Three responses to the methodological challenges of studying strategizing

J. Balogun, A.S. Huff, P. Johnson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

162 Citations (SciVal)
171 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Empirical studies of strategizing face contradictory pressures. Ethnographic approaches arc attractive, and typically expected since we need to collect data on strategists and their practices within context. We argue, however, that today's large, multinational, and highly diversified organizational settings require complimentary methods providing more breadth and flexibility. This paper discusses three particularly promising approaches (interactive discussion groups, self-reports, and practitioner-led research) that fit the increasingly disparate research paradigms now being used to understand strategizing and other management issues. Each of these approaches is based on the idea that strategizing research cannot advance significantly without reconceptualizing frequently taken-for-granted assumptions about the way to do research and the way we engage with organizational participants. The paper focuses in particular on the importance of working with organizational members as research partners rather than passive informants.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)197-224
Number of pages28
JournalJournal of management studies
Volume40
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2003

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Three responses to the methodological challenges of studying strategizing'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this