QualRes Article Review & Summary

Title
Author(s)
Source
(full citation)
Reviewed by
Date
Presented

Summary

Crafting Qualitative Research: Morgan and Smircich 30 Years On

Cunliffe, Anne
Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2011, pp. 647-673.
Nik Dholakia
Sep. 12, 2011

Summarize the key content. Extract the main themes of this piece in
terms of content, methods, theories, etc. Enumerate or present in the
form of bullets. Make it easy to understand and comprehend.

Article reviews the state of qualitative research in organization and management fields since the
publication of The Case for Qualitative Research by Gareth Morgan and Linda Smircich,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 5, No. 4, 1980, pp. 491-500.

Key conclusion of Morgan & Smircich (1980): A preoccupation with methods on their own account obscures the link between the assumptions that the researcher holds and the overall research
effort, giving the illusion that it is the methods themselves, rather than the orientations of the human
researcher, that generate particular forms of knowledge. The development of organization theory,
like other social science disciplines, would be better served if researchers were more explicit about
the nature of the beliefs they bring to their subject of study. (p. 499).

See the core table (attached) from Morgan & Smircich

Although Cunliffe says this about organization/management research, the statement applies equally
to marketing/CB: This pluralization of the field has opened up possibilities for new ways of
studying and theorizing the complexity of organizational life but also meant that the terrain has
become multifarious and contested, raising questions about what can be counted as good
knowledge, legitimate methods, and valid theories. Researchers now face choices about their work
in terms of the myriad of metatheoretical and methodological options.. (p. 648). Of course, in
marketing/CB the pluarlization and opening up still lag behind considerably compared to
OB/Mgmt.

Cunliffe offers review/summary of Morgan & Smircich.

The subject/object (subjective/objective) continuum has changed over 30 years: (a) subjects, objects
interact and entwine, (b) poststructural subjectivities (discourses of power and control shape
bodies/actions see Mikkonen), (c) objects also have agencies (see Zwick/Dholakia), (d) subjects
get objectified.

Page | 1

Cunliffe offers a much more refined and elaborate (highly nuanced) view of subjective-objective
distinctions and differences under contemporary conditions. She draws from OMT (org. mgt.
theory) but also heavily from philosophy and cultural theory.

Main conclusion of Cunliffe (20xx): In a world where the objectivist problematic and scientific
models of research still prevail, many researchers are interested in developing new ways of studying
organizations and new forms of knowledge. Morgan and Smircich asked us to do justice to the
nature of the social research by embracing different approaches and methods, and Daft (1983) urged
us to move beyond sheer scientific techniques to experiment and learn the craft of research. The
difference between technique and craft is crucial. Methods are systematic techniques, efficient,
measurable, and valid ways of gathering and analyzing data. If we are driven by method, we may
end up shaping our research around methodological obligations and the need to fit data to
technical requirements, rather than being sensitive to what is going on around us. Craftwork is
construed as the more exploratory expressions of embedded and aesthetic forms of knowledge
typical of subjectivist (some) and intersubjectivist problematic I suggest beauty and rigor lie in
crafting our research carefully and persuasively, being open and responsive to the possibilities of
experience, people, ideas, materials and processes, and understanding and enacting the relationship
between our metatheoretical position, our methods, our theorizing, and their practical consequences.
The revisioned map provides a way of understanding the various philosophical and methodological
possibilities open to us as qualitative researchers. (pp. 666-667).

Critique

Indicate what you liked or did not like about this piece, and why. Also
discuss what the author(s) could have done to improve this piece.
Enumerate or present in the form of bullets.

Great review and extension of the Morgan & Smircich piece

Some good insights on how to improve the craft aspects of QualRes

A main idea is to craft method or assemblage of methods around the problem of interest, and not
fit the problem to the method

There is some over-elaboration of subjectivity-objectivity spectrum, but not enough on how to be

good craftsperson.

Extensions
and
Applications

Indicate what further or related work can be done in this area. Enumerate
or present in the form of bullets. Think of applications in business,
consumer, organizational, communications, and other fields. Think about
further publishing opportunities in this area of research.

It would be great to go into details of how to craft well

Page | 2