TY - CHAP

T1 - Advancing Qualitative Meta-Analyses

T2 - Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management - ACM 2018

AU - Habersang, Stefanie

AU - Reihlen, Markus

N1 - Conference code: 78

PY - 2018/7/2

Y1 - 2018/7/2

N2 - Qualitative meta-analyses have gained increasing attention among scholars in management and organization theory. However, existing approaches reveal some inconsistencies that need to be overcome in order to unfold the full potential of the method. First, while previous approaches refer to a version of realism that is problematic as it either overlaps with notions of interpretivism or positivism, a purely constructivist perspective of knowledge synthesis is entirely absent in the literature. Second, most previous qualitative meta-studies have drawn primarily on variance instead of process approaches to synthesize existing findings which is surprising as understanding processes is a key focus in qualitative research. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to present two very different approaches for conducting a qualitative meta-analysis that are informed by two opposing philosophical positions. These are, as we suggest, a realist and a constructivist research design of a qualitative meta-analysis. We illustrate these two approaches in the context of process theorizing. As a result, we show how both approaches differ in synthesizing qualitative evidence, show what kind of outcomes they generate, and finally discuss different quality criteria to evaluate both types of meta-analyses.

AB - Qualitative meta-analyses have gained increasing attention among scholars in management and organization theory. However, existing approaches reveal some inconsistencies that need to be overcome in order to unfold the full potential of the method. First, while previous approaches refer to a version of realism that is problematic as it either overlaps with notions of interpretivism or positivism, a purely constructivist perspective of knowledge synthesis is entirely absent in the literature. Second, most previous qualitative meta-studies have drawn primarily on variance instead of process approaches to synthesize existing findings which is surprising as understanding processes is a key focus in qualitative research. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to present two very different approaches for conducting a qualitative meta-analysis that are informed by two opposing philosophical positions. These are, as we suggest, a realist and a constructivist research design of a qualitative meta-analysis. We illustrate these two approaches in the context of process theorizing. As a result, we show how both approaches differ in synthesizing qualitative evidence, show what kind of outcomes they generate, and finally discuss different quality criteria to evaluate both types of meta-analyses.

KW - Management studies

KW - AOM Annual Meeting Proceedings 2018

KW - AOM Chicago 2018

KW - Best Paper

U2 - 10.5465/AMBPP.2018.129

DO - 10.5465/AMBPP.2018.129

M3 - Published abstract in conference proceedings

VL - 1

T3 - Academy of Management Proceedings

BT - Academy of Management Proceedings

A2 - Atinc, Guclu

PB - Academy of Management (Briarcliff Manor, NY)

CY - Chicagpo

Y2 - 10 August 2018 through 14 August 2018

ER -