This seminar will focus on the qualitative approach to designing social and organizational research. It will be a continuation of the work started in the philosophy of science seminar. You may recall that during the first weekend of the philosophy of science seminar we covered different ‘cultures of inquiry’ You were introduced to qualitatively oriented inquiry cultures such as phenomenology, ethnography, and hermeneutics. This seminar will provide a more detailed exposition of these and a few other qualitative inquiry cultures. (Logical positivism, the other culture of inquiry we discussed in the philosophy of science seminar is being covered in the seminar on quantitative research methods). The overarching goal of this seminar is to establish a forum to continue learning the "craft" of organizational research and its associated technologies so as to help you acquire the skills necessary in undertaking your dissertation-related research from a qualitative perspective.

Qualitative research/methodology has a long and distinguished history in the human disciplines. In sociology the work of the "Chicago School" in the 1920s and 1930s established the importance of qualitative research for the study of human group life. In Anthropology, during the same period, the pathbreaking studies of Boas, Mead, Benedict, Bateson, Evans-Pritchard, Radcliffe-Brown, and Malinowski characterized the outlines of the fieldwork method (ethography), wherein the observer went to a foreign setting to study the customs and habits of another society and culture. Soon, qualitative research was employed in other social science disciplines such as linguistics, literary studies, education, social work, communications, and the management and organizational sciences.

In basic terms, Qualitative Methods is a detailed description of situations, events, people, and behaviors. It includes what people say about their experiences, attitudes, beliefs, and thoughts through recordings, documents, transcripts, records, and narrative histories. Qualitative data sources include observation and participant observation, fieldwork, interviews, texts, and the researcher's diary of impressions and reactions. Qualitative Methods are typically open-ended and do not impose, outsider, expert, academic, predetermined, categories (called Etic categories) such as the response choices that comprise typical questionnaires or tests. Instead Qualitative Methods begin with specific observations and build towards general observations and explorations of the people's grounded, categories-in-use (called Emic categories).

Qualitative research is a field of inquiry in its own right. It crosscuts disciplines, fields, and subject matter. The philosophical roots of qualitative research/methodology span multiple schools of thought such as phenomenology, critical theory, post-structuralism, hermeneutics, feminism, deconstructionism, psychoanalysis, interpretivism, post-positivism, postmodernism, and social constructionism. In terms of methods, Qualitative researchers use semiotics, narrative, content, discourse, archival and phonemic analysis, and sometimes even statistics. They also draw upon and utilize the approaches, methods, and techniques of ethnomethodology, ethnographies, interviews, survey research and participant observation among others (For a quick overview, check out the website at "QM Resource"  at  http://maple.lemoyne.edu/~hevern/nrmaster.html).

The following is a convenient and simple classification with which to approach Qualitative methods:

• Case study,
• Ethnography,
  
• Participant observation,
• Phenomenology,
• Ethnomethodology,
• Grounded theory,
• Biographical method,
• Historical method,
• Action and applied research,
• Clinical research
• Generative Theory

• Interviewing,
• Observing,
• Collecting artifacts, documents and records,
• Visual methods such as photographs, filming and video-taping,
• Personal experience and methods,
• Data management methods,
• Computer assisted analysis,
• Textual analysis,
• Storytelling and other narrative approaches

The seminar is intended to provide students an overview and experience of qualitative methods. We will to the extent possible try and cover the major traditions associated with qualitative research during the 2 weekends. However, two major thrusts of this seminar will be on:

1. Creating generative theory in our research both as a means of understanding and intervening into social systems, and
2. Developing and understanding the ‘grounded theory’ methodology which in our opinion is an approach that cuts across several traditions of qualitative research. Grounded theory in combination with methods of data collection and analysis such as interviews, participant observation and analytical techniques such as the constant comparative method undergirds several other forms of inquiry such as ethnography, biography, phenomenology and case-study approaches.

During the first weekend the seminar will focus on the development and increased understanding of five themes around qualitative methods:

1. Logic of Generative Theory

We will study the logic of generative theory- the proposal that theory does more than predict and control; theory can also challenge the basic assumptions that guide social patterns and suggest alternatives. This will lead us to a discussion of social constructionism and the interpretive turn in social sciences. If we take seriously the possibility that generative social theory may be the most powerful tool for intervening into social systems, how do we conceive of our role as researchers? How does this influence our choice of topics, the population we choose to study, and how do we approach our subjects/informants?

2. Characteristics of Qualitative Methods

We will discuss the basic characteristics of qualitative methods, when and why they are appropriate. We will review some of the major approaches to qualitative research such as biography, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, hermeneutics, narrative, and case study.

3. Exploring grounded theory building

We will explore the cyclical nature of grounded theory building and discuss the challenge in each of the facets through the simultaneous activities of collecting, coding, and analyzing data. We will look at various studies that have employed grounded theory building and analyze the choice of methods and coding decisions the authors’ made.

4. Interviewing and Participant Observation

We will discuss two main data collection methods, interviewing and participant observation. While it is difficult to develop mastery over these methods in just a weekend, we will spend some time developing skills in each of these areas.

5. Coding and Analyzing data

We will begin to explore the process of coding and analyzing data through what Glasser and Strauss call the ‘constant comparative’ method. Coding is the most challenging -- and for some the most exciting - area of qualitative analysis. We will spend some time on this in the first weekend and continue our discussions during the second weekend.

In general the course will alternate between philosophical/epistemological themes and practical applications. Some readings are more theoretical and others more case study focused. Some must be read by everyone, and some by specific groups for presentation in class. Make sure that you read the assigned page numbers.

1. Glaser & Strauss. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. (pp. 1-116; pp. 237-250). Everyone reads this one.

Please read this book first. This book is a classic in sociology. It lays out a method for inductive discovery of theory from the ground up. It treats grounded theory as a craft. It needs to be read and re-read. In order to fully appreciate the thrust of the argument in this book, it is important to understand the historical context in which it was written, and one that is relevant till today. At the time of the writing, the inductive generation of theory was not seen as a legitimate research activity compared to logical positivistic approaches. Also, qualitative data was seen as inferior to quantitative data. The book challenges the canon that research should only be concerned with accuracy and verification. Glaser and Strauss argue that the rules for what counts as evidence hinder creative discovery and the potential development of important theories. If we do not challenge this canon, Glaser and Strauss contend, we will be limited to verifying the theories of a few "great person’s’ who preceded us such as Weber, Durkheim and Marx. This book is significant to the field of inquiry. It stands as a challenge for researchers to stay alive and open to surprise at a time when they might be tempted to eliminate ambiguity and settle for premature closure.

What you need to study as you read this book is the practical method the authors propose for generating theory. Some specific concepts that you should be familiar with are: constant comparative method, theoretical sampling, category saturation, substantive and formal theory, axial coding, simultaneous activity of collecting, coding and analyzing data. Also pay attention to the various levels the researchers use in the coding, how close should our codes be to the language of our informants and subjects? (John Van Maanen refers it to as first and second level coding; Clifford Geertz calls this as as ‘experience near’ and ‘experience distant’ levels.)

2. Spradley. Participant Observation. (pp. 1-130). Everyone reads this one.

"Ethnography starts with a conscious attitude of almost complete ignorance" (p. 4). Well, since the postmodern turn, we know that this is naïve and impossible. Nevertheless, as a useful guide to the methods of ethnography and field work, Spradley introduces the notion that we need to train ourselves to notice the rich tapestry of social life that we have learned to ignore. He introduces the idea of observation as a discipline that requires focused practice. Even though this book is typically used to accompany the researcher while engaged in ethnography through Spradley’s proposed sequence, it is a very useful way of conceptualizing the entire cyclical research process. A most useful aspect of this book is the developmental sequence from general to more focused observation and the interplay between field notes taken soon after observation and the evolution of later concepts. Most important, pay attention to Spradley’s description of field notes. Taking good field notes is indispensable. Also, the book cites a number of interesting sociological studies that use ethnographic methods.

3. Rubin & Rubin. Qualitative Interviewing. (pp. 1-17; pp. 93-226). Everyone reads this one.

This book is a good introduction to interviewing and provides an easy read. It distinguishes between different kinds of interviews suitable for different purposes. The book should serve as a useful reference as your research proceeds. You will notice that the authors draw upon the work of Glaser and Strauss and go beyond discussing the interviewing as mere technique to discuss the process of inquiry and building concepts and theories throughout the data collection process. The early chapters on topic choice may be more relevant for some than others. The chapters on creating conversational partnerships (chpt. 6) and structuring the interview, especially the issue of probes following main questions, should be helpful for those who intend to use interview data. Chpt. 9 on topical interviewing might be relevant for those who are using interviews for very focused topics and research questions.

4. Whyte. Street Corner Society. Everyone reads Appendix A. Group 4 reads the whole book.

Although written 50 plus years ago, this book remains a classic. It is the study of an Italian gang that "hung out" in a Boston neighborhood in the 1940s. The vignettes and the stories are very enticing and sometimes the book reads like a 19^th century American novel. Read as many chapters as possible and to get a sense of the story and especially the role played by "Doc." Be sure to read the appendix in which Whyte outlines his method in the context of his own biography. This appendix is sometimes cited as the best account ever written on what it’s like to do fieldwork. Good ethnographies are rich stories that remind us that even the most mundane interactions carry very rich social meanings. In the terms of social science, every micro-interaction reproduces or transforms a macro social structure. We usually just don’t notice it. But Whyte does. What looked to most like a random group of kids hanging out on a street corner, became through Whyte’s perceptive eye, a complex social structure with discernible patterns of power, affiliation and influence. His depictions of leadership patterns that emerge while the group is bowling are classic and have been cited many times in other studies.

Particularly, one theme that has endured from this study concerns the crucial role of the key informant as a source for interpreting the social order. Also, this book begins to introduce us to the issue of self-relexivity in the research process. You may be interested to note that after writing Street Corner Society, Whyte recognized the transforming power of social theory and turned his efforts toward intervention and action research.

5. Strauss and Corbin. Basics of Qualitative Research. Do not read for the first weekend, but bring it to class. We’ll introduce it during the first weekend and use it in the second.

This book is the practical companion to Glaser and Strauss’s Grounded Theory. It walks you though the steps of doing a grounded theory, including getting started; how to use the literature; how to do open, axial, and selective coding; how to create "working diagrams," memos, and models; and how to build good, robust, compelling theory. For any of you who will be doing a qualitative dissertation of any kind (even if it is combined with quantitative), this book is an extremely useful tool.

Below I’ve divided the class into six groups. Each group is responsible for reading, analyzing, and coming to class prepared to present on a set of articles. The articles are all first rate pieces of qualitative research -- a couple of ethnographies, some grounded theories, some narrative/storytelling approaches, and a couple of pure theory pieces. Some are "classics" and some more recent. The idea is to expose you to a broad array of outstanding qualitative research studies, written in different styles, so that you can see what excellence looks like and so that you can compare the different approaches and gravitate toward the ones you like best for your own dissertation. Plan, as a group, to give an informative and entertaining 1-hour presentation on Saturday or Sunday (Nov. 10 or 11).

As you prepare, consider the following questions:

• How did you like the article? Was it enjoyable? Did it excite, delight, or compel you? Did you learn something valuable? Did it "stick with you?" Did it deepen or broaden your understanding or provide you with actionable knowledge?
• What was the fundamental question, hook, or core thrust of the article?
• How did the article flow? How was it structured? Break it down, analyze it. What were the sections and how were they connected to each other? Did it begin with an introduction, a story, a critique of existing literature, something else? Then what: literature review, setting description, methods section, theory, discussion, implications for future research and practice? Some other flow?
• What was the style of the writing? Propositional? Storytelling? An argument reinforced with quotes? Poetic? Imaginative/future oriented? Other?
• What was the methodology that was used? Grounded theory? Ethnography? Biography? Some other? Specifically, how was it used?
• How was the literature used and how was it connected to the empirical data and to the theory? What was the purpose of the literature?
• What kind of data was collected and how was it collected? How was it analyzed? Was there any quantitative data? How was it used and related to the qualitative data?
• How was the sample/target population selected?
• How did the authors involve the participants/interviewees in the data collection, analysis, and theory building, if at all?
• How was the theory constructed? What was the mix of literature, data, and generative/imaginative thinking? What did the "new theory" look like? How was it organized? Was it compelling to you? Why or why not?
• How did the authors use figures, tables, graphs, and charts?
• What about the references that were used, which sources, authors, and journals did the authors use and why?
• What else stood out for you that you might like to use for your own work/dissertation?

Dutton, J. E. and Dukerich, J. M. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation, Academy of Management Journal, 34(2), 517-554.

J. M. Bartunek (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order, Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355-372.

Isabella, L. (1990). Evolving interpretations as a change unfolds: How managers construe key organizational events, Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 7-41.

Barrett, F. J. (1996). The organizational construction of hegemonic masculinity: The case of the U.S. Navy. Gender, Work, and Organization, 3(3), 129-142.

Orlikowski, W. J. and Yates, J. (1994). Genre repertoire: The structuring of communicative practices in organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 541-57.

Kahn, W.A. (1993). Caring for the caregivers: Patterns of organizational caregiving, Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 539-563.

Group 3 -- Bob, Dave, George, Korin, Dan

Poole, P. E., Gioia, D. A., and Gray. B. (1989). Influence modes, Schema change, and organizational transformation, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 25, 271-289.

Rosen, M. (1988). "You asked for it: Christmas at the bosses expense" Journal of Management Studies, 25 5 ---

Bartunek, J. M. & Lacey, C. A. (1998). The roles of narrative in understanding work group dynamics associated with a dramatic event, Advances in Qualitative Organizational Research, 1, 33-66.

Whyte. Street Corner Society

Sutton, R. I & Hargadon, A. (1996). Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 685-718.

Group 5 -- Deb, Greg, Marilyn, Vic

Gioia, D. A., Thomas, J. B., Clark, S. & Chittipedi. K. (1994). Symbolism and strategic change in academia: The dynamics of sensemaking and influence, Organization Science, 5(3), 363.

Geertz, C. (1972) Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight.

Barker, J. (1993). "Tightening the Iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams". Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 38, 408-437.

Group 6 -- Gail, Rich Walsh, Mark, Marci

D. F. Roy, "Banana Time" Job satisfaction and informal interaction, Human Organization, 158---

Dutton, J.; J. Dukerich "Organizational images and member identification." Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 239 - 263, 1994.

Jehn, K. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions of Organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly.