Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:45:27.674Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Management and Organization Review Special Issue ‘Doing Qualitative Research in Emerging Markets’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2017

Emmanuella Plakoyiannaki ,
Tian Wei ,
Carol Hsu ,
Catherine Cassell  and
Shameen Prashantham
Emmanuella Plakoyiannaki
Affiliation:
Leeds University ([email protected])
Tian Wei*
Affiliation:
Fudan University ([email protected])
Carol Hsu
Affiliation:
Tongji University ([email protected])
Catherine Cassell
Affiliation:
Leeds University ([email protected])
Shameen Prashantham
Affiliation:
CEIBS ([email protected])
*
*Corresponding guest editor
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Management and Organization Review (MOR) special issue on ‘Doing Qualitative Research in Emerging Markets’ aims to advance the quality, diversity, and understanding of qualitative research methods in management in the context of emerging markets. The value of qualitative research is increasingly embraced by management scholars thanks to its merits for building new theories and testing existing ones, as well as exemplifying new phenomena by surfacing contextual idiosyncrasies (Bansal & Corley, 2011; Birkinshaw, Brannen, & Tang, 2011; Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007; Rynes, 2007; Welch, Piekkari, Plakoyiannaki, & Paavilainen-Mantymaki, 2011). As Bansal and Corley (2011: 234) suggest ‘The beauty of qualitative research is that it accommodates different paradigms and different styles of research and research reporting. Although there are merits to having norms emerge for the style of qualitative research manuscripts, we do not want to stifle creativity’.

Type
Call for Papers
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , June 2017 , pp. 455 - 458
Copyright
Copyright © The International Association for Chinese Management Research 2017 

Special Issue Theme Background

The Management and Organization Review (MOR) special issue on ‘Doing Qualitative Research in Emerging Markets’ aims to advance the quality, diversity, and understanding of qualitative research methods in management in the context of emerging markets. The value of qualitative research is increasingly embraced by management scholars thanks to its merits for building new theories and testing existing ones, as well as exemplifying new phenomena by surfacing contextual idiosyncrasies (Bansal & Corley, Reference Bansal and Corley2011; Birkinshaw, Brannen, & Tang, Reference Birkinshaw, Brannen and Tang2011; Eisenhardt & Graebner, Reference Eisenhardt and Graebner2007; Rynes, Reference Rynes2007; Welch, Piekkari, Plakoyiannaki, & Paavilainen-Mantymaki, Reference Welch, Piekkari, Plakoyiannaki and Paavilainen-Mantymaki2011). As Bansal and Corley (Reference Bansal and Corley2011: 234) suggest ‘The beauty of qualitative research is that it accommodates different paradigms and different styles of research and research reporting. Although there are merits to having norms emerge for the style of qualitative research manuscripts, we do not want to stifle creativity’.

This diversity of underlying philosophical positions, multiple research paradigms, nonstandard research designs, multiple theoretical purposes, and variable quality of writing, render qualitative research suitable to scholars who wish to generated nuanced accounts of high complexity settings (Pratt, Reference Pratt2008; Siggelkow, Reference Siggelkow2007; Suddaby, Reference Suddaby2006). Empirical studies in social science require high-quality research to purse truth through rigorous research (Lewin, Fey, Levine, McDermott, Murmann, & Tsang, Reference Lewin, Fey, Levine, McDermott, Murmann and Tsang2016). The criteriology of qualitative research can be pluralistic inspired by different philosophical orientations. Qualitative studies might employ ‘positivist’ quality criteria such as construct validity, internal validity, external validity and reliability (Yin, Reference Yin2009, Reference Yin2014) or naturalistic criteria, namely credibility, transferability, dependability and conformability (Symon & Cassell, Reference Symon, Cassell, Symon and Cassell2012). As suggested by Welch et al. (Reference Welch, Piekkari, Plakoyiannaki and Paavilainen-Mantymaki2011), philosophical and methodological pluralism may be desirable and critical in producing insights of phenomena in novel, idiosyncratic, and multiple contexts.

With the recognition of the criticism on generalization because of the small-N problem (Gerring, Reference Gerring, Boix and Stokes2007; Steinmetz, Reference Steinmetz2004), we appreciate the relative merits of qualitative research in three aspects of generalization: theoretical generalization, falsification and empirical within-population generalization (Tsang, Reference Tsang2014). Furthermore, the most recent editorial from Journal of International Business Studies (JIBS) emphasizes on the trustworthiness in qualitative research by ruling out alternative explanations (Cuervo-Cazurra, Andersson, Brannen, Nielsen, & Reuber, Reference Cuervo-Cazurra, Andersson, Brannen, Nielsen and Reuber2016). Detailed recommendations have been outlined for establishing trustworthiness in qualitative research in three dimensions: research context, research design, and empirical analysis (Cuervo-Cazurra et al., Reference Cuervo-Cazurra, Andersson, Brannen, Nielsen and Reuber2016).

Contextualization calls for more qualitative research to capture phenomena, explore comprehensive insights and develop context-specific theories (Tsui, Reference Tsui2006). It has been well recognized that the philosophy and approach in doing business vary between emerging markets and developed ones (Barkema, Chen, George, Luo, & Tsui, Reference Barkema, Chen, George, Luo and Tsui2015). Management theories developed in western countries may not adapt well to the emerging context descripted by multiple embeddedness (or polycontextuality, see Shapiro, von Glinow, & Xiao, Reference Shapiro, von Glinow and Xiao2007). Therefore, context-informed theory-building and -testing becomes an imperative if we are to explain the uniqueness of management in emerging markets, and so qualitative research becomes critical for scholars.

We are aware that the need for encouraging qualitative research has attracted the collective imagery and the joint attention of researchers, executives, and consultants in both transforming and established economies. Context-specific theories contribute both to scholars and practitioners in western and eastern world. However, even though some of the journals accept qualitative papers, the number of theories based on emerging markets is still limited.

We believe that a special interest on qualitative research in emerging markets has the potential to significantly draw the attention on qualitative research and enhance the understanding of qualitative methods. We echo Tsui (Reference Tsui2007: 1353) and view this special issue as an opportunity for ‘serious engagement in deep contextualization, novel questioning and innovative theorizing’. The MOR special issue will contribute to establishing the groundwork for reviewing, motivating, and illustrating rigorous qualitative research in emerging markets, by adopting a wide range of qualitative methods (case study, grounded theory, historical data, interviews, observation, visual methodologies, etc.). It seeks to attract and publish a diverse array of empirical, theoretical, and methodological contributions that significantly add to the state-of-the-art qualitative research in emerging markets. Through, reverse exporting’ (White, Reference White2002: 306) this special issue may offer novel ways to revisit phenomena in other contexts therefore contributing to the wider discourse of qualitative management research. Potential topics included but not limited to an overview of qualitative research in emerging markets, context-specific theories built by qualitative research, and empirical pieces adopting qualitative methods.

Topics

The following list of research topics is not intended to be exhaustive or complete.

  • • How to engage in qualitative theory-building and/or theory-testing research in emerging markets?

  • • Mixed method studies in emerging markets, combining different qualitative methodologies (e.g., case study, focus groups, and observations).

  • • Qualitative research in emerging markets, which focuses on various phenomenon and makes attempts to understand the underlying mechanism.

  • • Innovative qualitative research practices inspired by the emerging market context.

  • • Qualitative studies that employ various management theories (e.g., resource-based view, institutional theory, social network, etc.) to enrich existing understanding and elaborate theories in emerging markets.

  • • Generating management theories through qualitative analysis in the context of emerging markets.

  • • Adopting qualitative research methods to analyze empirical pieces in various fields of management studies (e.g., innovation, entrepreneurship, international management, organizational behavior, and human resource management) in emerging markets.

Questions about the special issue may be directed to guest editor Tian Wei (). Papers for the special issue should be submitted electronically through MOR’s ScholarOne Manuscripts site at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/mor and identified as submission to the ‘Doing Qualitative Research in Emerging Markets' special issue. All submissions should follow the ‘MOR Author Guidelines’, available online at http://journals.cambridge.org/images/fileUpload/documents/MOR_ifc.pdf

Footnotes

Submission deadline: September 30, 2017

References

REFERENCES

Bansal, P., & Corley, K. 2011. The coming of age for qualitative research: Embracing the diversity of qualitative methods. Academy of Management Journal, 54 (2): 233–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkema, H. G., Chen, X-P., George, G., Luo, Y., & Tsui, A. 2015. West meets East: New concepts and theories. Academy of Management Journal, 58 (2): 460–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkinshaw, J., Brannen, M. Y., & Tang, R. 2011. From a distance and generalizable to up close and grounded: Reclaiming a place for qualitative methods in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (5): 573–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuervo-Cazurra, A., Andersson, U., Brannen, M. Y., Nielsen, B. B., & Reuber, A. R. 2016. From the editors: Can I trust your findings? Ruling out alternative explanations in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 47 (8): 881–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. 2007. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1): 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerring, J. 2007. The case study: What it is and what it does. In Boix, C. and Stokes, S. C. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of comparative politics: 90–122. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lewin, A. Y., Fey, C. F., Levine, S. S., McDermott, G., Murmann, J. P., & Tsang, E. W. K. 2016. The critique of empirical social sciences: New policies at Management and Organization Review . Management and Organization Review, 12 (4): 649–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pratt, M. G. 2008. Fitting oval pegs into round holes. Tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals. Organizational Research Methods, 11 (3): 481–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rynes, S. L. 2007. Editor's forward on rich research. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1): 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, D. L., von Glinow, M. A., & Xiao, Z. 2007.Toward polycontextually sensitive research methods. Management and Organization Review, 3 (1): 129–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siggelkow, N. 2007. Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (1): 20–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinmetz, G. 2004. Odious comparisons: incommensurability, the case study, and ‘small N's’ in sociology. Sociological Theory, 22 (3): 371–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suddaby, R. 2006. What grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (4): 633–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Symon, G., & Cassell, C. 2012. Assessing qualitative research. In Symon, G. and Cassell, C. (Eds.), Qualitative organizational research: Core methods and current challenges: 204–223. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, E. W. K. 2014. Generating from research findings: The merits of case studies, International Journal of Management Review, 16 (4): 369–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsui, A. S. 2006. Contextualization in Chinese management research. Management and Organization Review, 2 (1): 1–13.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. S. 2007. From homogenization to pluralism: International management research in the academy and beyond. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (6): 1353–1364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Paavilainen-Mantymaki, E. 2011. Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 42 (5): 740–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, S. 2002. Rigor and relevance in Asian management research: Where are we and where can we go? Asian Pacific Journal of Management, 19 (2/3): 287–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yin, R. 2009. Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Sage.Google Scholar
Yin, R. 2014. Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage.Google Scholar