Paradigms in Qualitative IB Research: Trends, Analysis and Recommendations

Abstract

Abstract This paper examines trends, challenges and opportunities in terms of research methodologies in qualitative IB research. In particular, it examines trends for the dominant (positivism/(post)positivism) paradigm versus alternative paradigms (i.e., social constructivism, critical realism and interpretivism) and provides a comparative analysis of data collection and methods. Using mixed methods to collect and analyze data on qualitative articles published in International Business Review, Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of World Business, and Management International Review, we examine trends and differences between the dominant and alternative paradigms and use qualitative content analysis to investigate how alternative paradigm papers are conceptualized and presented. Moreover, we interview authors of non-positivist papers to gain in-depth understanding of the findings. We reveal differences across the paradigms and provide evidence of paradigmatic fit between methods and data collection techniques for the dominant paradigm, but more variation for alternative paradigms. Lastly, we provide prescriptions for IB scholars in terms of methodology diversity and how complex IB phenomena can be pursued vis-a-vis alternative paradigms.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 30 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.