A critical reflexive perspective on othering in collaborative knowledge production

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helle Merete Nordentoft ◽  
Birgitte Ravn Olesen
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Healthcare Setting ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Development Projects ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Collaborative Knowledge ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose The purpose of the paper is to show power mechanisms of in- and exclusion in moments where certain participants appeared to be othered in two collaborative research and development projects in a healthcare setting. Design/methodology/approach The paper contributes to critical-reflexive analyses of reflexive processes within collaborative knowledge production. The authors use an analytical framework combining Bakhtin and Foucault to investigate processes of inclusion and exclusion in the interplay between dominant and subordinated voices in a moment-by-moment analysis of two incidents from interdisciplinary workshops. Findings The analysis illuminates how differences between voices challenge participants’ reflexive awareness and lead to the reproduction of contextual power and knowledge hierarchies and the concomitant silencing of particular participants. Thus, the findings draw attention to the complex and ethical nature of collaborative knowledge production. Practical implications To invite researchers to be reflexive about the complex, situated and emergent character of reflexive processes and consider ethics to be a critical stance that encourages continuous reflection and critique of collaborative knowledge production. Originality/value To show the importance of not sweeping incidents in which participants are othered “under the carpet” in collaborative research. To present an analytical framework for analysing the contextual and emergent nature of collaborative research processes and discuss the ethical conundrums, which arise in the research process.

Web-based tools for collaborative research

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (8) ◽  
pp. 8-19
Author(s):  
Stacy Brody
Keyword(s):  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Collaborative Tools ◽  
Start Ups ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to profile various types of Web-based tools to facilitate research collaboration within and across institutions. Design/methodology/approach Various Web-based tools were tested by the author. Additionally, tutorial videos and guides were reviewed. Findings There are various free and low-cost tools available to assist in the collaborative research process, and librarians are well-positioned to facilitate their usage. Practical implications Librarians and researchers will learn about various types of tools available at free or at low cost to fulfill needs of the collaborative research process. Social implications As the tools highlighted are either free or of low cost, they are also valuable to start-ups and can be recommended for entrepreneurs. Originality/value As the realm of Web-based collaborative tools continues to evolve, the options must be continually revisited and reviewed for currency.

The logic and integration of coproductive research approaches

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Lindhult ◽  
Karin Axelsson
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Qualitative Methodology ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Family ◽  
Development Processes ◽  
Practical Implications

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to clarify the methodological logic of coproductive research approaches like action research, collaborative research, interactive research and participatory research in a way that can clarify its effectiveness and scientific qualities in high quality knowledge production, and show the way that it can be integrated with institutionalized textbook science.Design/methodology/approachThe paper clarifies the character of coproduction as research methodology concept, the logic of coproductive research approaches, and its characteristics compared to quantitative and qualitative methodology. A model for characterizing research approaches from leading textbook social science is developed to specify the character of coproductive research approaches and support integration in mainstream research methodology discussions.FindingsThe paper develops a research methodology framework for coproductive logic and approaches to research, to support the integration of this type of approaches in mainstream research methodology.Research limitations/implicationsThe developed model of coproductive research approaches is not empirically described. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test and further develop the model in relation to cases and designs of research projects.Practical implicationsThe paper is helpful for guiding the design of coproductive research in practice, i.e., in research project development or in research methodology education.Social implicationsThe development of coproductive research approaches supports making science relevant and useful for solving pressing problems and improving social conditions. It also is enabling stakeholders to participate in research and development processes, thus the democratization of research and knowledge production.Originality/valueThe paper contributes to integration of the family of coproductive approaches in mainstream research methodology discussion through the development and elaboration of a framework for organizing the description and development of coproductive research approaches. The aim is that the framework is valuable for both academics, practitioners and students in designing coproductive research projects.

scholarly journals Accounting for the messiness of the research process: the fieldpath approach

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 315-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Perttu Salovaara
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Environmental Consequences ◽  
Human Ethics ◽  
Conceptual Paper ◽  
The Common ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose It has recently become more acknowledged that there is a quality of “messiness” to the qualitative research process. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the fieldpath approach—a hermeneutically inspired framework—to account for the non-linearity, uncertainty and ambiguity of the research process. Design/methodology/approach This conceptual paper reviews how the scope of hermeneutics has been partly misunderstood. The paper discusses how the scope of hermeneutics has lately been expanded by works such as Günter Figal’s (2010) Objectivity: The Hermeneutical and Philosophy. Findings The fieldpath approach proposes that a heightened relation to materiality enables the messiness of the process to be preserved, while at the same time offering a way to find one’s footing in the midst of ontologically incomplete phenomena that are still—in a processual fashion—forming and becoming. Research limitations/implications This is a conceptual paper. In addition to the research mentioned here, more studies would be needed to legitimise, test and refine the approach. Practical implications Objectivity provides an additional criterion for researchers to lean on when facing the non-linearity and unexpected turns inherent in the qualitative research process. Social implications The stress on materiality involves an ethical dimension. Post-human ethics are concerned with the future environmental consequences and sustainability of the material world. The way that matter matters in our methodologies is of primary importance. Originality/value First, the paper emphasises that hermeneutics, contrary to the common perception, does offer criteria for evaluating between interpretations. Second, it introduces the notion of hermeneutic objectivity, which stresses the importance of materiality for interpretations. Third, it introduces the fieldpath approach, which, based on the previous criterion of hermeneutic objectivity, allows for the messiness of the research process, while also preserving a tight grip on the hermeneutic imperative of “understanding in a new way”.

scholarly journals Invisible students: institutional invisibility and access to education for undocumented children

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Meloni ◽  
Cécile Rousseau ◽  
Alexandra Ricard-Guay ◽  
Jill Hanley
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Community Partnership ◽  
Access To Education ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Community Stakeholders ◽  
Policies And Practices

Purpose In Canada, undocumented children are “institutionally invisible” – their access to education to be found in unwritten and discretionary practices. Drawing on the experience of a three-year university-community partnership among researchers, institutional and community stakeholders, the purpose of this paper is to examine how undocumented children are constructed as excluded from school. Design/methodology/approach The establishment of this collaborative research space, helped to critically understand how this exclusion was maintained, and highlighted contradictory interpretations of policies and practices. Findings Proposing the analytical framework of “institutional invisibility”, the authors argue that issues of access and entitlement for undocumented children have to be often understood within unwritten and ambiguous policies and practices that make the lives of young people invisible to the institutional entities with which they interact. Originality/value The notion of institutional invisibility allows the authors to integrate the missing link between questions of access and deservingness. The paper also reflects on the role of action research in both documenting dynamics and pathways of institutional invisibility, as well as in initiating social change – as both horizontal, and vertical mobilisation.

scholarly journals Reconciling contracts and relational governance through strategic contracting

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bent Petersen ◽  
Kim Østergaard
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Marketing Management ◽  
Relational Governance ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Industrial Marketing ◽  
Rent Theory ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Contingency Approach

Purpose In an industrial marketing context of manufacturer–distributor collaboration, this law and economics paper aims to contrast two approaches to contracting: conventional and strategic. Design/methodology/approach Based on relational rent theory, this paper provides an analytical framework for juxtaposing conventional and strategic contracting. A contingency approach is applied to formulate propositions as to when conventional versus strategic contracting is preferable. Findings The distinction between conventional and strategic contracting has implications as to whether relational governance substitutes or complements formal contracts (the substitution versus complements perspectives). Strategic contracting results in complementarity (rather than substitutability) between formal contracts and relational governance. Research limitations/implications This paper argues that a more nuanced view on contract types, such as strategic versus conventional, may reconcile the enduring research controversy between the substitution and complements perspectives. Practical implications Today, formal contracts with foreign distributors tend to resemble “prenuptial agreements”. The opportunity for relational rent (e.g. manifested in higher export revenues) grows if conventional contracts are superseded by contracts following strategic contracting principles. Originality/value This study is interdisciplinary, not only by its combination of marketing, management and contractual economics but also through its law and economics amalgamation.

scholarly journals Knowledge capabilities in supply chain networks: a taxonomy

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 655-674
Author(s):  
Robert Ogulin ◽  
Gustavo Guzman ◽  
Subasinghage Maduka Nuwangi
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Managerial Decision ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Supply Chain Networks ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Two Bodies

Purpose This paper aims to develop a conceptual taxonomy for building requisite knowledge capabilities for different supply chain network (SCN) types. Specifically, it examines knowledge capabilities required for three types of SCNs: efficient, collaborative and agile SCNs. Design/methodology/approach This paper integrates two bodies of thought (i.e. knowledge management and organisational learning) and applies them to SCNs. An abductive research process is used to develop this conceptual taxonomy. Findings The conceptual taxonomy details three archetypical knowledge capabilities – exploitation, exploration and ambidextrous. Those knowledge capabilities are required for efficient, collaborative and agile SCNs, respectively. Research limitations/implications This paper is conceptual and theory-based. The next stages of the research seek to further strengthen the explanatory value of the taxonomy through empirical validation. Practical implications The taxonomy developed in this paper provides a valuable and pragmatic tool for managerial decision-making in the context of SCNs. Specifically, it provides a roadmap for practitioners since the study develops an understanding of the relationship between knowledge capabilities and types of SCNs. Originality/value This is one of the earliest studies that attempt to unearth requisite knowledge capabilities for different types of SCNs.

scholarly journals A biopsychosocial framework for recovery from COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (9/10) ◽  
pp. 1021-1039
Author(s):  
Kaz Stuart ◽  
Mark A. Faghy ◽  
Elaine Bidmead ◽  
Ruth Browning ◽  
Catriona Roberts ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Living Arrangements ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Narrow Range ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Social Media Platforms ◽  
Practical Implications

PurposeThis paper proposes a biopsychosocial (BPS) analysis of COVID-19 experiences which enhances understanding of complex and interrelated factors and leads to the proposition of a BPS recovery framework.Design/methodology/approachOnline narrative research was used to explore people's experiences of COVID-19 and was conducted over a four-month period. The call was distributed via a short open-ended qualitative online survey advertised on social media platforms and 305 responses came from across England.FindingsThe findings illustrate people with a narrow range of BPS characteristics experienced over a wide range of BPS impacts which are nuanced, complex and dynamic. Left unaddressed these may create future adverse BPS characteristics. An integrated BPS framework for recovery is proposed to avoid such further negative outcomes from the pandemic.Research limitations/implicationsThe sample contained a bias in age, gender and living arrangements.Practical implicationsThe paper offers a clear framework to enable integrated holistic recovery/regrowth planning.Social implicationsUsing the framework would reduce social and health inequities which have been recently deepened by COVID-19 in the long-term.Originality/valueThe paper is original in its use of a BPS analytical framework.

Reflections on the socio-politics of qualitative research

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert J. Mills
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Qualitative Methods ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Past ◽  
Politics Of Knowledge ◽  
Qualitative Approaches ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – A focus on the socio-politics of qualitative research and, given the space available, to raise more questions than answers. In other words, the author wants to be more speculative then definitive. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is grounded in a sociology of knowledge approach known as ANTi-History. Findings – The development of qualitative methods is grounded in the socio-politics of knowledge production. Research limitations/implications – The focus chosen – ANTi-History – is selected in exclusion to other potential approaches. Practical implications – To encourage researchers to include socio-politics in understanding the production of qualitative research methods. Social implications – Identification of the socio-politics that underlie qualitative approaches. Originality/value – The paper is rooted in a developing approach to the socio-politics of knowledge of the past.

Construct creation from research questions

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (8) ◽  
pp. 1817-1838
Author(s):  
Sarah Forbes ◽  
Mark Avis
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Methodological Problem ◽  
Ecological Validity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Made In

Purpose Construct Creation (CC) is a methodological problem occurring when a research process, instead of measuring an extant construct in the participant’s mind, creates the construct. The purpose of this paper is to argue that CC derives from problems around ecologically invalid research and attitudinal responses developed on the spot, both resulting from self-generated validity. Design/methodology/approach A between-subjects design was used to explore whether the personification prime (PP), a component of brand personality (BP) methodology, influenced the CC of BP for rocks. Analysis of qualitative data on how participants made their BP ratings in the absence of a PP was also completed. Findings Findings revealed that a methodology can enable CC in the participant’s mind, despite the construct being ecologically invalid prior to them participating in the study. Analysis also revealed that participants will use varied, and sometimes elaborate, strategies to enable CC and provide researchers with the answers to their questions. Research limitations/implications Previous research has drawn attention to CC as a problem but the implications of prior research have so far been “sidestepped”. Consequently, this paper demonstrates CC and why it is a problem, while rebutting some arguments made in prior research for sidestepping CC. Practical implications CC is a potentially serious methodological problem that can result in invalid findings informing or misdirecting theory used by practitioners. As such, this paper proposes methods to ameliorate CC and improve ecological validity of future research. Originality/value This study will contribute to methodological literature by refocusing attention to the currently neglected problem of CC and by proposing a model of CC by participants.

Exploring the complexities of validity claims in action research

2007 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 381-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter McInnes ◽  
Paul Hibbert ◽  
Nic Beech
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Language Games ◽  
Research Setting ◽  
Action Research Project ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Validity Claims ◽  
Practical Implications

PurposeThe paper aims to explore the problematics of validity that are inherent to the conduct of an action research project because of the disparate language games of both practitioners and academics.Design/methodology/approachAn exploration is offered of the tensions between different understandings of a research setting at different stages of the research process.FindingsIn each phase of the research there are a number of tensions between different epistemological assumptions about the “reality” of the research setting. Validity is not, therefore, about capturing a singular objective picture of the organisation, but rather it is produced through the negotiation of a temporary intersection of language games.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper provides a framework for understanding the role of the researcher in the research process and the issues underlying validity claims made from different epistemological positions.Practical implicationsThe paper provides insights in to the mechanisms through which practitioners and academics come to understand each other and the limitations of this knowledge.Originality/valueThe article raises awareness of the different normative assumptions at play within a variety of action research contexts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document