods will be presented by telling a short research story, documenting bothwhy it was useful to use the group method and how the method was used.