Contradictions in qualitative management research

Consensus and dissensus perspectives on impression, identity and management work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

– Contradictory accounts in empirical material are often perceived as deliberate “lies” or “misleading deceptions” performed in acts of impression management, or they are simply neglected. When observed in the material collected empirically, methods have been developed in order to identify and remove them from the analytical work. The purpose of this paper is to re-visit and re-introduce a dissensus-based management research strategy in order to analytically be able to work with what appear to be contradictions and misinformation in qualitative research accounts, and give them a more profound role in the understanding of management ideas, work and practices.
Original languageEnglish
Article number3
JournalBaltic Journal of Management
Volume11
Issue number1
Pages (from-to)44-64
ISSN1746-5265
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Jan 2016

Fingerprint

Management research
Qualitative research
Research strategy
Deception
Impression management

Cite this

@article{cc5127ea766d4d079fe94b3a88c4e816,
title = "Contradictions in qualitative management research: Consensus and dissensus perspectives on impression, identity and management work",
abstract = "– Contradictory accounts in empirical material are often perceived as deliberate “lies” or “misleading deceptions” performed in acts of impression management, or they are simply neglected. When observed in the material collected empirically, methods have been developed in order to identify and remove them from the analytical work. The purpose of this paper is to re-visit and re-introduce a dissensus-based management research strategy in order to analytically be able to work with what appear to be contradictions and misinformation in qualitative research accounts, and give them a more profound role in the understanding of management ideas, work and practices.",
keywords = "Contradictions, Impression management , Management research, Qualitative research",
author = "Hansen, {Per Richard} and Jens Dorland",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1108/BJM-01-2014-0015",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "44--64",
journal = "Baltic Journal of Management",
issn = "1746-5265",
publisher = "JAI Press",
number = "1",

}

Contradictions in qualitative management research : Consensus and dissensus perspectives on impression, identity and management work. / Hansen, Per Richard; Dorland, Jens.

In: Baltic Journal of Management, Vol. 11, No. 1, 3, 07.01.2016, p. 44-64.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Contradictions in qualitative management research

T2 - Consensus and dissensus perspectives on impression, identity and management work

AU - Hansen, Per Richard

AU - Dorland, Jens

PY - 2016/1/7

Y1 - 2016/1/7

N2 - – Contradictory accounts in empirical material are often perceived as deliberate “lies” or “misleading deceptions” performed in acts of impression management, or they are simply neglected. When observed in the material collected empirically, methods have been developed in order to identify and remove them from the analytical work. The purpose of this paper is to re-visit and re-introduce a dissensus-based management research strategy in order to analytically be able to work with what appear to be contradictions and misinformation in qualitative research accounts, and give them a more profound role in the understanding of management ideas, work and practices.

AB - – Contradictory accounts in empirical material are often perceived as deliberate “lies” or “misleading deceptions” performed in acts of impression management, or they are simply neglected. When observed in the material collected empirically, methods have been developed in order to identify and remove them from the analytical work. The purpose of this paper is to re-visit and re-introduce a dissensus-based management research strategy in order to analytically be able to work with what appear to be contradictions and misinformation in qualitative research accounts, and give them a more profound role in the understanding of management ideas, work and practices.

KW - Contradictions

KW - Impression management

KW - Management research

KW - Qualitative research

U2 - 10.1108/BJM-01-2014-0015

DO - 10.1108/BJM-01-2014-0015

M3 - Journal article

VL - 11

SP - 44

EP - 64

JO - Baltic Journal of Management

JF - Baltic Journal of Management

SN - 1746-5265

IS - 1

M1 - 3

ER -