The range of methods that can be applied for empirical research work in business has developed at a fast pace over the last decade. A surprising range of epistomological debates around the nature and quality of the type of results obtained from these methods has developed in parallel?

Although we get a large number of submissions, there are surprisingly few that we can accept due to the lack of fit to this journal’s subject focus. They may be well written but they are not on the subject that this journal was founded to address. The Journal has the objective of publishing papers that offer new insights or practical help in the application of research methods in business research. Papers are accepted that for example ‑ present new methods, offer the experience of researchers in applying controversial or complex methods, offer practical help on the research process or debate the various philosophical issues that are so critical to application and evaluation. We look for a high standard in scholarship writing. But of key importance is that each paper includes discussion on the research process.

The four papers chosen for this issue deal with widely differing subjects. The paper by Noy and Luski addresses the problem posed for the researcher by the lack of a unified philosophical paradigm for business strategy. The authors produce a fascinating solution for finding a path through the maze of competing models, theories available from a wide range of disciplines. The paper by Armitage and Thornton assesses the effect of using personal narrative exchanges to investigate organizational issues. The paper by Muskat, Blackman and Muskat gives an excellent introduction to the use of Mixed Methods ‑ one of the relatively new types of empirical method. It does this through the development of a specific example. The paper by Roy and Tarafdar is very specific to the use of the technique of SEM (structural equation modeling) in Operations and Manufacturing Management. The paper carries out an interesting assessment of the likely impact of a poor or inappropriate application of this technique.

Ann Brown
Editor

Share |

The Use of Narratives to Reveal the Secret Data of Organisational Life pp1‑8

Andrew Armitage, Alan Thornton

Look inside Download PDF (free)

Show Summary

Abstract

This paper considers the use of narrative exchanges in the form of letters and conversations as a legitimate research method when collecting “secret data” within organisational settings. It refers to narrative exchanges the authors’ undertook over a three‑month period, regarding their different perspectives on their University Staff Appraisal System. It explores personal tensions and anxieties that reside within the “secret data” of organisational life. It also reveals a concern regarding “professional commitments” with colleagues and the “managerial” edicts that dominate their work environment. From a “critical management” perspective, the paper initially provides an overview of the postmodern position and its impact upon organisational power relationships and knowledge, as individuals strive to attain and gain their authentic, personal voice within the domination of modernistic organisations. It then explains the methodological approach used for the narrative exchanges and describes the context and relationship of the two colleagues. Commencing from a discussion of organisational policy and postmodernist critiques the conversations increasingly developed into a dialogical meditation on the relationship between “self” and “other”. These narratives revealed, through their autographical, autobiographical and at times surreal discourses, messages that are often absent from conventional research data. The paper concludes with a perspective regarding critical management in which individual values, dignity, honesty and respect are upheld. Thus, narrative exchanges of this kind allow dialogical conversations in which statements are agreed, accepted, challenged or sometimes synthesised to be used as a means to explore and collect legitimate “secret data” of organisational life within an environment that respects the ethical and value systems of the participants engaged in narrative exchanges.

Keywords: postmodern, surrealism, autography, autobiography, aesthetic, individual voice, critical turn

Share |

Mixed Methods: Combining Expert Interviews, Cross‑Impact Analysis and Scenario Development pp9‑21

Matthias Muskat, Deborah Blackman, Birgit Muskat.

Look inside Download PDF (free)

Show Summary

The Multidisciplinary Nature of Business Strategy: Suggesting a Rhizome Paradigm pp22‑33

Eli Noy, Aim Deulle Luski

Look inside Download PDF (free)

Show Summary

The Effect of Misspecification of Reflective and Formative Constructs in Operations and Manufacturing Management Research pp34‑52

Subhadip Roy, Monideepa Tarafdar, T.S. Ragu-Nathan, Erica Marsillac

Look inside Download PDF (free)

Hide Summary

Abstract

This paper highlights theoretical and mathematical differences between formative and reflective measurement models, in the context of academic SEM oriented research in Operations and Manufacturing Management, an area of significant current interest. It discusses problems associated with measurement model misspecification. It further illustrates, using survey data, the effects of possible misspecification on model fit parameters and path coefficients in a nomological model, using the Partial Least Squares (PLS) approach. It then proposes guidelines for the use of the PLS methodology for analyzing formative measurement models.

Keywords: formative, reflective, measurement models, PLS, structural equation modeling, model misspecification

Share |