This article explores how abductive reasoning is central to Mode 2 organization development and change (ODC) research, despite the rarity with which it is made explicit. It differentiates between Peirce’s notions of deduction, induction, and abduction in the field of ODC and explores how Mode 2 ODC research, particularly that involving collaboration between academics and practitioners, draws on abductive reasoning. It is when confronted with an array of puzzling and paradoxical data that insights constitute abductive reasoning, a fundamental element in both the production of knowledge and the development of successful organizational interventions.
This research explores organizational trauma and the phenomenon of organizational posttraumatic growth (OPTG). Many organizations experience traumatic events, events that disrupt core organizational activities. While some affected organizations never recover their prior level of well-being, others surpass their pretrauma state. This research explores this phenomenon by examining how one organization, which was traumatized by a substantial theft committed by a senior leader, emerged transformed and stronger. In the exploration of this intriguing phenomenon, we extend individual-level trauma research to the organization level to address how OPTG occurs. We draw on these findings to chart paths for future research on OPTG and organizational change and consider their implications for development and change practitioners in organizations experiencing trauma.
Purpose
While organizational access is central to much qualitative research, little is known about how researchers secure it. The purpose of this paper is to provide a systematic assessment of this critical methodological step.
Design/methodology/approach
A systematic review was conducted to establish how researchers gained access to organizations for qualitative research. Access type was identified and explanatory indicators were inductively developed to illuminate how access was obtained in a sample of 216 qualitative articles published in Administrative Science Quarterly and Academy of Management Journal between 1986 and 2013. A supplemental review of 306 articles published in Organization Studies over the same period augmented the primary analysis with a broader view of published accounts of access.
Findings
Learning prior to entering organizations, researchers’ backgrounds, organizational insiders, and outside contacts facilitated access. The role of these factors, which served as indicators of legitimacy, varied with the type of access. In addition, the authors found that many articles provide little information about how the researchers gained access, regardless of a publication’s domicile.
Originality/value
This study furthers the understanding of how researchers gain access to organizations to conduct qualitative research and discusses the implications of the limited access accounts in published studies. In addition, this research provides practical guidance for authors, editors, and reviewers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.