【#166_研究メモ】質的研究を深めるためのリソースリスト～～Köhler et al.(2024) からの学び vol.04
Köhler et al.(2024)の論文では、最後に、今後、質的研究についての学びを深めていく上で、参考になる論文・書籍が列挙されていました。
すぐれたレビュー論文は、たくさんの学びをいただけるのですが、それと同時に、読みたい/ 研究の都合上、読まなくては・・・・という論文も大量に出てくるので、大変な沼にはまってしまったなといつも思います苦笑
下記、カテゴリーごとに、紹介されていた論文を残しておきますね！
本論文のタイトルは、”ファミリービジネス”を冠していますが、下記で紹介する論文は、必ずしも”ファミリービジネス”の範囲に限定されないかと思います。
一度に、たくさんのことはできないので、一歩ずつですね・・・。
ーーーKöhler et al.(2024)で紹介されていた論文ーーー
【ケーススタディ】
Gibbert, M., & Ruigrok, W. (2010). The “what” and “how” of case study rigor: Three strategies based on published work. Organizational Research Methods, 13(4), 710–737.
Gibbert, M., Ruigrok, W., & Wicki, B. (2008). What passes as a rigorous case study? Strategic Management Journal, 29(13), 1465–1474.
Piekkari, R., Welch, C., & Paavilainen, E. (2009). The case study as disciplinary convention: Evidence from international business journals. Organizational Research Methods, 12(3), 567–589.
Welch, C., & Piekkari, R. (2017). How should we (not) judge the ‘quality’ of qualitative research? A re-assessment of current evaluative criteria in International Business. Journal of World Business, 52(5), 714–725.
Welch, C., Piekkari, R., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Paavilainen-M¨antym¨aki, E. (2020). Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluralist future for international business research. Research methods in international business (pp. 171–220). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
【グラウンデッド・セオリー】
Locke, K. (2015). Pragmatic reflections on a conversation about grounded theory in management and organization studies. Organizational Research Methods, 18(4), 612–619.
Suddaby, R. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 633–642.
【談話分析】
Greckhamer, T., & Cilesiz, S. (2014). Rigor, transparency, evidence, and representation in discourse analysis: Challenges and recommendations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1), 422–443.
【エスノグラフィー】
Golden-Biddle, K., & Locke, K. (1993). Appealing work: An investigation of how ethnographic texts convince. Organization Science, 4(4), 595–616.
【プロセスリサーチ】
Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.
【質的研究における文章評価の基準】
Golden-Biddle, K., & Locke, K. (2006). Composing qualitative research. Sage Publications.
Locke, K., & Golden-Biddle, K. (1997). Constructing opportunities for contribution:Structuring intertextual coherence and “problematizing” in organizational studies. Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 1023–1062.
⇒質的研究の構成方法に関するアドバイス
K¨ohler, T. (2016). From the editors: On writing up qualitative research in management learning and education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(3), 400–418.
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.
Pratt, M. G. (2009). From the editors: For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 856–862.
⇒Pratt, 2008: 2009は、読者が質的論文で何を読むことを期待しているのか、また、査読プロセスにおいて著者がよく質問されることについて調査を実施。質的論文に含まれる一般的な内容のガイドラインを抽出。
【ファミリービジネス研究における質的研究】
[質的研究の効果的な活用]
Chenail, R. J. (2009). Communicating your qualitative research better. Family Business Review, 22(2), 105–108.
Reay, T. (2014). Publishing qualitative research. Family Business Review, 27(2), 95–102.
[アイディアや示唆の提供]
Fletcher, D., De Massis, A., & Nordqvist, M. (2016). Qualitative research practices and family business scholarship: A review and future research agenda. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 7(1), 8–25.
Kammerlander, N., & De Massis, A. (2020). Frequently asked questions in qualitative family business research and some guidelines to avoid risky paths. In A. De Massis & N. Kammerlander (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for Family Business (pp. 1–23). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
【粘り強く質的研究に臨み、キャリア構築に繋がった例】
Bruns, H. C. (2013). Working alone together: Coordination in collaboration across domains of expertise. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 62–83.
Neeley, T. B. (2013). Language matters: Status loss and achieved status distinctions in global organizations. Organization Science, 24(2), 476–497.
Pratt, M. G. (2000). The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: Managing identificationamong Amway distributors. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 456–493.
Rogers, K. M., Corley, K. G., & Ashforth, B. E. (2017). Seeing more than orange: Organizational respect and positive identity transformation in a prison context. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(2), 219–269.
Smith, A. D., & Zeithaml, C. (1996). Garbage cans and advancing hypercompetition: The creation and exploitation of new capabilities and strategic flexibility to two regional bell operating companies. Organization Science, 7(4), 388–390.
