Transparency and replicability in qualitative research: The case of interviews with elite informants

Aguinis, Herman; Solarino, Angelo M.

doi:10.1002/smj.3015

Cited by 400 publications

(356 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

327

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This seems to indicate a rather idiosyncratic approach to quality and very little “researcher effect” (i.e., researchers aware of one factor impacting rigor are not necessarily aware of another). This finding is in line with the recent results of Aguinis and Solarino (), who investigated the transparency of qualitative research in the strategic management discipline. Looking at the highest correlations between quality criteria in the current study, theoretical foundation and sampling share about 14% of variance.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…It was expected that if a study was rigorous regarding some of the quality criteria, it would also be rigorous in others. This analysis followed the notion of a “researcher effect,” introduced by Aguinis and Solarino (), that is, informed researchers would be aware of multiple factors that influence rigor and so a given study would be consistently rigorous (or not, in the case of uninformed researchers) across multiple criteria. The results are reported in Table .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rather, there is value in regarding the combination of the 10 criteria as the “pillars” on which good quality case study research can be based, in using as many pillars as possible, and in using different pillars in combination to give maximum support to quality (cf. Aguinis and Solarino, ). From this standpoint, the identification of 23 exemplary studies, which scored “8” or “9” against CASET, provides case study researchers with a rich source of learning on how the pillars can be used.…”

Section: Reflections On the State‐of‐the‐art Of Case Study Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Perspective: State‐of‐the‐Art: The Quality of Case Study Research in Innovation Management

Goffin¹,

Åhlström²,

Bianchi³

et al. 2019

J of Product Innov Manag

163

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The practice of innovation management is developing fast. As new concepts emerge, exploratory studies are needed and case study research is often appropriate. To investigate the usage and quality of case study research in innovation management, all of the articles published in five top journals over 20 years (1997–2016) were reviewed. Case study research accounted for 818 of the published articles in this period (12%) and an evaluation template (termed case study evaluation template: CASET) was developed to objectively assess these articles against 10 quality criteria. It was found that the quality of case study research has often been low, although it has improved over time. Similarly, quality was found to fluctuate both within and between the different innovation journals. This indicates that the peer review process for case study research is not as robust as it should be. The assessment of individual articles using the evaluation template found significant deficiencies. Many articles: did not justify why case study research was appropriate; did not apply theoretical sampling criteria; were not transparent on how conclusions were drawn from the data; did not consider validity and reliability adequately; and did not go beyond description in their interpretation. However, the evaluation template also identified 23 “exemplary studies,” which clearly addressed nearly every criterion. Such exemplary studies provide innovation management researchers with “benchmark” reading, which can help shape their own research. This article makes four contributions to the innovation management discipline. First, the evaluation template and exemplary studies can help innovation researchers improve the quality of their case study research. Second, clear recommendations are given for how reviewers can use the template to make the peer review process more consistent and robust. Third, journal editors are encouraged to consider the implications of the findings for their particular journal. Fourth, the article should stimulate a long overdue debate on methodology in innovation management research, including the use of case study research.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reflections On the State‐of‐the‐art Of Case Study Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perspective: State‐of‐the‐Art: The Quality of Case Study Research in Innovation Management

Goffin¹,

Åhlström²,

Bianchi³

et al. 2019

J of Product Innov Manag

163

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is motivated by the fact that, although of indisputable value, most reviews of case‐study practices focus on rigor and transparency (see, e.g. Aguinis and Solarino, 2019), but pay less attention to such paradigmatic assumptions. Yet, Pratt et al (2019) suggest that such preoccupation with rigor can marginalize some qualitative research approaches and, consequently, limit the development of the field.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are rigor and transparency enough? Review and future directions for case studies in technology and innovation Management

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is crucial to assess how technology and innovation management (TIM) scholars use casebased research. Our study provides a theoretical systematic review of qualitative casebased articles published in 31 TIM journals from 2013 to 2018. Our analysis of 311 articles uncovers patterns regarding rigor (including case justification and selection), transparency (including data collection and analytical methods), and paradigmatic consistency and pluralism. Our findings show some evidence of emerging pluralism in how TIM researchers perform qualitative case studies, but also highlight some worrying trends: paradigmatic inconsistencies, lack of transparency, and over-reliance on specific approaches, all of which affect the value of case study research. We provide methodological guidelines for improving the use of qualitative case research in TIM. 2009), and thereby constrain novel approaches that could advance the field (Bluhm et al., 2011;Bansal and Corley, 2012). For example, Van de Ven and Poole (2005) note that variance methods, which imply a positivistic view of organizations, have been Are rigor and transparency enough? R&D Management 50, 3, 2020 311Are rigor and transparency enough? R&D Management 50, 3, 2020 323 study practices can seriously hinder the progress of our field (see Pratt et al., 2019).

show abstract

“…These outlined selection criteria of respondents are in line with the guidelines provided by Aguinis and Solarino (2019) for choosing respondents who have deep knowledge on a firm's strategies and are able to provide information on the dynamics between the different hierarchy levels in the organisation (termed 'elite informants').…”

Section: Data Collection and Analysismentioning

confidence: 96%

In pursuit of supply chain fit

Sabri

2019

IJLM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -This paper develops exploratory propositions and a conceptual framework on the interaction between organisational structure (decision-making centralisation and internal coordination) and the relationship between supply chain fit and firm performance.Design/Methodology -Through a case study, two corporate groups with distinctive organisational structures were examined; both are undergoing a critical moment of changes to their top management and are reshaping their corporate and supply chain strategies. Data on decision-making centralisation, internal coordination mechanisms, supply, demand and innovation uncertainties, and supply chain strategies was collected from key respondents. Findings -The analysis conducted suggests the need to consider the joint interaction between organisational structure and supply chain fit in offsetting the implications of a potential misfit on firm performance. Furthermore, the context-sensitivity of a supply chain is often overlooked, hence simply modifying supply chain strategy does not necessarily lead to a variation in firm performance.Practical Implications -This research is of particular importance to most organisations in the testing times of uncertainty in the global landscape. It guides supply chain practitioners to better understand which elements of the organisational structure interact with the uncertainty of supply, demand and innovation.Originality/value -This paper is one of the first to investigate the interaction between elements of organisational structure and supply chain fit, and identifies decision-making centralisation and coordination as the internal uncertainty factors that are most relevant to supply chain fit research. A conceptual framework has been built for future testing, in which 2 the organisational structure moderates the relationship between supply chain fit and firm performance.

show abstract

Transparency and replicability in qualitative research: The case of interviews with elite informants

Cited by 400 publications

References 82 publications

Perspective: State‐of‐the‐Art: The Quality of Case Study Research in Innovation Management

Perspective: State‐of‐the‐Art: The Quality of Case Study Research in Innovation Management

Are rigor and transparency enough? Review and future directions for case studies in technology and innovation Management

In pursuit of supply chain fit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About