Paradigm Interplay for Theory Development: A Methodological Example With the Kulturstandard Method

Abstract

Cross-cultural management research is done in both the positivist and the interpretive paradigms. Calls are repeatedly made to consider this diversity, thus asking for more multiparadigm research, which is both challenging and methodologically vague. This article proposes a clear method for a bi-paradigm study leading to theory development. Multiparadigm studies present challenges that are first explained and then addressed with the strategy of interplay. The authors assert that interplay is a paradigmatic conversation that respects and builds upon the connections and differences between paradigm's components used by Kuhn to stress continuity and change during scientific revolutions. With the Kulturstandard method, the authors illustrate the feasibility of interplay between the positivist and the interpretive paradigms. Interplay is reached by first conducting analyses in their respective paradigms. Then, in light of each other, they reveal mutually enriching themes that lead to a shift of attention toward a venue of interplay. This venue is then explored to investigate its respectful consideration of the paradigms and how it contributes to theory. The authors conclude by underscoring the methodological contributions of this article to multiparadigm research.

Performing interplay through intercultural simulations

“…This finding can be linked to the study of Romani et al (2011) who found similar potential in the Kulturstandard method. This encourages interpretative CCM researchers to look for inter-paradigmatic linkages in positivist frameworks.…”

“…It uses oscillation between different paradigms for generating deeper insights (Romani et al, 2011). Contributions are higher reflexivity and higher relevance (Lewis and Kelemen, 2002: 268).…”

The Importance of Trailblazing Scholarship for Understanding Entrepreneurship

“…To achieve this strength and completeness, researchers (and journals) must accept that there is not one correct approach or answer in this field, and they must welcome numerous viewpoints, including those from different paradigms and multi-paradigms. Indeed, scholars have begun to recognize a "post-paradigm war" approach to building fields of knowledge (Romani, Primecz, & Topçu, 2011)-a multi-paradigm perspective (e.g., Gioia & Pitre, 1990)-that emphasizes a more complete picture of the phenomena at hand. This more complete picture of entrepreneurial phenomena will likely come from scholars who undertake at least some trailblazing projects; from scholars who broaden the range of research questions, the potential outcomes of entrepreneurial action, and the selection and combination of research methods; and from researchers who avoid the endless debates about the margins of the field and its sub-fields or about whether one theoretical or philosophical lens is superior to another.…”

Methodological and Substantive Issues in Conducting Multinational and Cross-Cultural Research

“…Whereas quantitative approaches are able to provide standardized measures, qualitative methods are better able to capture precise aspects of culture within a particular place (Soin & Scheytt 2006). Qualitative approaches can be particularly useful in generating theory (Romani et al 2011), particularly when researchers have limited understanding of the culture about which they wish to theorize.…”