This report presents an analysis of assessment criteria and training needs for
qualitative management research. 45 in-depth interviews were held with members of four panels: academic
disseminators; practitioners; doctoral programme leaders; and qualitative
researchers. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and interpreted with the aid of template analysis. This report presents six major themes from this analysis concerning
qualitative management research: definitions; status and credibility; good practice;
assessment criteria; training needs; professional and institutional context. A variety of definitions of qualitative management research were identified ranging
from indicating a central concern with the subjectivity of research practice to barely
constituting research at all. Such a range of definitions indicates the range of work
in the area but also implies that the derivation of a set of universal assessment
criteria is problematic. Sources of research credibility also varied widely. To some extent judgements of
credibility were seen to depend on aspects of the nature and conduct of the
research itself (e.g. methodical, conclusive, technically skilled etc), but also as
influenced by symbolism and context. In general definitions of credibility were
seen to disadvantage qualitative research. Various elements of good practice in relation to qualitative management research
were identified (and sometimes disputed) including flexible research design,
epistemologically coherent analysis, reflexivity concerning process and product of
research and a persuasive, engaging presentation. Assessing qualitative management research appeared to be more of an intuitive
decision-making process than an application of known and agreed criteria (cf
quantitative research). Judgements in these areas vary according to the beliefs and
commitments of the individual. Reflecting this variety, a summary table of
contingent criteria is presented at the end of the report. Provision of qualitative research training was seen to vary but be generally scarce
and of poor quality . Specific training needs included: ‘technical’ skills, such as data
analysis techniques and writing; knowledge of underlying philosophical issues;
reviewing skills; and PhD supervision. Current research practice was seen to be deeply affected by pressures within the
current academic context including audit processes and career needs. Such
pressures may work against the adoption of qualitative management research. In general all these issues were seen to be highly related and inter-dependent.
While some contextual issues cannot be addressed by this research, the report
concludes with an overview of the qualitative management research workshops
derived from our interpretation of the interviewees’ observations