Diretrizes para Pesquisas Qualitativas em Estudos Organizacionais: Controvérsias e Possibilidades Outros Idiomas

ID:
47216
Resumo:
O objetivo do presente artigo foi abordar a controvérsia sobre o estabelecimento de diretrizes para a pesquisa qualitativa em estudos organizacionais e apresentar um resumo de sugestões sobre como realizar uma boa pesquisa qualitativa dadas por metodólogos em publicações internacionais de primeira linha. Para tanto, o artigo discute: diretrizes gerais à pesquisa qualitativa; como alcançar coerência e transparência em um estudo empírico qualitativo; o significado e a importância do conceito de reflexividade; e, finalmente, como estabelecer uma contribuição teórica e transferência de resultados em tal contexto. O trabalho propiciou valiosa contribuição porque tais diretrizes, conceitos e abordagens podem ser adotados por estudantes e pesquisadores ao realizarem e conduzirem uma proposta de pesquisa qualitativa, bem como por revisores de periódicos para avaliar a qualidade dos estudos empíricos existentes.
Citação ABNT:
CAVALCANTI, M. F. R.Guidelines for Qualitative Research in Organization Studies: Controversy and Possibilities. Administração: Ensino e Pesquisa, v. 18, n. 3, p. 457-457, 2017.
Citação APA:
Cavalcanti, M. F. R.(2017). Guidelines for Qualitative Research in Organization Studies: Controversy and Possibilities. Administração: Ensino e Pesquisa, 18(3), 457-457.
DOI:
10.13058/raep.2017.v18n3.522
Link Permanente:
http://www.spell.org.br/documentos/ver/47216/diretrizes-para-pesquisas-qualitativas-em-estudos-organizacionais--controversias-e-possibilidades/i/pt-br
Tipo de documento:
Artigo
Idioma:
Inglês
Referências:
ALKON, A. H. Reflexivity and Environmental Justice Scholarship: A Role for Feminist Methodologies. Organization & Environment, v. 24, n. 2, p. 130-149, 2011.

ALVESSON, M.; HARDY, C.; HARLEY, B. Reflecting on Reflexivity: Reflexive Textual Practices in Organization and Management Theory. Journal of Management Studies, v. 45, n. 3, p. 480-501, 2008.

AMIS, J. M.; SILK, M. L. The Philosophy and Politics of Quality in Qualitative Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods, v. 11, n. 3, p. 456-480, 2007.

ARMOUR, M.; RIVAUX, S. L.; BELL, H. Using Context to Build Rigor: Application to Two Hermeneutic Phenomenological Studies. Qualitative Social Work, v. 8, n. 1, p. 101-122, 2009.

ATKINSON, E. Thinking outside the box: An exercise in heresy. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 10, p. 111-129, 2004.

BAILEY, L. F. The origin and success of qualitative research. International Journal of Market Research, v. 56, n. 2, p. 167, 2014.

BALLINGER, C. Writing up Rigour: Representing and Evaluating Good Scholarship in Qualitative Research. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, v. 67, n. 12, p. 540-546, 2004.

BANSAL, P.; CORLEY, K. Publishing in AMJ--Part 7: What’s Different about Qualitative Research? Academy of Management Journal, v. 55, n. 3, p. 509-513, 2012.

BELL, K. Doing qualitative fieldwork in Cuba: social research in politically sensitive locations. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, v. 16, n. 2, p. 109-124, 2013.

BERGER, R. Now I see it, now I don’t: researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, v. 15, n. 2, p. 219-234, 2015.

BOCHNER, A. P. Criteria Against Ourselves. Qualitative Inquiry, Communication Faculty Publications, v. 6, n. 2, p. 266-272, 2000.

BOTT, E. Favourites and others: reflexivity and the shaping of subjectivities and data in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, v. 10, n. 2, p. 159-173, 2010.

BRYMAN, A. Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

BUCKNER, S. Taking the debate on reflexivity further. Journal of Social Work Practice, v. 19, p. 59-72, 2005.

BURRELL, G.; MORGAN, G. Sociological Paradigm and Organisational Analysis - Elements of the sociology of corporate life. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing, 1979.

CARCARY, M. Evidence Analysis using CAQDAS: Insights from a Qualitative Researcher. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, v. 9, n. 1, p. 10-24, 2011.

CHALMERS, A. F. What is this Thing Called Science? 3 ed. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1999.

CUNLIFFE, A. Crafting Qualitative Research: Morgan and Smircich 30 years on. Organizational Research Methods, v. 14, n. 4, p. 647-673, 2011.

CUNLIFFE, A.; KARUNANAYAKE, G. Working Within HyphenSpaces in Ethnographic Research: Implications for Research Identities and Practice. Organizational Research Methods, v. 16, n. 3, p. 364-392, 2013.

CUNLIFFE, A. Reflexive inquiry in organizational research: Questions and possibilities. Human Relations, v. 56, n. 8, p. 983-1003, 2003.

CUNLIFFE, A. Using ethnography in strategy-as-practice research. In: GOLSORKHI, D.; ROULEAU, L. et al. (Ed. ). Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2015. p. 431-446.

CURTIS, S. et al. Approaches to Sampling and Case Selection in Qualitative Research: examples in the geography of health. Social Science & Medicine, v. 50, p. 1001-1014, 2000.

DAVIES, D.; DODD, J. Qualitative Research and the Question of Rigor. Qualitative Health Research, v. 12, n. 2, p. 279-289, 2002.

DENZIN, N. K. The Epistemological Crisis in the Human Disciplines: Letting the Old Do the Work of the New. In: JESSOR, R. et al. (Ed. ). Ethnography and Human Development - Context and Meaning in Human Development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. p. 127-152.

DYER, W. G.; WILKINS, A. L. Better Stories, Not Better Constructs, To Generate Better Theory: A Rejoinder to Eisenhardt. Academy of Management Review, v. 16, n. 3, p. 613-619, 1991.

EASTERBY-SMITH, M.; GOLDEN-BIDDLE, K.; LOCKE, K. Working With Pluralism Determining Quality in Qualitative Research. Organizational Research Methods, v. 11, n. 3, p. 419-129, 2008.

EISENHARDT, K. M. Better Stories and Better Constructs: The Case for Rigor and Comparative Logic. The Academy of Management Review, v. 16, n. 3, p. 620-627, 1991.

EISENHARDT, K. M. Building Theory from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review, v. 14, n. 4, p. 532-550, 1989.

EISENHARDT, K. M.; GRAEBNER, M. E. Theory Building from Cases: Opportunities and Challenges. The Academy of Management Journal, v. 50, n. 1, p. 25-32, 2007.

ERDEN, Z.; SCHNEIDER, A.; KROGH, G. V. The Multifaceted Nature of Social Practices: A review of the perspectives on practice-based theory building about organizations. European Management Journal, v. 32, p. 712-722, 2014.

FEYERABEND, P. Against Method. 4 ed. New York: Verso, 2010.

FINLAY, L. ‘Rigour’, ‘Ethical Integrity’ or ‘Artistry’?Reflexively Reviewing Criteria to Evaluate Qualitative Research. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, v. 69, n. 7, p. 319-326, 2006.

FRESHWATER, D. et al. Qualitative research as evidence: criteria for rigour and relevance. Journal of Research in Nursing, v. 15, n. 6, p. 497-508, 2010.

GARSIDE, R. Should we appraise the quality of qualitative research reports for systematic reviews, and if so, how? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, v. 27, n. 1, p. 67-79, 2013.

GIBBERT, M.; RUIGROK, W. The ‘’What’’ and ‘’How’’ of Case Study Rigor: Three Strategies Based on Published Work. Organizational Research Methods, v. 13, n. 4, p. 710-737, 2010.

GOERTZ, G.; MAHONEY, J. A Tale of Two Cultures - Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012.

GOLDEN-BIDDLE, K.; LOCKE, K. An Investigation of How Ethnographic Texts Convince. Organization Science, v. 4, n. 4, p. 595-616, 1993.

GRECO, J. Introduction: What is Epistemology? In: GRECO, J.; SOSA, E. (Ed. ). The Blackwell Guide to Epistemology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1999. p. 1-32.

GUBA, E. G.; LINCOLN, Y. S. Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues. In: HESSE-BIBER, S.; LEAVY, P. (Ed. ). Approaches to Qualitative Research - A reader on theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. p. 17-38.

HAMMERSLEY, M. What’s Wrong with Ethnography? London: Routledge, 1992.

HEMPEL, C. G. Philosophy of Natural Science. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1966.

HERTZ, R. Introduction. In: HERTZ, R. (Ed. ). Reflexivity and Voice. London: SAGE Publications, 1997. p. vii-xviii.

KLAG, M.; LANGLEY, A. Approaching the Conceptual Leap in Qualitative Research International Journal of Management Reviews, v. 15, n. 2, p. 149-166, 2013.

KREFTING, L. Rigor in Qualitative Research: The Assessment of Trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, v. 45, n. 3, p. 214-222, 1991.

KUPER, A.; LINGARD, L.; LEVINSON, W. Critically appraising qualitative research. British Management Journal, v. 337, p. 10-35, 2008.

LECOMPTE, M. D.; GOETZ, J. P. Problems of Reliability and Validity in Ethnographic Research. Review of Educational Research, v. 52, n. 1, p. 31-60, 1982.

LINCOLN, Y. S.; GUBA, E. G. Naturalistic Inquiry. London: SAGE Publications, 1985.

LOCKE, K. Field Research Practice in Management and Organization Studies: Reclaiming its Tradition of Discovery. Academy of Management Annals, p. 613-652, 2011.

MACBETH, D. On “Reflexivity” in Qualitative Research: Two Readings, and a Third. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 7, n. 1, p. 35-68, 2001.

MAIR, J. Social Entrepreneurship: taking stock and looking ahead. In: FAYOLLE, A.; MATLAY, H. (Eds. ), Handbook of Research on Social Entrepreneurship. Glos: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2010. p. 15-28

MAYS, N.; POPE, C. Rigour and Qualitative Research. British Management Journal, v. 31, n. 8, p. 109-112, 1995.

MEYRICK, J. What is good qualitative research?A first step towards a comprehensive approach to judging rigour/quality. Journal of Health Psychology, v. 11, n. 5, p. 799808, Sep 2006.

MILES, M. B. Qualitative Data as an Attractive Nuisance: The Problem of Analysis. Administrative Science Quaterly, v. 24, n. 4, p. 590-601, 1979.

OLIVER, D. P. Rigor in Qualitative Research Editorial. Research on Aging, v. 33, n. 4, p. 359-360, 2011.

ONWUEGBUZIE, A. J.; LEECH, N. L. On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: The Importance of Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, v. 8, n. 5, p. 375-387, 2005.

PAYNE, G.; WILLIAMS, M. Generalization in Qualitative Research. Sociology, v. 39, n. 2 p. 295-314, 2005.

PILLOW, W. S. Confession, catharsis, or cure?Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological power in qualitative research. Qualitative Studies in Education, v. 16, n. 2, 2003.

PRATT, M. G. Fitting Oval Pegs Into Round Holes: Tensions in Evaluating and Publishing Qualitative Research in Top-Tier North American Journals. Organizational Research Methods, v. 11, n. 3, p. 481-509, 2008.

RHODES, C. After Reflexivity: Ethics, Freedom and the Writing of Organization Studies. Organization Studies, v. 30, n. 6, p. 653-672, 2009.

RUBIN, A. Standards for Rigor in Qualitative Inquiry. Research on Social Work Practice, v. 10, n. 2, p. 173-178, 2000.

SAVALL, H. et al. The Emergence of Implicit Criteria Actually Used by Reviewers of Qualitative Research Articles. Organizational Research Methods, v. 11, n. 3, p. 510-540, 2008.

SEALE, C. The Quality of Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications, 1999.

SINGH, K. D. Creating Your Own Qualitative Research Approach. Vision, v. 9, n. 2, p. 132-146, 2015.

SPARKES, A. C. Myth 94: Qualitative Health Researchers will Agree About Validity. Qualitative Health Research, v. 11, n. 4, p. 538-552, 2001.

SPENCER, L.; RITCHIE, J.; O’CONNOR, W. Analysis: Practices, Principles and Processes. In: RITCHIE, J.; LEWIS, J. (Eds. ) Qualitative Research Practice - a guide for social science students and researchers. London: SAGE Publications, 2003. p. 199-218.

SUTTON, R. I. The Virtues of Closet Qualitative Research. Organization Science, v. 8, n. 1, p. 97-106, 1997.

TRACY, S. J. Qualitative Quality: Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research. Qualitative Inquiry, v. 16, n. 10, p. 837-851, 2010.

TRACY, S. J. Qualitative Research Methods - collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, 2013.

TRAINOR, A. A.; GRAUE, E. Evaluating Rigor in Qualitative Methodology and Research Dissemination. Remedial and Special Education, v. 35, n. 5, p. 267-274, 2014.

VAN MAANEN, J. Reclaiming Qualitative Methods for Organizational Research: A Preface. Administrative Science Quaterly, v. 24, n. 4, p. 520-526, 1979.

WASSERFALL, R. R. Reflexivity, Feminism and Difference. In: HERTZ, R. (Ed. ). Reflexivity & Voice. London: SAGE Publications, 1997. p. 150-167.

WHITTEMORE, R.; CHASE, S. K.; MANDLE, C. L. Validity in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Health Research, v. 11, n. 4, p. 522-537, 2001.

WOLCOTT, H. F. Writing Up Qualitative Research. 2. ed. London: Sage Publications, 2001.