Narrow Results

This collaborative paper aims to reflexively evaluate the versatile and comprehensive application of grounded theory, comparatively using two studies researching the strategic behaviour of small organisations within a small island state. The methodological stance adopted is that of practitioner researchers, critically analysing the research positioning and processes in two large grounded theory studies that mapped the competitive behaviours of some 100 small businesses in the small island EU state of Malta. The study evaluates grounded theory processes and actions taken in the two studies, depicting the systematic collection, comparison and analysis of the data gathered, concept generation, continuous interaction between actions and context, use of in-depth interviews combined with quantitative data, coding, mapping and categorisation of the data collected, and the use of MAXQDA as a viable software tool to carry out grounded theory. This practitioner research study comprises detailed practice-related implications for the use of grounded theory in researching small organisations, in a manner that a novice grounded theory practitioner can adopt and a manager in a small business can appreciate.

The paper discusses the relationship between learning, innovation and (institutional) reflexivity. It is often held that reflexivity is a crucial factor for learning and innovation processes. However, a rather formalistic approach to reflexivity is predominant. We propose to overcome this limitation and to develop a more meaningful concept of reflexivity which "reflects" the contingent, relational, dynamic and complex character of organizational environments and reality. Based on this broadened understanding it appears that reflexivity is imminently a dialectic category and, under specific circumstances, it can also inhibit innovation. This is especially the case when reflexive tools are abused to push performance only. In order to illustrate our concept and hypotheses we added two case studies which highlight the conflicting counterparts of reflexivity and innovation and pointed us to important cultural "success factors".

Reflexivity, the extent to which teams reflect upon and modify their functioning, is widely considered a key factor for engendering team innovation. In this study, we propose that reflexivity is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for team innovation. Outcome interdependence, defined as the extent to which team members perceive that attainment of goals by their colleagues will facilitate their own goal achievement, and shared team vision, will moderate the effect of team reflexivity on team innovation. An empirical study with 332 team members of 34 software projects reveals that as predicted high outcome interdependence and shared team vision magnified the positive impacts of team reflexivity on team innovation. However, an increase in team reflexivity at low outcome interdependence and shared team vision had a negative impact on team innovation. Further, in general, agile software teams consistently demonstrated higher outcome interdependence and team reflexivity and thereby higher team innovation compared to teams adopting plan-driven methods of software development.

My paper aims at presenting the cross-cultural encounters between my educational and intellectual background as an international Ph.D. researcher and the epistemological stances underpinning my Western-based methodology. In my reflexive ethnographic study of a global non-governmental organisation, I developed a dual act of reflexivity, one on constructing the data and the other on developing my methodological perspectives and skills. I draw this approach from Alvesson's (2010) proposal for a methodological awareness through ‘an epistemological-theoretical-methodological context’ in order to make stronger knowledge claims.

The influence of digital technology on our modern workforce is significant and has been instrumental in the creation of new jobs in new marketplaces to satisfy new needs. Although we may not know the direction of future technological change, what is known is that change will invariably benefit some groups and not others. One group who have not benefited are Māori in Aotearoa New Zealand. With very few Māori employed in the information technology (IT) sector, the benefits to Māori from the increased opportunities are yet to be realized. Historically, Māori have been the subjects of research as end users of technology rather than as technology workers. The dominant narrative being that Māori are underachieving and that Māori will want to participate if they either acquire the technical skills or see the benefits of working in IT for themselves. The aim of this study was to push past this narrative and explore, via the experiences of Māori IT workers, why so few Māori work in IT. At the heart of this research was the question that drove this study: How can Māori IT workers be enabled to thrive in IT? Seeking answers, I traveled throughout Aotearoa New Zealand to kōrero (discuss, converse) with Māori IT workers. A newly developed approach called kaupapa tika was used, where unstructured insider-based interviews were conducted as a co-creation exercise to explore participants’ complex lived experiences. What was uncovered was that while working with IT is fun and exciting, in many cases, working in IT is not.