969570


Course
Qualitative Research Methods - 2018

Faculty
Professor Torsten Ringberg, Department of Marketing, Copenhagen Business School
Professor Dr. Markus Reihlen, Institute of management and Organization, Leuphana University of Lueneburg

Course Coordinator
Professor Torsten Ringberg

Prerequisites
This PhD seminar is for PhD students (regular and industrial) in business, organization, marketing, and management. However, students from other social science disciplines may also find this course relevant for developing a qualitative research approach. The two instructors bring with them extensive experiences with social science theories and how to extract relevant data using a range of methods, such as case-studies and semi-structured in-depth interviews. Both instructors have published in leading international academic journals.

Aim
Qualitative research is a research strategy that emphasizes large bodies of unstructured data (textual, graphical, audio, and video data) that cannot be meaningfully analyzed by formal, statistical approaches. Despite differences, qualitative research approaches share at least the following two assumptions: (1) by systematically generating and analyzing data new theory can be discovered (inductive view), and (2) this theory stresses the understanding of the socio-cultural world through an examination of interpretations of that world by its participants. Since each particular research method is informed by different philosophical traditions, this course will first introduce different philosophical perspectives ranging from positivism to interpretativism and postmodernism. Students will then be exposed to various theoretical orientation within the interpretive paradigm and how each brings along certain ontological assumptions as to the construction of meaning and representation of reality/ies a well as require unique methodological considerations. We will cover various qualitative approaches (e.g., ethnography, grounded theory, action research, case studies, ZMET) and discuss their pros and cons given your particular research question. Whereas the case studies and participant observations represent a holistic approach, the ZMET semi-structured in-depth interview surfaces subconsciously mindsets that inform and motivate the sensemaking related to a given issue within a given group of people under study.

Qualitative methods provide the opportunity to gain new insights into motivators of behaviour and to build new theory. As part of the course students will be introduced to how to analyse the data through grounded theory (coding), which is a general method involving comparative analyses for qualitative data. The idea of the grounded theory is to code the text into meaningful themes that enable the identification of deeper seated socio-cultural models, propositions, assumptions and mid-range theories. The approach is primarily inductive, i.e., there are no prior hypotheses to be established or tested but rather a research question to be explored. The insights from qualitative research can, in addition to theory building, also be used to establish hypotheses that can be addressed quantitatively (surveys, experimentally etc.). As such, quantitatively oriented students might also benefit from this course.

The qualitative data analysis is supported by different software packages (e.g., NVivo, Nudist, Atlas.ti, MAXQDA). Only Atlasti will be covered more generally. It is possible to download and install a training version of the software program Atlas.ti 7.0 on your laptop computer. Link: http://www.atlasti.com/de/demo.html. Also, you can consult online tutorials for a more detailed coverage- see below links). The course represents a doctorate workshop. Throughout the course, initiatives, creativity, and critical thinking on part of the students will be appreciated and encouraged.

Course content
This course is designed as a seminar, which requires preparation by students before each session and dynamic interaction in the classroom. Students are encouraged to debate their particular views, methodological problems, and research issues in class. In order to get a certificate from the Copenhagen Business School you have to pass the following components:

• One short group presentation. Students will be assigned to a small group after enrollment. The group will prepare an in-class discussion of one academic papers and present the it as a group to the rest of the class. It should include no more than five slides that highlight the research problem, research contribution, research design, theoretical framework, methods, findings, discussion/take aways. The group will be allotted 15 min for the presentation. You will need to read, discuss, and prepare the short presentation before the course and submit it a week prior to the start of the course.
• Research proposal: formulating a research problem of your choice (preferably from your own research field) and developing a qualitative research design (approx. six pages). You should hand in the research proposal latest by October 10th. You will present and discuss this in the course. After the course you update the proposal based on feedback and general knowledge acquired during the course.
• Review of a research proposal. In order to learn from each other you also will be asked to write a constructive review (approx. 1-2 pages long) of a fellow PhD student’s updated research proposal and turn this in after the course. We will provide additional information about how to write a constructive review.
• In-class participation: We expect you to show up for all seminar sessions and participate actively throughout, including challenge existing assumptions/theories/methods and present your own thoughts and work in class.

Teaching style

Lecture plan
OCTOBER 22

10 - 12
1. Philosophical Foundations of Social Research
  Introductory lecture and discussion

13 - 15
2. Qualitative Research: Design and Approaches
  Lecture and discussion
Team activity: systematic comparison/discussion of background theories

15.00 – 17.00
3.
Design and Method of Case Study Research
  Lecture and discussion 


OCTOBER 23

10 - 12
4. Short group presentations of academic papers
  Presentations and discussion of assigned academic articles

13 - 17
5. Design, Method and use of Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET) and Ethnography
  Lecture on ZMET. Interview techniques, using Atlasti to coding, and the identification of mental models and collective mindmaps.
 Ethnographic data gathering


OCTOBER 24

10 - 12
6. Grounded Theory
• Lecture on using grounded theory approach to coding and identification of themes

13 - 14:30
7. Workshop: Qualitative Research Designs
• Group 1: Case study
• Group 2: ZMET
• Group 3: Ethnography

14:30 - 17
8. Presentations of individual research projects
• Presentations, discussion and feedback to student research proposals


OCTOBER 25

10 - 13
9. Writing Qualitative Research papers
Lecture on positioning, contribution, theoretical framing and the
relevance of various of methods including examples of different types of
research.
• Narrative
• Phenomenon-driven
• Theory-driven
• Exploratory
• Meta-analysis
• Mixed methods





Learning objectives

Exam

Other
Please register your topic of your PhD-thesis or research interests as well as your PhD-supervisor (to CBS) - Name and Email.

We will distribute a reading overview. 

Updated course information will be distributed to students via email. 

ONLINE TUTORIALS
Atlas.ti 7 for Windows
Introduction
Atlas.ti for Mac Introduction
Approaches to Coding by Susanne Friese

Start date
22/10/2018

End date
25/10/2018

Level
PhD

ECTS
5

Language
English

Course Literature

READINGS

1.Philosophical Foundations of Social Research Pre-reading
•Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research. Sage: London, chap. 1-3.
•Madill, A., Jordan, A., & Shirley, C. (2000). “Objectivity and reliability in qualitative analysis: Realist, contextualist and radical constructionist epistemologies,” British Journal of Psychology, 91(1), 1-20.
•Ringberg, Torsten and Markus Reihlen, (Sept 2008). “Toward a Socio-Cognitive Approach to Knowledge Transfer” in Journal of Management Studies Vol. 45 No 5, pp. 912-935.
•Reihlen, M.; Klaas-Wissing, Th; Ringberg, T. (2007) “Metatheories in Management Studies: Reflections upon Individualism, Holism, and Systemism,” in M@n@gement, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 49-69. Complementary Reading
•Crotty, M. (1998) The foundations of social research. Meaning and perspective in the research process, Sage: London, chap. 1.
•Morgan, G.; Smircich, L. (1980) “The Case for Qualitative Research,” in Academy of Management Review, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 491-500.
•Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research. Sage: London.
•Bryman, A.; Bell, E. (2003) Business research methods, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
•Crotty, M. (1998) The foundations of social research. Meaning and perspective in the research process, Sage: London.
•Bunge, M. (1996) Finding philosophy in social science, New Haven: Yale University Press.
•Kuhn, T. (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd ed., Chicago University Press: Chicago. 2.Qualitative Research: Design and Approaches Pre-reading
•Locke, K. and Golden-Biddle, K. (2004) An introduction to qualitative research: its potential for industrial and organizational psychology, in Rogelberg, S. G.: Handbook of research methods in industrial and organizational psychology.
•Maxwell, J. A. (2008). Designing a Qualitative Study, in The SAGE handbook of applied social research methods, 2, 214-253.
•Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2010). “Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies,” International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47(11), 1451-1458.
•Reihlen, Markus and Torsten Ringberg (2013) “Uncertainty, pluralism, and the knowledge-based theory of the firm: From J.-C. Spender’s contribution to a socio-cognitive approach,” in European Management Journal, Vol. 31. Issue 6 pp.706-716. Complementary Reading
•Alvesson, M.; Sköldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research (2 ed.). London: Sage.
•Alvesson, M.; Kärreman, D. (2011) Qualitative research and theory development: Mystery as method. London: Sage.
•Antegy, Michael (2013) “Relaxing the Taboo on Telling Our Own Stories: Upholding Professional Distance and Personal Involvement,” Organization Science, 24(4), 1277-1290.
•Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln (2000) Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, Calif., Sage Publications.
•Flick, Uwe; von Kardorff, Ernst; Steinke, Ines (Eds.) (2004) A companion to qualitative research, Sage: London.
•Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice, Routledge.
•Guba, E. G. (1981) “Criteria for Assessing the Trustworthiness of Naturalistic Inquiries,” ECTJ, 29(2): 75-91.
•Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. New York: Sage.
•Maxwell, J. A. (2012). A realist approach for qualitative research, Sage: London.
•Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook, Sage: London.
•Smets, M.; Burke, G.; Jarzabkowski, P. (2014) “Charting new territory for organizational ethnography: Insights from a team-based video ethnography,” Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 3(1):10-26. 3. Design and Method of Case Study Research Pre-reading
•Dyer, W.G.; Wilkins, A.L. (1991), ‘Better Stories, Not Better Constructs, To Generate Better Theory: A Rejoinder to Eisenhardt’, Academy of Management Review, 16, 3, pp. 613-619.
•Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research,”Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, S. 532–550.
•Yin, K.R. (2003) Case study research: Design and Methods – Third Edition, Thousand Oaks, pp. 1-56.
•Reihlen, Markus and Torsten Ringberg, (2006) "Computer-mediated knowledge systems in consultancy firms: do they work?" Professional Service Firms; Royston Greenwood and Toy Sudderby (eds.), in Research in Sociology of Organizations. Vol. 24, pp. 307-336. (annual volume/periodical).
•Anteby, M. (2013). Perspective. “Relaxing the taboo on telling our own stories: Upholding professional distance and personal involvement.” Organization Science, 24(4), 1277-1290.

Complementary Reading
•Eisenhardt, K. und Graebner, M. E. (2007): “Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges,” in Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1: 25-32
•Gibbert, M., Ruigrok, W., & Wicki, B. (2008). “What passes as a rigorous case study?” Strategic Management Journal, 29(13), 1465-1474.
•Langley, A. (1999). “Strategies for theorizing from process data,” in Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691-710. Burawoy, M. (1998), The Extended Case Method, Sociological Theory, 16, 1, pp. 4-33.
•Ragin, CC. (1997) Turning the Tables: How Case-Oriented Research Challenges Variable-Oriented Research, Comparative Social Research, 16, 27-42. 5. Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique (ZMET) & Ethnography Pre-reading Zaltman
•Alvesson, M. (2003). “Beyond neopositivists, romantics, and localists: A reflexive approach to interviews in organizational research,” in Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 13-36.
•Zaltman, G.; Coulter, R. H. 1995. “Seeing the voice of the customer: Metaphor-based advertising research,” Journal of Advertising Research, 35(4): 35-51.
•Ryden, P., Ringberg, T. and Wilke, R. (2015), “The influence of Mental Models of Business- Consumer Interaction on Social Media Use” in Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 31, August, pp 1-16.
•Ringberg, T and Gupta, S. (2003), “The Importance of Understanding the Symbolic World of Customers in Asymmetric Business-to-Business Relationships,” in Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Special Issue on Qualitative Approaches in B-2-B. Vol. 18 No 6/7. Pp. 607-626. Complementary Reading ZMET
•Alvesson, M. (2011). Interpreting interviews. Los Angeles ; London: Sage.
•Zaltman, Gerald (2003). How customers think: Essential insights into the mind of the market. Harvard Business School Press: Cambridge. Pre-reading Ethnography
•Smets, M.; Burke, G.; Jarzabkowski, P. (2014) Charting new territory for organizational ethnography: Insights from a team- based video ethnography, Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 3(1), pp.10-26.
•Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice. Routledge, Chap. 1.
•Sandikci, Özlem and Güliz Ger (2010)” Veiling in Style: How Does a Stigmatized Practice Become Fashionable?” in Journal of Consumer Research (Jun) Vol. 37 Issue 1, p15-36. Complementary Readings Ethnography
•Antegy, Michael (forthcoming) Relaxing the Taboo on Telling Our Own Stories: Upholding Professional Distance and Personal Involvement, Organization Science.
•Alvesson, M.; Sköldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research (2 ed.). London: SAGE.
•Guba, E. G. (1981) Criteria for Assessing the Trustworthiness of Naturalistic Inquiries, ECTJ, 29(2): 75-91.
•Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. New York: Sage. 6. Grounded Theory Pre-reading
•Bryant, Antony; Charmaz, Kathy (2007) Introduction - Grounded theory research methods: Methods and practices, in The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, edited by Bryant, Antony; Charmaz, Kathy, Sage: London, pp. 2-28.
•Corbin, Juliet; Strauss, Anselm (1990) Grounded Theory research: Procedures, canons and evaluative Criteria, Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 19 (6), 418-427.
•Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). “Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research notes on the Gioia methodology.” Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15-31.
•Orton, J. D. (1997). “From inductive to iterative grounded theory: Zipping the gap between process theory and process data,” Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13(4), 419-438.
•Strauss, A.; Corbin, J. (1998): Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 2nd ed., Sage: Thousand Oaks.
•Suddaby, R. (2006) What grounded theory is not. In Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 633-642. Complementary Reading
•Bryant, A.; Charmaz, K. (Eds.) (2007) The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory, Sage: Thousand Oaks.
•Glaser, B.; Strauss, A. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research, Aldine, Chicago.
•Glaser, B. G. 1992. Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, California: Sociology Press.
•Jones,, R.; Noble, G. (2007) “Grounded theory and management research: a lack of integrity?” In Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management Vol. 2, No. 2, p: 84-103
•O¹Reilly, K., Paper, D., & Marx, S.(2012). Demystifying grounded theory for business research. Organizational Research Methods, 15(2), 247-262.
•Locke, K. (2001): Grounded theory in management research, London: Sage
•Miles, M.B.; Huberman, M.A. (1994): Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, 2nd. ed., Thousand Oaks: Sage. On qualitative meta-studies
•Bronstein Bejarano, J., & Reihlen, M. (2014). „Entrepreneurial university archetypes: A meta-synthesis of case study literature,” Industry and Higher Education, 28(4), 245–262.
•Hoon, C. (2013), “Meta-synthesis of qualitative case studies: an approach to theory building,” Organizational Research Methods, 16(4): 522–556.
•Rauch, A., Doorn, R., and Hulsink, W. (2014), “A qualitative approach to evidence-based entrepreneurship: theoretical considerations and an example involving business clusters,” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(2): 333–368. 9. Writing Qualitative Research Papers: Learning from Examples Pre-reading
•Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2011). “Generating research questions through problematization,” Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 247-271.
•Corley, K. G. (2011). “The coming of age for qualitative research: Embracing the diversity of qualitative methods,” Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 233-237.
•Ragins, B. R. (2012). “Reflections on the craft of clear writing,” Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 493-501.
•Luna, David, Torsten Ringberg, and Laura Peracchio (2008), “One Individual, Two Identities: Frame Switching Among Biculturals,” in Journal of Consumer Research Vol. 35, No 2, pp. 279-293. (Mixed methods) Example
•Smets, M., Morris, T., & Greenwood, R. (2012). “From practice to field: A multi-level model of practice driven institutional change,” Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 877-904; best article award 2012 by the Academy of Management Journal.
•Ringberg, Torsten, Gaby Odekerken-Schröder and Glenn L. Christensen, (2007) “A cultural models approach to segmenting consumer recovery expectations,” in Journal of Marketing, Vol.71 (July), pp. 194-214. Complementary Reading
•Alvesson, Mats and Jörgen Sandberg (2013). Constructing research questions: Doing interesting research. Sage: Los Angeles.
•Huff, A. S. 1999. Writing for scholarly publication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
•Pratima B. and Corley, K. 2011. From the editors: “The coming of age for qualitative research,” Academy of Management Journal, 2011, Vol. 54, No. 2, p. 233-237
•Starbuck, William (1999) “Fussy Professor Starbuck's Cookbook of Handy-Dandy Prescriptions for Ambitious Academic Authors or Why I Hate Passive Verbs and Love My Word Processor” ;http://people.stern.nyu.edu/wstarbuc/Writing/Fussy.htm http://people.stern.nyu.edu/wstarbuc/Writing/Fussy.htm 


Fee
DKK 6,500

Minimum number of participants
14

Maximum number of participants
20

Location
10-17 Monday-Wednesday, 10-13 Thursday

Kilevej 14A - room KL2.53, Wednesday 24 October room KL1.53
2000 Frederiksberg

Contact information
Bente S. Ramovic
bsr.research@cbs.dk
+
45 3815 3138

Registration deadline
01/10/2018

Please note that your registration is binding after the registration deadline
Top