There is a growing understanding that human intuition cannot be replaced by quantitative methods. That is why much research in the developed world is qualitative or ethnographic research. You might like to read "What data can't tell you about customers" published in Harvard Business Review (2012). Several writers have written on the role of human judgement - you might like to read wsj blogs and an article in NYT about data and intuition. I have covered these aspects in my new book on Consumer Behaviour which is due to be published by OUP in 2015.

In India, we are enamoured of graphs and charts, even if they are drivel. That is why it will take some time before research shifts from quantitative obsession to something more meaningful. It is not availability of computer software, but the software in the mind of professors that is to blame.

There is a good book related to the above topic titled Research design: quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods approaches by professor J. Creswell (2009). Moreover you can find articles on mixed methods by Hanson and Richardson as well. Google it with the key words

In fact in many Asian (particularly in Southeast Asian) countries most of the research is done by the research students who must write dissertations and defend them in front of, often, hostile audiences. And in such circumstances qualitative research becomes much more trickier to defend. So, in my opinion it is less of a problem of incapability and more of a defense against unnecessary criticism. 

There is a growing understanding that human intuition cannot be replaced by quantitative methods. That is why much research in the developed world is qualitative or ethnographic research. You might like to read "What data can't tell you about customers" published in Harvard Business Review (2012). Several writers have written on the role of human judgement - you might like to read wsj blogs and an article in NYT about data and intuition. I have covered these aspects in my new book on Consumer Behaviour which is due to be published by OUP in 2015.

In India, we are enamoured of graphs and charts, even if they are drivel. That is why it will take some time before research shifts from quantitative obsession to something more meaningful. It is not availability of computer software, but the software in the mind of professors that is to blame.

Qualitative approach is getting more popular now. It is based on a fundamental reason that the quantitative methodology is too rigid in such a way that it can't conceptualise a particular problem holistically. Say for example an issue with a predetermined set of variables which is tested by statistical analysis. We will not be able to explore further what are other variables that could be considered in research to address the said problem, as we are preoccupied by theoretically tested variables rather than exploring other variables which are usually unique from one case to another.   

There is a similar discussion in psychology. There are journals like Journal of Mixed Methods Research (JMMR) http://mmr.sagepub.com/. I can recommend the critical eye of Aaro Toomela. He's maybe too critical, but sometimes it needs a strong words and personality to make people really think about a topic https://tallinn.academia.edu/AaroToomela.

I would humbly disagree with the assertion that research is moving away from quantitative to qualitative and mixed methods. I agree that there is a rise in multitude of methodological approaches but that is bound to happen as our understanding is refined further through the use of various approaches. If one looks at the top journals in Management such as AMJ, SMJ, ASQ etc. one would find a large number of articles using mixed methods or quants. Pure qual articles are still rare in top management journals. NVivo and other qual softwares are available in most countries however the training is lacking for sure (but so is for SEM and PLS approaches). There are quite a few good quality books available including the classics by Yin (1994, 2004) on case research and Glasser and Strauss (1967) on grounded theory. There are numerous other good books such as from Craswell, Silverman etc. As for your initial query about articles which discuss the need for quals and mix methods a good starting point will be to look at AMR editorials and this article by Yadav (2010 - Journal of Marketing). 

http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.74.1.1

I agree with you Paurav and neither the proponents of mixed methods intend to be wholly qualitative and many qualitative and mixed methods have a lot of quantitative elements. I regard these issues as methodological development.Morever,large amounts of data regardless of methodology can only be best managed quantitatively.

It has often been argued that neither positivism (quantitative) nor interpretivism (qualitative) can be solely used to understand a phenomenon fully. In fact, many authors have recommended that researchers should triangulate both approaches during research projects although these arguments are valid, the choice of methodology should also be guided by the key objectives of what is being studied. Even though there are arguments that mixed method research designs represent one of the fastest growing areas in research methodology there still remains grey areas to be addressed. The benefits of mixed methods include capturing a holistic picture of the subject matter and allowing for the possibility of uncovering surprising features in addition to validating the findings. Difficulties with mixed methods can arise when results from different methods fail to converge while others have said that methodological pluralism places extra demands on the researcher’s capabilities and resources. The three motives for using mixed methods including one part facilitating another, improve validity and finally that researchers will acquire deeper understanding of the research subject.

Yin has been regarded as one of the greatest scholars in case study that includes mixed methods and he has discussed various strategies in managing mixed method studies. The list of resources includes:

1.Hurmerinta, L. and Numela, N. 2011. Mixed Methods in Case Studies on International Business.

In: Piekkari, R. and Welch, C. Rethinking the case study in International Business

Research. Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK.

2.Saunders, M., Lewis P. and Thornhill, A. 2007. Research Methods for Business Students4th

Edition. F.T Press Ed, Harlow, England: Pearson Education Inc.

3.Yin, R. 1984. Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

4.Yin. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th edition, Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Bes

Erick Outa

We use mixed methods in most of our studies that examine policy and organizational context, largely in public sector settings.  For an example of a MM study I would suggest our mixed methods study protocol

http://www.implementationscience.com/content/9/1/183

Aarons, G.A., Green, A.E., Willging, C.E., Ehrhart, M.E., Roesch, S.C., Hecht, D.B., & Chaffin, M.J. (2014). Mixed-method study of a conceptual model of evidence-based intervention sustainment across multiple public-sector service settings. Implementation Science, 9:183.

I think a lots of textbooks has been listed for you. I will add that you read some journal articles also so that you can some picture of how the methods works. For instance, "an evaluation of  Public Housing Estates Beneficial sustainability factors fin the Niger Delta " by Ihuah and Eaton, 2014, journal of built and human environment review, available at www.tbher.org

I'd recommend Creswell (2009). His work is up to date and clearly written.

Qualitative over Quantitative methods have been prevalent in management research. I think the basis behind this is how an individual personality type--- such as Myers Briggs profile-- influence CEOs in decision making, sometimes the gut over rules hard quantitative information. For the simple reason that data can be unreliable and human beings sometimes  act irrationally.

There is major shift from quantitative methods to qualitative ones. Qualitative analysis can give you an answer to only such questions: "when, where, who,what". However, major question is still unanswered. Question" why".  Answers for this type of question can be given only by qualitative research.

You would need to conduct a search of the literature using the appropriate databases for your topic of interest to obtain articles regarding this topic..  To support your perspective, or to confirm your perspective, you want to have scholarly articles from peer reviewed journals.  Regarding qualitative software, learning to use qualitative software is a long learning curve.  There are various software programs available, depending on what qualitative methodology you are using.  However, one must understand that qualitative software programs only manage the data, they do not analyze the data for you.  That the researcher still must do.  

Valera,are you suggesting that Arun should conduct a scientific study testing the hypothesis that research is shifting from quantitative to qualitative\mixed methods? Would this be a meta study?

Erick

No, not at all. What I suggested is a literature review to see what the extant research literature states since I believe the initial request was for articles. 

You might check out the Journal of Mixed Methods Research. The papers cover a range of substantive areas but all have a focus on the use of mixed methods. Michael Quinn Patton has written extensively on the use of qualitative research in program evaluation. There might be something there for you as well. 

I wont be able to suggest you articles sir, but just to mention, I did my M.Phil Management thesis was also qualitative. I didnt use any software for analysis, but softwares are being introduced at a very small scale in Pakistan.

Secondly, no Pakistani journal (as per my knowledge) publishes qualitative research, therefore this could also be a reason for less focus on qualitative work. 

In Germany we also recognize a growing interest in qualitative methods in different research branches - e.g. in computer science, management research etc..

We decide to lunch a conference on this topic, see www.qmiw.de and a community of practice: www.cop-qmiw.de

There you can find some articles soon, we also provide (national) conference proceeding.

In my opinion to get a solid contribution and results its better to do mixed method, where each method complete the other. 

Yes, the trend is changing. But there are so many reasons for this. For instance the partial failures of strict functionalism based paradigms, the growing concern for human and environmental concern etc. etc. Additionally, Research in developing context is not primarily for knowledge but most of the time other considerations like how many papers can be published easily, how quickly can one do MPhil, PhD etc take precedence over the knowledge aim.

A deeper issue lies in the absence of research philosophy and how modern science came into limelight. We directly tend to start with a tool in a quantitative research and students tailor the rest of research and thesis to this tool. Which is a very wrong approach because first comes a research question, then we justify its significance and utility for various audiences, leading to (and sometimes iteratively) prospective population of study and the most appropriate way to answer the questions/hypotheses etc.

Given the weakness of documentation in most developing ASIA, I would say that Qualitative and Mixed methods would have a much bigger scope than quantitative but unfortunately we are going the wrong way in most cases and thus most research studies are of no use to most audiences as they sit in the cupboard while the researcher grows into an experienced professor on very shadowy record.

Janie Harden Fritz has a great journal that explores the qualitative turn in organizational studies, especially in management and workplace relationships. You can find it in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships: http://spr.sagepub.com/content/31/4/460

As suggested by the journal name, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal has a strong focus on qualitative research and occasionally has articles exploring issues related to qualitative research in organizational settings.

What basically I wanted was articles on topics similar to "Management Research Shifting from Quantitative to Qualitative." Its a mtter of fact but I am not able to lay hands on many articles though I have heard it in number of conferences and seminars.

Dear Arun,

My contribution on that brainstorming for your research is the following:

Always the definition of the units of analysis for making quantitative researches have a qualitative step: if you tell me “10”, I will make you the question “10 of what?” and this “what” is the qualitative. By example, if I we say “10 cows” the qualitative is the term “cow” and the extension “10” refers the extension of that quality (like a quantity that predicates the quality) on a measured environment or space.

When the quantitative can turn into a new quality? Maybe only when the extension of a gived quality achieves a critic mass able to act as a new factor or a new object on a context. By example in social statistics we define with a “urban” quality a conglomerate that have more than 10000 inhabitants, and with a “rural” quality, one that have less of that critic mass that allows us to determine a new unit of analysis (in this case the urban in difference to the rural), etc.

In general when we work doing prospective research we begin searching for the intervenient qualities of a process, system or something else, using the analytical method; and after if it’s necessary, we measure the quantitative extensions of those qualities with different aims.

For your specific question; "Management Research Shifting from Quantitative to Qualitative", fussy logic can give you interesting keys, that’s because, it is a principal instrument for making “industrial control of processes” and telemetry. Fussy logic can also help you to classify not only collections of objects, but product/pulses of one or more processes, also the action of intervenient factors on systems, etc. following its numerical intensities, concentrations or frequencies on time (Shift from Quantitative to Qualitative for management purposes); but only to the extent that you have good pre-defined sensitive intervalar scales to classify as qualities, the rhythms of appearance or concentrations of the observation units that you are looking to classify following its numerical extensions as intervenient factors or products from, or on a system.

You can have a good and short tutorial on fussy logic on the following web page, the rest is for your imagination following your own needs:

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq.html

Hi Arun,

i think qualitative portion can give you answers of why?  which is not sufficient  and complete as it first requires answers of what which comes from quantitative portion. yes mixed method is strongly recommended for new domains in research.

regarding your question about qualitative portion first of all you dig about theories in following aspects:

abstract theories

middle age theories

grounded theories

i think  it will be self guidance for you as it pin points problems with references.

regards

What I want is articles with title similar to "Qualitative research preferred over Quantitative Research........." If anyone has come across such articles, please provide.

I think there is too much material on Qualitative vs Quantitative so it may depend on what you are up to and the references so far given just address that. Sometimes academics write in certain context which blurs what one is looking for. Like a lot of research in this area refers to Yin who addresses qualitative vs quantitative in the context of case study method and that is the majority. If you just want non contextualized articles, then you may look at essays and lesser rigorous scientific academic material such as:

1. Booker, R. (2014). Why is qualitative research sometimes given preference over

quantitative research?

Available from: www.essex.ac.uk/.../research/.../2014SC101_Robin%20Brooker_3final.p...

This is an essay.

2. Quantitative vs. Qualitative - Answers Research

Available from http://www.answersresearch.com/article9.php

3. Qualitative and Quantitative research

https://www.academia.edu/4780163/Qualitative_and_Quantitative_Research

Zalan and Lewis are however an academic article

4. Zalan, T. and Lewis, G. (2004) “Writing About Methods in Qualitative Research: Towards a More Transparent Approach” in Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for International Business. Elgar original Reference Edited by Rebecca Piekkari and Catherine Welch

Best

Erick Outa

Hi,

One of the main reasons why there is a shift from quantitative to qualitative is because of a greater acceptability of a social constructionist research epistemology as oppose to a positivistic epistemology. Personally I can accept a post-positivist and a social constructionist approach, even postmodern research epistemology as a method. If you adopt a post-positive approach in the tradition of Karl Popper or Imre Lakatos you tend to use quantitative techniques to reject the null hypothesis in theory testing. If you adopt a social constructionist or a postmodern epistemology, the methodology will be qualitative in nature. Refer to Michael Crotty's Foundations of Social Research for a good grounding on these.

Therefore, if you are trying to defend the proposition that the is a shift from QUAN to QUAL methodologies in management studies, you will find support from reading into the shift in preference of epistemology from a positivistic (a justification for the use of QUAN methods) to a social constructionistic approach (justification for the use of QUAL methods).

Regards,

Rodney

Hi Erick,

You are right that plenty of articles are available on topics similar to "Quantitative Vs. Qualitative." I am looking for articles that proves that Qualitative Methods are superior to Quantitative in conducting research in the field of Mangement.

See From the Editors "The coming of age for Qualitative Research: Embrancing the Diversity of Qualitative Methods. Academy of Management Journal, 2011, vol 54 (2), pp 233-237

From the editors "Qualitative Research and The Academy of Management Journal" .Academy of Management Journal, 2004, vol 47(4),pp 454-462

http://aom.org/uploadedFiles/Publications/AMJ/Gephart.pdf

http://aom.org/uploadedFiles/Publications/AMJ/Apr11_Bansal_Corley.PDF

Thanks Ercillia.

The editorials talk about qualitative research but does not mention about management research shifting from quantitative to qualitative.

Some researchers move from quantitative to qualitative research in some countries like US & Europe might due to certain challenges they face in quantitative research which include: 1) lack of respondents to fill up survey (for correlational research), 2) stricter regulations imposed on cause-and-effect experimental research e.g. not causing harm to the participants in the experiment(s) etc.  Generally it is visible that Asian countries' researchers still focusing on quantitative research.  However, the trend looks gradually changing in which more and more qualitative and mixed method research are mushrooming.

I generally agree to that notion. In accounting, in specific, we used to refer to an article written by Scapens, about his 30 years joiurney in accounting research. In other areas I'm not that sure..  

Mr Sahay,

I tend to think  that in science you cannot be certain something is true;  a method used might suggest something is true with a certain degree of confidence, until someone else devises a  better method to show what was shown to be true may not be true at all - a single exception invalidates a claim of having proved something.. And it goes on… So, I am wondering about your question about proof. The validity of what you might see as  proving superiority can  be questioned by others.

The next question will be:   when is something superior? What is the criterion for   calling something " superior"?

I agree with Arun, there is talk of qualitative research rather than a "shift" to qualitative research at the expense of quantitative research.From experience though, if you keep submitting qualitative research to ranked \top journals , your chances of publications get reduced. I do not see a world where qualitative research over rules quantitative but i see a world where both methods are complementary. For those who want to succeed in their publishing efforts,rich mixed methods is a good strategy although many qualitative researchers find quantitative methods especially application of econometric to be somehow difficult.

I tend to agree with the view that qualitative research in ranked \top journals are difficult to publish. Because of this, some journals have come up which publish only qualitative research. Despite this, qualitative researchers are at disavantage when it comes to publication despite good quality of research. What should be done to iron out this disparity?

Hi Phil

You are right in saying that the next question will be:   when is something superior? What is the criterion for   calling something " superior"? Every research method has its stength and weakness. I am not entering into debate of qual Vs. Quan.

What I an looking for is articles addressing management research shifting from quantitative to qualitative or mixed method.