The qualitative process data approach as an opportunity to improve innovation management studies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18568/internext.v18i2.682Keywords:
Method, Qualitative Research, Process Approach, Process data, ManagementAbstract
Objective: This article presents the process data research approach as an opportunity to improve management studies and to create a roadmap for beginners. Process research is a sidelined way to conduct qualitative studies. The fundamental concern of the process approach is to capture and apprehend the meanings attributed to organizational phenomena directly in the field of research, aiming to understand and answer the questions of ‘how’ and ‘why’ events change over time. Method: This study reviews selected recent research on innovation management that used process research criteria (temporal orientation, units of analysis, sample, data, analytical strategies, and conceptual products) as the backdrop. Main Results: The main result of this paper is the creation of a roadmap for applying the process research approach. Also, it highlights elements of improvement for management studies from the process data approach. Relevance / Originality: This study provides several examples of qualitative process research in innovation. The proposed roadmap helps increase the rigor and uses of this research approach. Theoretical / Methodological Contributions: We offer an academic discussion on process research’s role in improving (innovation) management studies.
Downloads
References
Abbott, A. (2001). Time matters: On theory and method. University of Chicago Press.
Abdallah, C., Lusiani, M., & Langley, A. (2019). Performing process research. In S. Hawking (ed.), Standing on the Shoulders of Giants (v. 11, pp. 91-113). Emerald Publishing Limited. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-838720190000011008
Bansal, P., & Corley, K. (2012). Publishing in AMJ—Part 7: What's different about qualitative research? Academy of Management, 55(3), 509-513. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.4003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.4003
Berends, H., & Deken, F. (2019). Composing qualitative process research. Strategic Organization, 19(1), 134-146. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127018824838 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127018824838
Bizzi, L., & Langley, A. (2012). Studying processes in and around networks. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(2), 224-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2012.01.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2012.01.007
Chia, R., & MacKay, B. (2007). Post-processual challenges for the emerging strategy as-23 practice perspective: Discovering strategy in the logic of practice. Human Relations, 60(1), 217-242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707075291 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707075291
Cloutier, C., & Langley, A. (2020). What makes a process theoretical contribution? Organization Theory, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2631787720902473 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2631787720902473
Damanpour, F., & Schneider, M. (2006). Phases of the adoption of innovation in organizations: effects of environment, organization and top managers. British Journal of Management, 17(3), 215-236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00498.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00498.x
Dixon, S., Meyer, K., & Day, M. (2014). Building dynamic capabilities of adaptation and innovation: A study of micro-foundations in a transition economy. Long Range Planning, 47(4), 186-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.08.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.08.011
Dodgson, M., Gann, D., MacAulay, S., & Davies, A. (2015). Innovation strategy in new transportation systems: The case of Crossrail. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 77, 261-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.019
Estensoro, M. (2015). How can social innovation be facilitated? Experiences from an action research process in a local network. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 28(6), 527-545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-015-9347-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-015-9347-2
Faccin, K., & Balestrin, A. (2018). The dynamics of collaborative practices for knowledge creation in joint R&D projects. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 48, 28-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2018.04.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2018.04.001
Faccin, K., Balestrin, A., Martins, B. V., & Bitencourt, C. C. (2019). Knowledge-based dynamic capabilities: a joint R&D project in the French semiconductor industry. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(3), 439-465. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2018-0233 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2018-0233
Faccin, K., & Martins, B. V. (2022). Abordagem Processual em Pesquisa Qualitativa. Internext, 17(1), 128-134. https://doi.org/10.18568/internext.v17i1.685 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18568/internext.v17i1.685
Feldman, M. (2017). Making Process Visible: Alternatives to Boxes and Arrows. In A. Langley & H. Tsoukas (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Process Organization Studies (pp. 66-184). Sage. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957954.n41
Fisher, G., & Aguinis, H. (2017). Using theory elaboration to make theoretical advancements. Organizational Research Methods, 20(3), 438-464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428116689707 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428116689707
Garrido, I., Vasconcellos, S., Faccin, K., Monticelli, J. M., & Carpenedo, C. (2021). The moderating role of polycentric institutions in the relationship between effectuation/causation logics and corporate entrepreneur's decision‐making processes. Global Strategy Journal, 11(4), 740-766. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1419 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1419
Gehman, J., Glaser, V. L., Eisenhardt, K. M., Gioia, D., Langley, A., & Corley, K. G. (2018). Finding theory–method fit: A comparison of three qualitative approaches to theory building. Journal of Management Inquiry, 27(3), 284-300. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492617706029 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492617706029
Gioia, D., Corley, K., Eisenhardt, K., Feldman, M., Langley, A., Lê, J., Golden-Biddle, K., Locke, K., Mees-Buss, J., Piekkari, R., Ravasi, D., Rerup, C., Schmid, T., Silverman, D., & Welch, C. (2022). A curated debate: On using “templates” in qualitative research. Journal of Management Inquiry, 31(3), 231-252. https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926221098955 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926221098955
Hernes, T. (2008). Understanding organization as process: theory for a tangled world. Routledge.
Hernes, T., & Weik, E. (2007). Organization as process: Drawing a line between endogenous and exogenous views. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 23(3), 251-264. https://10.1016/j.scaman.2007.06.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2007.06.002
Jagd, S., & Fuglsang, L. (2016). Studying trust as a process within and between organizations. In S. Jagd & L. Fuglsang (eds.), Trust, Organizations and Social Interaction (pp. 1-18). Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783476206.00008
Kassie, M., Teklewold, H., Jaleta, M., Marenya, P., & Erenstein, O. (2015). Understanding the adoption of a portfolio of sustainable intensification practices in eastern and southern Africa. Land Use Policy, 42, 400-411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.08.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.08.016
Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691-710. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2553248
Langley, A. (2009). Studying processes in and around organizations. In D. Buchanan & A. Bryman (eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational research methods. Sage Publications Inc.
Langley, A., & Abdallah, C. (2011). Templates and turns in qualitative studies of strategy and management. In D. D. Bergh & D. J. Ketchen (eds.), Building methodological bridges (pp. 201-235). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-8387(2011)0000006007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-8387(2011)0000006007
Langley, A., Smallman, C., Tsoukas, H., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2013). Process studies of change in organization and management: Unveiling temporality, activity, and flow. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.4001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.4001
Langley, A., & Tsoukas, H. (eds.). (2017). The SAGE handbook of process organization studies. Sage. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957954
Leonard-Barton, D. (1990). A dual methodology for case studies: Synergistic use of a longitudinal single site with multiple sites. Organization Science, 1(3), 248-266. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.3.248 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.3.248
Lerman, M. P., Mmbaga, N., & Smith, A. (2022). Tracing ideas from Langley (1999): Exemplars, adaptations, considerations, and overlooked. Organizational Research Methods, 25(2), 285-307. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120915510 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120915510
Liu, Y., Liang, X., & Shi, Y. (2018). Brokerage and balance: Creating an effective organizational interface for product modularization in multinational R&D. Research Policy, 47(6), 133-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.019
Lundberg, H., Andresen, E., & Törnroos, J. Å. (2016). Understanding network emergence after turbulent industrial relocation: A Swedish biorefinery initiative. European Management Journal, 34(5), 475-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2016.03.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2016.03.001
Medlin, C. J., & Törnroos, J. Å. (2015). Exploring and exploiting network relationships to commercialize technology: A biofuel case. Industrial Marketing Management, 49, 42-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.05.036 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.05.036
Meng, F., Guo, X., Peng, Z., Lai, K. H., & Zhao, X. (2019). Investigating the adoption of mobile health services by elderly users: Trust transfer model and survey study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 7(1), e12269. https://doi.org/10.2196/12269 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/12269
Mohr, L. B. (1982). Explaining organizational behavior. Jossey-Bass.
Mousavi, S., & Bossink, B. A. (2017). Firms' capabilities for sustainable innovation: The case of biofuel for aviation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 167, 1263-1275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.146 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.146
Newey, L., & Verreynne, M. L. (2011). Multilevel absorptive capacity and interorganizational new product development: A process study. Journal of Management & Organization, 17(1), 39-55. https://doi.org/10.5172/jmo.2011.17.1.39 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5172/jmo.2011.17.1.39
Petruzzelli, A. M. (2015). A Story of Breakthrough. The Case of Common Rail Development. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19(4). https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919615500346 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919615500346
Pettigrew, A. M. (1990). Longitudinal field research on change: Theory and practice. Organization Science, 1(3), 267-292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.3.267
Pettigrew, A. M. (1992). The character and significance of strategy process research. Strategic Management Journal, 13(Suppl. 2), 5-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250130903 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250130903
Poppo, L., Zhou, K. Z., & Li, J. J. (2016). When can you trust “trust”? Calculative trust, relational trust, and supplier performance. Strategic Management Journal, 37(4), 724-741. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2374 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2374
Pratt, M. G. (2009). From the editors: For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management, 52(5), 856-862. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.44632557 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.44632557
Salter, A., & Alexy, O. (2014). The nature of innovation. In M. Dodgson, D. M. Gann & N. Phillips (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management (pp. 26-49). Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199694945.013.034
Silva, S. E., Venâncio, A., Silva, J. R., & Gonçalves, C. A. (2020). Open innovation in science parks: The role of public policies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 151, 119844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119844 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119844
Skog, D. A. (2016). Local game, global rules: exploring technological heterogeneity exploitation in digital creative cluster evolution. Industry and Innovation, 23(6), 53-550. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1185358 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1185358
Szajnfarber, Z., & Weigel, A. L. (2012). Managing complex technology innovation: the need to move beyond stages and gates. International Journal of Space Technology Management and Innovation, 2(1), 30-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/ijstmi.2012010103
Urbinati, A., Chiaroni, D., Chiesa, V., & Frattini, F. (2020). The role of digital technologies in open innovation processes: an exploratory multiple case study analysis. R&D Management, 50(1), 136-160. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12313 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12313
Van de Ven, A. H. (1992). Suggestions for studying strategy process: A research note. Strategic Management Journal, 13(Suppl. 1), 169-188. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250131013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250131013
Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510-540. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080329 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080329
Volkmer, B., Faccin, K., Motta, G. D. S., Bernardes, R., & Balestrin, A. (2019). Evolução e tendências da agenda de pesquisa internacional em inovação. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 59(4), 293-307. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-759020190407 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s0034-759020190407
Yin, R. K. (2004). The case study anthology. Sage Publications Inc.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Kadígia Faccin, Bibiana Volkmer Martins, Luciana Maines da Silva, Cristian Rogério Foguesatto, Alsones Balestrin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
- The author(s) authorize the publication of the article in the journal;
- The author(s) ensure that the contribution is original and unpublished and is not being evaluated in other journal(s);
- The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas and concepts expressed in the texts because they are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
- In case an article will be approved for publication, the author will sign the term of Cession of Copyright to the journal, according to the download form.
