The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1746-5648.

htm

QROM 1,1

EDITORIAL

Taking qualitative methods in organization and management research seriously

Gillian Symon
Birkbeck College, University of London, London, UK
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce the new journal and outline the rationale and aims and objectives of Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal (QROM). Design/methodology/approach The paper considers why there is a necessity for a journal like QROM, outlines the scope of the new journal, and introduces the articles in the rst issue. An invitation for further contributions to the journal is also given. Findings There is still a need for an outlet that both provides a showcase for the diverse range of qualitative techniques in use and promotes high quality qualitative research. Originality/value This paper is of use to those new readers of the journal, and those who wish to submit to the journal, in that it clearly outlines editorial policy and processes. Keywords Qualitative research, Qualitative methods Paper type Research paper

Welcome to the rst issue of Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal (QROM). We are delighted to be involved in the production of such a journal, and believe it is a much needed and useful addition to the organization and management eld. QROM is an international journal committed to encouraging and publishing qualitative work from researchers and practitioners within the management and organizational arena throughout the world. The journal seeks to provide a forum for qualitative researchers through which they can share their work with others and discuss issues of research practice of particular pertinence to qualitative approaches. In this editorial, we explain why we believe there is a need for this journal, the scope of the journal, and the distinctive nature of the material we will publish. We also introduce the contents of this rst issue. Why do we need QROM ? Qualitative methodologies have a long history and tradition within organization and management research. Early ethnographies of managerial work, such as Daltons (1959) Men Who Manage, Watsons (1977) The Personnel Managers and Jackalls (1988) Moral Mazes: The World of Corporate Managers have led to considerable insights into managerial experience and practice. More recently, it has been argued that qualitative techniques can, in general, provide powerful tools (Gummesson,

Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal Vol. 1 No. 1, 2006 pp. 4-12 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1746-5648 DOI 10.1108/17465640610666606

2000, p. 1) for the management and organization researcher (Boje, 2001; Cassell and Symon, 2004; Lee, 1999; Prasad and Prasad, 2002). Increasingly qualitative research can be found in all the domains that cover the diverse organization and management eld, for example: marketing (Daymon and Holloway, 2003; Moisander, 2006); market research (Mariampolski, 2001); information science (Myers, 2002; Trauth, 2001); accounting and nance (Humphrey and Lee, 2004); entrepreneurship and small business (Cope, 2005); and international business (Marschan-Piekkari and Welch, 2004). So we may ask ourselves, is there any need to particularly promote qualitative research in this area? The problem is partly that research using qualitative techniques is still under-represented in the top journals in the eld (Van Maanen, 1979; Cassell et al., 2006). Editors of various prestigious journals in the area, conscious that few qualitative articles are published in their journals, still nd themselves having to specically encourage qualitative research submissions (Lee, 2001; Sparrow, 1999; Gephart and Rynes, 2004) and qualitative research still features as a topic of special issues of various journals rather than simply being accepted as mainstream. Qualitative research is often then invisible in our eld and such invisibility means that it is not viewed as accepted practice and that new researchers cannot learn about its potential: what is published in our eld acts as an indication of what is expected in our eld. Lee (1999) argues that many researchers in the eld have limited knowledge of qualitative techniques, and the research opportunities that such techniques provide. The argument then could be that more qualitative research should be published in prestigious journals. However, calls for the publication of qualitative research in such journals do not appear to have met with much success. Given this situation and despite the fact that there are some organization and management journals which do publish qualitative pieces (Organization Studies, Organization and Journal of Management Studies), we believe that there is still a need for an outlet that both provides a showcase for the diverse range of qualitative techniques in use and promotes high quality qualitative research. The invisibility of qualitative research, however, is not the only reason to promote a new journal in the area specically oriented to the concerns of qualitative researchers. QROM is fortunate in having the guidance of an esteemed group of individuals in the roles of associate editors and members of the editorial advisory board. We invited them to comment on why they felt there was a need for a journal such as this, and why they had wanted to become involved, and an analysis of their comments highlights a variety of other issues. Thus, it was suggested that qualitative researchers sometimes grow tired of defending their methodologies against what can be seen as a potentially hostile audience committed to quantitative methodologies informed by a positivist epistemology:
We need the journal as a forum where scholars can show what great work can be done without having to justify using such methods or stage shadow boxing confrontations with advocates of quantitative methods (Yiannis Gabriel, emphasis commentators own). . . . the benet of a journal dedicated to qualitative enquiry is that it appears to express a different set of values: quantitative research is not better; it is simply different (Bill Lee).

Editorial

The QROM editorial team regards qualitative research as intrinsically credible, valuable and a worthy and insightful endeavour. QROM welcomes research informed

QROM 1,1

by a wide range of methodological techniques and approaches, and we do not seek to imply editorially that any one particular qualitative approach has any more value than any other. Although we would expect those submitting to QROM to account for their methodological approach, we do not anticipate that they will have to defend that approach with reference to traditional positivist evaluation criteria. We will strive to ensure that research submitted to the journal is assessed within the parameters of its own epistemological commitments. We also wish to encourage the submission of the best quality qualitative research possible. Publishing poor examples of qualitative work only encourages its dismissal and undermining. We draw from a wide pool of reviewers who are experts in qualitative research and our standards are high. We want QROM to demonstrate powerfully the importance of qualitative research to the development of the organization and management eld and to be regarded as a premier outlet for such work. Articles submitted to QROM, therefore, have to advance understanding in some way rather than simply repeat what is already well-established through other methods. Another important goal for the journal is that it provides a forum in which methodological issues can be discussed in some detail. As Joanne Duberley points out currently few journals look at methodology and those that do are often US- and quantitatively-oriented. While articles that simply describe well-known qualitative methods may struggle to nd a place in the journal, articles that describe new methods or develop established methods will be welcome. Indeed, we would particularly encourage critiques of methodological practices and debates about methodological issues. While there are journals that specically discuss qualitative methods in general in some detail (Qualitative Inquiry and Qualitative Research), these do not focus on the management and organization eld specically and indeed do not publish many articles in this area. Qualitative research in organizations and management has special features and needs that other social science areas may not share. Our discussion of research practice within the pages of QROM may extend beyond that of method, however, to include, for example, issues such as reexivity. In comparison to other methodological journals:
QROM has a wider remit, actually encourages reexivity, and is open to thoughtful and more philosophically based approaches (Ann Cunliffe).

We are particularly welcoming of papers in which authors have engaged in a critical appraisal of their own research practices and recognise their own underlying assumptions and how this has shaped their work. The eld of organization and management research raises its own particular challenges and opportunities:
Qualitative enquiry in the management area has, to date, often been ghettoized within each of the sub-disciplines in that area . . . By providing a forum for qualitative researchers from a range of disciplines, it allows those who have found qualitative methods ghettoized in their own sub-discipline to escape from such ghettos, to nd afnity with qualitative researchers in other sub-disciplines. This could lead to cross-germination of ideas across the sub-disciplines about qualitative research practice and lead to both greater experimentation/innovation and improvements (Bill Lee). When students and researchers at business schools look for help on qualitative methodology they are usually left with literature by sociologists and ethnographers and sometimes others

in social sciences. In writing my book Qualitative Methods in Management Research the strategy was to present examples and cases on business and management phenomena. Today more books do this but ideally we should develop our own tradition in business research . . . with an identity of its own (Evert Gummesson).

Editorial

QROM, therefore, offers the opportunity of cross-disciplinary research in the very diverse eld of enquiry that is organization and management research. It also brings together researchers who have common interests but may be isolated in their own sub-disciplines. It provides research support for such researchers and encourages a sense of community. Indeed it could be something of a political tool in establishing the credibility of what may often be regarded at a sub-discipline level as alternative perspectives. Overall, QROM aims to ll a gap in the management and organization journal area by providing an overview of the current state of the art of qualitative methods in management and organizational research. As such, it will be useful to those academics who are experienced qualitative researchers and want to nd out more about the work of others in this area, and those new to the eld who wish to learn about the diverse range of subject areas to which qualitative work can contribute. However, QROM will also be of interest to those practitioners seeking excellent examples of applied qualitative work, knowledge of advances in the eld of organization and management inquiry, and insights into alternative problem formulations and interventions suggested by qualitative work. We aim to demonstrate the rich contribution that qualitative research can make in advancing the theoretical and methodological base of the diverse range of subject areas within the management and organizational eld. Editorial policy and journal content In outlining the editorial policy for the journal, there are three issues we particularly wish to consider. The rst concerns what is meant by qualitative research; the second, the scope of the organizations and management eld; and the third, our understanding of what it means to be an international journal. With reference to how qualitative research may be dened, this is not as straightforward as it might initially appear. Reasons for this difculty include the range of different approaches that are subsumed under the heading qualitative (Symon et al., 2000), which is exacerbated by the multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary nature of management and organization research (Brown, 1997; Watson, 1994); and the diversity in philosophical assumptions that underlie qualitative research (Knoblauch et al., 2005; Prasad and Prasad, 2002). Numerous authors have highlighted the difculties posed when trying to seek an all-encompassing denition. In addressing this issue in relation to how we evaluate submissions to the journal, we will use the term as it is conventionally used within the management eld: that is, to represent those techniques of data collection and analysis that rely on non-numerical data. Where papers do contain numerical data, we would anticipate that the authors will provide a methodological rationale for why this is the case, and why QROM is a suitable outlet for their work. Our second issue concerns the scope of QROM in relation to how management and organizational research is dened. Our aim is that the journal will cover a wide range of the sub-disciplines that make up the eld of management and organizational research. Coverage will include, but is not restricted to, qualitative research methodology and practice; strategic management; public sector management;

QROM 1,1

entrepreneurship and small business; marketing; human resource management; organizational theory and behaviour; employee relations; industrial and organizational psychology; nance; accounting and nancial management; information systems; and technology, innovation and operations management. We particularly welcome papers that address those areas that are perceived to be in the harder more numbers driven areas of the management eld, where qualitative research has traditionally remained hidden. However, our key concern is that a paper provides an example of good empirical research of interest to a general management audience, rather than the sub-discipline within which it is set. We are also concerned that papers advance understanding within the sub-discipline of interest, rather than describing the types of qualitative research located within it. The third issue is that QROM is an international journal for an international audience. Alasuutari (2004, p. 597) highlights the Anglo-American dominance of the social sciences, and the big market share of American and British authors in the qualitative methodology literature. We intend that QROM will publish papers from authors located throughout the world, though we recognise that the publication of the journal in the English language will be a barrier for many. This is particularly perhaps the case where concepts such as meaning sense-making and symbolism are of central concern, as in qualitative research. However, it is qualitative researchs very sensitivity to the issue of meaning making its concern to preserve contextual understandings and its specicity (with no pretensions to a generalised knowledge) that may encourage a truly international perspective. As Alasuutari suggests, truly global qualitative research would mean that there would be:
. . . an increased knowledge and circulation of tools developed in different parts of the world.

This is something that we would certainly like to capture in QROM. Having described some of the important parameters of the journal (as suggested by the journal title), we now turn to the particular sub-sections planned for the journal at this stage. As well as a number of regular articles each issue will also contain reviews of relevant books. The Book Reviews Editor Nigel King outlines the kind of reviews we would like to see later in this rst issue. Additionally, we have a section in the journal entitled Insider accounts. The aim of this section is that authors can write about their own experiences warts and all. Our view is that insider accounts has a wide remit and could also cover issues such as experiences and learning from conducting particular types of research; issues with writing, producing and disseminating qualitative research; or developments in methods for teaching qualitative research. What denes an insider accounts paper is that the focus is on the researchers own experience of conducting research, or teaching qualitative methods in itself, rather than the outcome of empirical work. Our goal is that this section will provide an avenue for researchers to share their own experiences, and learn from the experiences of others. In this issue, Alan Bryman and Catherine Cassell have contributed an article that focuses on their experiences of interviewing researchers, an article stimulated by their interviewing each other for various research projects. We also envisage that the journal will have occasional special issues which take a particular theme within qualitative research as their focus, and collect together a number of articles around that theme. In addition to regular submissions, book

reviews, and insider accounts, we are keen to engage with other types of contribution, and suggestions for these should be made to the editors in the rst instance. With regard to the editorial process, once a paper has been submitted to QROM through the central system [email protected] it will be read by one of the two editors. If the paper meets the general aims and objectives of the journal, then it will be assigned to one of the editorial team. If that editor decides to progress the article further, it will then be assessed anonymously by (at least) two independent reviewers. The member of the editorial team will then make a decision on the paper informed by the reviewers comments. We will endeavour to process papers as efciently as possible and with suitable respect for the contributing authors on whose submissions we depend. Invited contributions in this inaugural issue We turn now to the articles in this inaugural issue. In his invited paper, John Van Maanen reects on his experience of writing ethnography and on developments in that eld over the last 20 years. John is a key gure in the eld of qualitative research in organizations and management, and edited the special issue of Administrative Science Quarterly in 1979 which called for the reclaiming of qualitative research for the organizational eld, and the recognition of the considerable insights that qualitative research can provide. We are delighted that John has contributed such an insightful and entertaining piece. John points out that the production of an ethnographic account is often seen as a solitary endeavour, yet in practice there are a whole range of social and contextual inuences on the work we produce, including how we read other writers and receive comments on our work. His article sketches out how ethnography has both changed over the last 20 years, but also retained some of its particular qualities. From his account, it appears that ethnography is thriving in the area of organizational research. Indeed we welcome ethnographic contributions for QROM. We are also pleased to have an invited contribution from David Boje in which David, a renowned thinker and prolic writer in the area of postmodernism in management and organizational research, reects upon how far postmodernism has come, the contribution it has made, and how a dark side of postmodernism has developed. David calls for a combination of critical theory and postmodern theory to create a form of critical postmodernism through which qualitative studies can generate insights into the dynamics of organizations in the current environment. In providing an auto-ethnographic account of building a Harley-Davidson chopper, David creatively illustrates what post-production and post-consumption participatory research can look like. These two papers encapsulate many of the qualities of the kind of contributions we are seeking for QROM. In Johns paper, we have a detailed review of a particular (qualitative) approach of specic interest to the readers of this journal, and in Davids paper, a review of a particular paradigm similarly of specic interest to qualitative researchers. However, both authors do not simply describe these approaches but speak authoritatively on ways in which they have changed and in which they may be developed. Both pieces are also reexive in the authors consideration of their own experiences of and commitments to these approaches. While also accepting more traditional empirical (qualitative) studies of topics in the general area of organization and management studies, we would encourage the kind of theoretical, developmental and reexive work illustrated so well in these accounts.

Editorial

QROM 1,1

10

An invitation Having outlined why we think there is a need for a journal like QROM, our aims, objectives and scope, and the details of this rst issue, it remains to say that we invite you to submit your work to QROM. More details on the journal and the submission process can be found at [email protected]. We welcome papers that have taken a reexive and critical approach on their subject matter and that seek to develop our understanding of a particular issue in the organization and management eld or to develop particular (qualitative) methodologies. We also welcome papers that may elucidate meanings and sense-makings from other cultures than mainland Europe or North America, and papers that may seek to provide cross-disciplinary insights on relevant topics. In providing this outlet for high quality qualitative research, we wish to encourage an increased recognition of the signicance and value of qualitative research in the organization and management eld and continue its development both methodologically and epistemologically. The main protagonists in this endeavour, however, are the researchers and practitioners who pursue qualitative research. Our goals depend on you as authors of high quality research and we, therefore, encourage your support through your submissions. We are very much looking forward to reading some excellent work and to helping facilitate the further development of our research eld.
References Alasuutari, P. (2004), The globalization of qualitative research, in Seale, C., Gobo, G., Gubrium, J.F. and Silverman, D. (Eds), Qualitative Research Practice, Sage, London. Boje, D. (2001), Report from the division chair, Academy of Management Research Methods Division Newsletter, Vol. 16 No. 2. Brown, R.B. (1997), You cant expect rationality from pregnant men: reections on multi-disciplinarity in management research, British Journal of Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 23-30. Cassell, C.M. and Symon, G. (Eds) (2004), Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research, Sage, London. Cassell, C.M., Symon, G., Beuhring, A. and Johnson, P. (2006), The role and status of qualitative methods in management research: an empirical account, Management Decision, Vol. 44, pp. 290-303. Cope, J. (2005), Researching entrepreneurship through phenomenological inquiry: philosophical and methodological issues, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 23, pp. 163-89. Dalton, M. (1959), Men Who Manage, Wiley, New York, NY. Daymon, C. and Holloway, I. (2003), Qualitative Research in Public Relations and Communications, Routledge, London. Gephart, R.P. and Rynes, S. (2004), Qualitative research and the Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 454-62. Gummesson, E. (2000), Qualitative Methods in Management Research, Sage, London. Humphrey, C. and Lee, B. (2004), The Real Life Guide to Accounting Research: A Behind the Scenes View of Using Qualitative Research Methods, Elsevier, Oxford. Jackall, R. (1988), Moral Mazes: The World of Corporate Managers, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Knoblauch, H., Flick, U. and Maeder, C. (2005), Qualitative research in Europe: the variety of social research, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 6 No. 3, Art. 34, available at: www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-05/05-3-34-e.htm (accessed 11 June 2005). Lee, T. (2001), On qualitative research in AMJ, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 215-6. Lee, T.W. (1999), Using Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Mariampolski, H. (2001), Qualitative Marketing Research: A Comprehensive Guide, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Marschan-Piekkari, R. and Welch, C. (2004), Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in International Business, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham. Moisander, J. (2006), Qualitative Marketing Research: A Cultural Approach, Sage, London. Myers, M.D. (2002), Qualitative Research in Information Systems: A Reader, Sage, London. Prasad, A. and Prasad, P. (2002), The coming age of interpretive organizational research, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 4-11. Sparrow, P. (1999), Editorial, Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, Vol. 72, pp. 261-4. Symon, G., Cassell, C. and Dickson, R. (2000), Expanding our research and practice through innovative research methods, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 1-6. Trauth, E.M. (2001), Qualitative Research in Information Science: Issues and Trends, Idea Group Publishing, London. Van Maanen, J. (1979), Reclaiming qualitative methods for organizational research: a preface, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24, pp. 520-6. Watson, T.J. (1977), The Personnel Managers: A Study in the Sociology of Work and Employment, Routledge, London. Watson, T.J. (1994), In Search of Management: Culture, Chaos and Control in Managerial Work, Routledge, London. Further reading Crompton, R. and Jones, G. (1988), Researching white collar organizations: why sociologists should not stop doing case studies, in Bryman, A. (Ed.), Doing Research in Organizations, Routledge, London. Johnson, P., Buehring, A., Cassell, C.M. and Symon, G. (2005), Evaluating qualitative management research: towards a contingent criteriology, working paper. Mintzberg, H. (1973), The Nature of Managerial Work, Harper & Row, New York, NY. Reason, P. and Rowan, J. (1981), Human Inquiry: A Sourcebook of New Paradigm Research, Wiley, Chichester. About the authors Catherine Cassell is a Professor of Occupational Psychology at Manchester Business School. She has a long-term interest in the use of qualitative methods in organizational and management research and has published three edited texts with Gillian Symon in this eld. She is also inaugural joint editor of the journal QROM. She has recently completed (with Gillian Symon and Phil Johnson) an ESRC project examining assessments of the quality of qualitative research in the business and management eld.

Editorial

11

QROM 1,1

12

Gillian Symon is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Organizational Psychology, Birkbeck, University of London. She has undertaken and published research in the areas of qualitative research, rhetorical analysis and politics in the technological change process. She has edited three compendia of qualitative research methods and special issues of both the European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (2000) and the Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology (2006) with Catherine Cassell. They are currently joint editors of the journal QROM. Gillian Symon is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: g.symon@ bbk.ac.uk

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.