Academy of Management Review 2007, Vol. 32, No. 4, 1155–1179.

METHODOLOGICAL FIT IN MANAGEMENT FIELD RESEARCH

AMY C. EDMONDSON Harvard Business School

STACY E. MCMANUS Monitor Executive Development

Methodological fit, an implicitly valued attribute of high-quality field research in organizations, has received little attention in the management literature. Fit refers to internal consistency among elements of a research project—research question, prior work, research design, and theoretical contribution. We introduce a contingency framework that relates prior work to the design of a research project, paying particular attention to the question of when to mix qualitative and quantitative data in a single research paper. We discuss implications of the framework for educating new field researchers.

To advance management theory, a growing This article introduces a framework for as- number of scholars are engaging in field re- sessing and promoting methodological fit as an search, studying real people, real problems, and overarching criterion for ensuring quality field real organizations. Although the potential rele- research. We define methodological fit as inter- vance of field research is motivating, the re- nal consistency among elements of a research search journey can be messy and inefficient, project (see Table 1 for four key elements of field fraught with logistical hurdles and unexpected research). Although articles based on field re- events. Researchers manage complex relation- search in leading academic journals usually ex- ships with sites, cope with constraints on sam- hibit a high degree of methodological fit, guide- ple selection and timing of data collection, and lines for ensuring it are not readily available. often confront mid-project changes to planned Beyond the observation that qualitative data are research designs. With these additional chal- appropriate for studying phenomena that are lenges, the logic of a research design and how it not well understood (e.g., Barley, 1990; Bouchard, supports the development of a specific theoreti- 1976; Eisenhardt, 1989a), the relationship be- cal contribution can be obscured or altered tween types of theoretical contributions and along the way in field research. Compared to types of field research has received little ex- experimental studies, analyses of published plicit attention. In particular, the conditions un- data sets, or computer simulations, achieving fit der which hybrid methods that mix qualitative between the type of data collected in and the and quantitative data are most helpful in field theoretical contribution of a given field research research—a central focus of this paper—are not project is a dynamic and challenging process. widely recognized. We define field research in management as systematic studies that rely on the collection of original data—qualitative or quantitative—in We thank David Ager, Jim Detert, Robin Ely, Richard real organizations. The ideas in this paper are Hackman, Connie Hadley, Bertrand Moingeon, Wendy not intended to generalize to all types of man- Smith, students in four years of the Design of Field Research Methods course at Harvard, seminar participants at the Uni- agement research but, rather, to help guide the versity of Texas McCombs School, the MIT Organization design and development of research projects Studies group, and the Kurt Lewin Institute in Amsterdam for that centrally involve collecting data in field valuable feedback in the development of these ideas. We sites. We offer a framework that relates the are particularly grateful to Terrence Mitchell and the AMR stage of prior theory to research questions, type reviewers for suggestions that improved the paper im- mensely. Harvard Business School Division of Research pro- of data collected and analyzed, and theoretical vided the funding for this project. contributions—the elements shown in Table 1.

1155 Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved. Contents may not be copied, emailed, posted to a listserv, or otherwise transmitted without the copyright holder’s express written permission. Users may print, download, or email articles for individual use only. 1156 Academy of Management Review October

TABLE 1 Four Key Elements of a Field Research Project

Element Description

Research question ● Focuses a study ● Narrows the topic area to a meaningful, manageable size ● Addresses issues of theoretical and practical significance ● Points toward a viable research project—that is, the question can be answered Prior work ● The state of the literature ● Existing theoretical and empirical research papers that pertain to the topic of the current study ● An aid in identifying unanswered questions, unexplored areas, relevant constructs, and areas of low agreement Research design ● Type of data to be collected ● Data collection tools and procedures ● Type of analysis planned ● Finding/selection of sites for collecting data Contribution to literature ● The theory developed as an outcome of the study ● New ideas that contest conventional wisdom, challenge prior assumptions, integrate prior streams of research to produce a new model, or refine understanding of a phenomenon ● Any practical insights drawn from the findings that may be suggested by the researcher

In well-integrated field research the key ele- ical literature and describe the sources that ments are congruent and mutually reinforcing. inform our ideas. The framework we present is unlikely to call for changes in how accomplished field research- BACKGROUND ers go about their work. Indeed, experienced researchers regularly implement the alignment Prior Work on Methodological Fit we describe. However, new organizational re- The notion of methodological fit has deep searchers, or even accomplished experimental- roots in organizational research (e.g., Bouchard, ists or modelers who are new to field research, 1976; Campbell, Daft, & Hulin, 1982; Lee, Mitch- should benefit from an explicit discussion of the ell, & Sablynski, 1999; McGrath, 1964). Years ago, mutually reinforcing relationships that promote McGrath (1964) noted that the state of prior methodological fit. knowledge is a key determinant of appropriate The primary aim of this article, thus, is to research methodology. Pointing to a full spec- provide guidelines for helping new field re- trum of research settings, ranging from field re- searchers develop and hone their ability to search to experimental simulations, laboratory align theory and methods in field research. experiments, and computer simulations, he pre- Because a key aspect of this is the ability to sented field studies as appropriate for explor- anticipate and detect problems that emerge atory endeavors to stimulate new theoretical when fit is low, our discussion explores and ideas and for cross-validation to assess whether categorizes such problems. A second aim is to an established theory holds up in the real world. suggest that methodological fit in field re- The other, non-field-based research settings search is created through an iterative learning were presented as appropriate for advancing process that requires a mindset in which feed- theory. Understandably, given the era, McGrath back, rethinking, and revising are embraced did not dig deeply into the full range of methods as valued activities, and to discuss the impli- that have since been used within field research cations of this for educating new field re- alone. searchers. To begin, in the next section we Subsequently, Bouchard, focusing on how to situate our efforts in the broader methodolog- implement research techniques such as inter- 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1157 views, questionnaires, and observation, noted, goal is to increase validity of new measures “The key to good research lies not in choosing through triangulation1 and/or to generate the right method, but rather in asking the right greater understanding of the mechanisms un- question and picking the most powerful method derlying quantitative results in at least par- for answering that particular question” (1976: tially new territory. This paper complements 402). Others have issued cautions against as- prior work on hybrid methods by addressing suming the unilateral rightness of a method— how the state of current theory and literature wielding a hammer and treating everything as influences not only when hybrid research nails (e.g., Campbell et al., 1982). Yet all re- strategies are appropriate but also when other searchers are vulnerable to preferring those methodological decisions are appropriate and hammers that we have learned to use well. how different elements of research projects fit Thus, we benefit from reminders that not all together to form coherent wholes. tools are appropriate for all situations. At the same time, exactly how to determine the right Sources for Understanding Fit in Field method for a given research question—particu- Research larly in the field—has not been as well speci- fied. Several sources have informed the ideas pre- More recently, Lee et al. (1999: 163) tackled the sented in this paper. A long-standing interest in challenges of research in “natural settings” to teaching field research methods fueled exten- explicate strategies for effective qualitative or- sive note taking, reflection, and iterative model ganizational and vocational research. Using ex- building over the past decade. In this reflective emplars, these authors showed that qualitative process we drew first from the many high- data are useful for theory generation, elabora- quality papers reporting on field research pub- tion, and even testing, in an effort to “inspire lished in prominent journals; we use a few of [other researchers] to seek opportunities to ex- these articles as exemplars to highlight and ex- pand their thinking and research” and to help plain our framework. Second, we drew from our them “learn from this larger and collective ex- own experiences conducting field research, perience and avoid misdirection” (1999: 161). In complete with missteps, feedback, and exten- advocating the benefits of qualitative work for sive refinement. Third, the first author’s experi- organizational researchers, these authors pro- ence reviewing dozens of manuscripts reporting vide a helpful foundation for the present paper. on field research submitted to academic jour- We build on this work by distinguishing among nals provided additional insight into both the purely qualitative, purely quantitative, and hy- presence and absence of methodological fit.2 brid designs, as well as by including a fuller Unlike reading polished published articles, re- range of field research methods in a single viewing offers the advantage of being able to framework. The categories we develop allow a observe part of the research journey. Moreover, more fine-grained analysis of field research op- a reviewer’s reward is the opportunity to see tions than offered previously. how other anonymous reviewers have evalu- A recent body of work debates the appropri- ated the same manuscript—constituting an in- ateness of combining qualitative and quanti- formal index of agreement among expert judges. tative methods within a single research Papers rejected or returned for extensive revi- project. Issues addressed in this debate in- sion because a poor match among prior work, clude whether qualitative and quantitative methods investigate the same phenomena, are philosophically consistent, and are paradigms 1 Triangulation is a process by which the same phenom- that can reasonably be integrated within a enon is assessed with different methods to determine study (e.g., Greene, Caracelli, & Graham, 1989; whether convergence across methods exists. See Jick (1979) Morgan & Smircich, 1980; Sale, Lohfeld, & Bra- for a thoughtful discussion. zil, 2002; Yauch & Steudel, 2003). Consistent 2 These reviewing experiences were important inputs into with Yauch and Steudel (2003), who provide a the framework in this paper; however, the confidentiality of the review process precluded using these cases as exam- brief review of the current thinking on this ples. To illustrate poor fit and attempts to improve fit later in topic, we propose that the two methods can be the article, we resorted to drawing on our second primary combined successfully in cases where the source—our own field research projects. 1158 Academy of Management Review October research questions, and methods helped inform vant theory at the time the research is designed our framework; agreement among expert re- and executed. We use the state of prior theory as viewers strengthens our confidence in these the starting point in achieving methodological ideas. fit in field research because it serves as a given, This agreement is not explained by explicit reasonably fixed context in which new research instruction. A glance at the current Academy of is developed: it is the one element over which Management Journal and Administrative Sci- the researcher has no control (i.e., the state of ence Quarterly checklists for reviewers reveals extant theoretical development cannot be mod- an emphasis on the quality of the individual ified to fit the current research project). elements of a submission—for example, “tech- nical adequacy”—without a formal criterion for A CONTINGENCY FRAMEWORK FOR evaluating fit among elements. Yet researchers MANAGEMENT FIELD RESEARCH may employ a particular method exceptionally well, without it being an effective approach to The State of Prior Theory studying the stated research question. This hap- We suggest that theory in management re- pens, in part, because field research is often search falls along a continuum, from mature to spurred by unexpected data collection opportu- nascent. Mature theory presents well-developed nities. Responding to requests from contacts at constructs and models that have been studied companies, researchers may collect data driven over time with increasing precision by a variety by company interests but not well matched to of scholars, resulting in a body of work consist- initial research questions. For example, surveys ing of points of broad agreement that represent may be distributed that help the site but that cumulative knowledge gained. Nascent theory, have limited connection to the researcher’s the- in contrast, proposes tentative answers to novel oretical goals. Similarly, interview data from a questions of how and why, often merely sug- consulting project may be reanalyzed for re- gesting new connections among phenomena. In- search, focusing on an area of theory not well termediate theory, positioned between mature suited to purely qualitative research. The oppor- and nascent, presents provisional explanations tunistic aspect of field research is not in itself a of phenomena, often introducing a new con- weakness but may increase the chances of poor struct and proposing relationships between it methodological fit when data collected for one and established constructs. Although the re- reason are used without careful thought for an- search questions may allow the development of other. testable hypotheses, similar to mature theory The experience of reviewing also highlights research, one or more of the constructs involved that a lack of methodological fit is easier to is often still tentative, similar to nascent theory discern in others’ field research than in one’s research. own. This motivated us to develop a formal This continuum is perhaps best understood as framework to help researchers uncover areas of a social construction that allows the develop- poor fit in their own field research earlier in the ment of archetypes. Consequently, it is not al- research journey, without waiting for external ways easy to determine the extent of theory de- review. velopment informing a potential research Drawing on the above sources, we inductively question.3 We propose a continuum rather than derived the framework presented in this paper, revising it along the way, driven by each other and by colleagues and reviewers both close and 3 distant. In exploring methodological fit, we are We thank an anonymous reviewer for pointing this out and Terry Mitchell for suggesting how we might address this particularly focused on how the state of current issue. To gain insight into raters’ agreement on this catego- theory shapes other elements of a field research rization approach, we prepared short descriptions of four- project. For clarity of illustration and compari- teen research questions that each began with a brief sum- sons across diverse methods, we limit the sub- mary of the state of prior work on the topic. The fourteen stantive topic of the research projects discussed cases included the articles described in this paper, along with a few additional field research studies. We then asked to one area—organizational work teams. four organizational researchers to categorize them accord- In the next section we show that producing ing to definitions of the three stages of theory we provided. methodological fit depends on the state of rele- The average overall agreement with our intended classifi- 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1159 clear stages to acknowledge that the categories specific research questions within one broad we suggest are not obvious or inviolable and to topic can vary from mature to nascent. recognize the potential for debate on the status of prior work related to a given research ques- Mature Theory Research tion. In short, our aim is to help field researchers think about methodological fit in a more ex- Mature theory encompasses precise models, plicit, systematic way, using exemplars from the supported by extensive research on a set of re- organizational literature to illustrate how the lated questions in varied settings. Maturity state of current theory informs methodological stimulates research that leads to further refine- decisions. ments within a growing body of interrelated the- ories. The research is often elegant, complex, and logically rigorous, addressing issues that Developing Sensible Connections to Prior other researchers would agree from the outset Work are worthy of study. Research questions tend to In a given field study, the four elements in focus on elaborating, clarifying, or challenging Table 1 should be influenced by the stage of specific aspects of existing theories. A re- development of the current literature at the time searcher might, for example, test a theory in a of the research. In general, the less known about new setting, identify or clarify the boundaries of a specific topic, the more open-ended the re- a theory, examine a mediating mechanism, or search questions, requiring methods that allow provide new support for or against previous data collected in the field to strongly shape the work. researcher’s developing understanding of the Specific testable hypotheses are developed phenomenon (e.g., Barley, 1990). In contrast, through logical argument that builds on prior when a topic of interest has been studied exten- work. Researchers draw from the literature to sively, researchers can use prior literature to argue the need for a new study and to develop identify critical independent, dependent, and the logic underlying the hypotheses they will control variables and to explain general mech- test. This hypothesis-testing approach examines anisms underlying the phenomenon. Leverag- relationships between previously developed ing prior work allows a new study to address constructs (and variables) to produce variance issues that refine the field’s knowledge, such as theory (an increase in some X is associated with identifying moderators or mediators that affect an increase in some Y; Mohr, 1982). Although the a documented causal relationship. Finally, most compelling test of a theory may be exper- when theory is in an intermediate stage of de- imental (e.g., Campbell & Stanley, 1963), field velopment—by nature a period of transition—a researchers usually cannot manipulate inde- new study can test hypotheses and simulta- pendent variables randomly across units. Re- neously allow openness to unexpected insights search questions and designs thus utilize corre- from qualitative data. Broadly, patterns of fit lation-based analyses consistent with causal among research components can be summa- inferences supported by logic (e.g., while a per- rized as in Table 2. son’s sex may predict salary level, it would be We begin our more detailed exploration of fit nonsensical to assert the reverse). These studies between theory and method with a discussion of rely heavily on statistical analyses and infer- mature theory, because it conforms to tradi- ences to support new theoretical propositions.4 tional models of research methodology and so Many excellent examples of published work serves as a conceptual base with which to com- could be used to illustrate fit in mature theory pare the other two categories. By drawing pri- research. Stewart and Barrick’s (2000) research marily on the topic of work teams, we demon- strate that the state of prior knowledge for 4 Research explaining team effectiveness, boasting many empirical studies providing statistical support for consistent explanatory models, fits this category. See, for example, cation was 86 percent, with seven of the fourteen research Hackman (1987). Multiple empirical studies lend support to questions achieving 100 percent accuracy and agreement; the basic model (e.g., Campion, Medsker, & Higgs, 1993; the raters also had 86 percent overall agreement with each Cohen & Ledford, 1994; Goodman, Devadas, & Hughson, 1988; other. Wageman, 2001). 1160 Academy of Management Review October

TABLE 2 Three Archetypes of Methodological Fit in Field Research

State of Prior Theory and Research Nascent Intermediate Mature

Research questions Open-ended inquiry Proposed relationships Focused questions about a phenomenon between new and and/or hypotheses of interest established relating existing constructs constructs Type of data collected Qualitative, initially Hybrid (both Quantitative data; open-ended data that qualitative and focused measures need to be quantitative) where extent or interpreted for amount is meaningful meaning Illustrative methods for Interviews; Interviews; Surveys; interviews or collecting data observations; observations; observations designed obtaining documents surveys; obtaining to be systematically or other material material from field coded and quantified; from field sites sites relevant to the obtaining data from relevant to the phenomena of field sites that phenomena of interest measure the extent or interest amount of salient constructs Constructs and Typically new Typically one or more Typically relying measures constructs, few new constructs heavily on existing formal measures and/or new constructs and measures measures Goal of data analyses Pattern identification Preliminary or Formal hypothesis exploratory testing testing of new propositions and/or new constructs Data analysis methods Thematic content Content analysis, Statistical inference, analysis coding for exploratory standard statistical evidence of statistics, and analyses constructs preliminary tests Theoretical A suggestive theory, A provisional theory, A supported theory that contribution often an invitation for often one that may add specificity, further work on the integrates new mechanisms, or issue or set of issues previously separate new boundaries to opened up by the bodies of work existing theories study serves as a recent exemplar in the area of team sistent findings within a large body of previous effectiveness. The researchers asked whether work that had identified relationships between the relationship between team structure and facets of team structure (such as interdepen- team performance changes as a function of task dence) and team effectiveness. Because these type and whether intrateam processes mediate inconsistencies suggested the presence of a the structure-performance relationship. The first moderator, the researchers investigated question gave rise to hypotheses about moder- whether differences in task type might ac- ators of the relationship between structural in- count for differences in the relationship be- puts and performance outcomes (notably, when tween team structure and effectiveness. The team task is conceptual, the relationship be- second question addressed an untested as- tween team interdependence and performance sumption in the literature—that inputs such as will be stronger than when team task is behav- team structure affect team processes, which, ioral). These hypotheses were inspired by incon- in turn, explain team effectiveness (McGrath’s 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1161

[1984] input-process-output model)—to test a pre- The contributions to the literature were a more cise specification of team process as a mediator refined specification of factors that enhance between team interdependence and performance. team effectiveness, a clarification of task type Nine hypotheses were developed from these as a moderator, and tests of process mediators. two questions, using constructs specified by The authors suggested that the input-process- prior work. For instance, Stewart and Barrick did output model of teams is more useful in explain- not need to observe teams to determine what ing the relationship between interdependence type of tasks teams performed; instead, they re- and performance when team tasks are concep- viewed the literature and identified a distinc- tual and less useful when the tasks are behav- tion between conceptual and behavioral team ioral. Including task type as a boundary condi- tasks. Similarly, prior work had identified team tion helped refine team effectiveness theory. structural elements and clarified structures that Finally, the study showed that team process me- appeared most related to team effectiveness (in- diates the relationship between team structure terdependence and team self-leadership). Stew- and team effectiveness, providing empirical ev- art and Barrick could then draw on this work to idence for assumptions made in prior theoreti- further specify the conditions under which those cal work. relationships were present. As this example demonstrates, precise mod- The researchers used a cross-sectional de- els, supported by quantitative data, are charac- sign, collecting quantitative survey data from teristic of effective field research in areas of forty-five manufacturing teams in three plants. mature theory. Other examples in team research This methodology was appropriate because the include work by Wageman (2001) and by Chen constructs themselves were well understood. and Klimoski (2003). Table 3 compares these Reliable, valid measures of them existed in the three studies to highlight commonalities, literature, and quantitative data were needed to thereby summarizing basic attributes of field test the hypotheses. Data analyses began with research that achieves methodological fit within statistical tests to ascertain whether data aggre- mature theory related to work teams. gation from the individual to the team level of The examples in Table 3 are not intended to analysis was justified,5 and standard reliability suggest that there is never a benefit in revisiting analyses were conducted to ensure convergent well-trodden theoretical territory with a com- and discriminant validity of the measures. Hy- pletely open mind. In the sections that follow, potheses were then tested with regression anal- we show how researchers can—given certain yses, using a quadratic term to test the hypoth- conditions—develop greater understanding of esized curvilinear relationship—that high levels existing relationships or mechanisms by em- of team performance would be observed at high bracing a qualitative or hybrid approach. Next, and low levels of team interdependence, we turn to exploratory methods appropriate for whereas low levels of team performance would understanding phenomena still in early stages be observed at moderate levels of team interde- of theory development. pendence.6 Data analyses also tested for mod- eration and mediation effects.7 Nascent Theory Research On the other end of the continuum is nascent 5 Two commonly used statistics for determining whether it theory—topics for which little or no previous is appropriate to aggregate individual responses to team-level theory exists. These topics have attracted little data are the intraclass correlation coefficient, or ICC (James, research or formal theorizing to date, or else 1982), and Rwg (James, Demaree, & Wolf, 1984). Others have also used the eta-squared statistic (Georgopolous, 1986). they represent new phenomena in the world 6 Hierarchical regression analyses testing for a curvilin- (e.g., “virtual” or geographically dispersed work ear relationship proceed by regressing the dependent vari- teams). The types of research questions condu- able in step one and then adding the independent-variable- cive to inductive theory development include squared term in step two. A significant increase in the understanding how a process unfolds, develop- amount of variance accounted for by the second equation (i.e., a significant increase in R-squared) supports the exis- tence of a curvilinear relationship. deciding on appropriate statistical tests include Cohen and 7 See Baron and Kenny (1986) for details on conducting Cohen (1983), Keppel (1991), Klein and Kozlowski (2000), Ped- moderator and mediator analyses. Other useful sources for hazur (1982), and Tabachnick and Fidell (1989). 1162 Academy of Management Review October

TABLE 3 Similarities Among Mature Theory Studies

Element Stewart and Barrick (2000) Wageman (2001) Chen and Klimoski (2003)

Nature of the research Testing theory-driven Testing theory-driven Testing theory-driven question hypotheses that the hypotheses about the hypotheses that individual relationship between team contributions of team differences along with structure and team leader coaching and team motivational and performance changes as a design to the effectiveness interpersonal processes function of task type and of self-managed teams predict role performance in that intrateam processes individuals who are new to mediate the structure- project teams engaged in performance relationship knowledge work Primary method of data A survey instrument that An interview protocol for A survey instrument that collection yields quantitative team members, with yields quantitative measures of team process, resultant qualitative data measures of empowerment, task type, and other later systematically coded role performance, and other established constructs in to produce quantitative established constructs in the team effectiveness measures of leader the team effectiveness literature coaching, team design, and literature; created two other established constructs measures of established in the team effectiveness constructs in order to literature assess them appropriately for the given sample Data analysis Statistical tests: team Statistical tests: correlation Statistical tests: team agreement tests (ICCs), and regression agreement tests (ICCs), followed by correlation and followed by hierarchical regression regression and structural equations modeling Contribution A precise model: team A precise model: team design A precise model: self-efficacy process mediates the affects team effectiveness and self-expectations affect effects of team structure on more than team leader team newcomers’ role team effectiveness; task coaching: design and performance through type alters relationship coaching interact to motivational processes, between team structure and positively impact team while prior experience and team effectiveness effectiveness others’ expectations affect team newcomers’ role performance through interpersonal processes

ing insight about a novel or unusual phenome- phenomenon. Interviews, observations, open- non, digging into a paradox, and explaining the ended questions, and longitudinal investiga- occurrence of a surprising event. Interest in tions are methods for learning with an open these problems can arise from unexpected find- mind. Openness to input from the field helps ings in the field, from questioning assumptions ensure that researchers identify and investigate or accepted wisdom promulgated in the extant key variables over the course of the study. Data literature, and from identifying and addressing collection may involve the full immersion of eth- gaps in existing theory. The research questions nography8 or, more simply, exploratory inter- are more open-ended than those used to further views with organizational informants. knowledge in mature areas of the literature. In studies where theory is nascent or immature, researchers do not know what issues may 8 Ethnography is the “written representation of culture (or emerge from the data and so avoid hypothesiz- selected aspects of a culture)” (Van Maanen, 1988: 1) that often reveals not only the inner workings of the culture but ing specific relationships between variables. also the context in which the culture exists, and how the Because little is known, rich, detailed, and culture both affects and is affected by the context (see also evocative data are needed to shed light on the Denzin & Lincoln, 2000). Organizational ethnographies study 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1163

Researchers frequently use a grounded theory tude, and personal control over their work lives. approach to connect these data to existing and The new system relied on “concertive control,” suggestive new theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). where team members worked together to nego- Instead of a sequential process in which hypoth- tiate behavioral norms. Yet little formal theory eses are formed and data are collected and then and research existed to understand how this analyzed, data analyses often alternate and it- process worked. Barker’s question thus focused erate with the data collection process. Content on the nature of concertive control, its develop- analyses help reveal themes and issues that ment over time in a single organization, and recur and need further exploration. Through this whether such a system truly represented a step iterative process, theoretical categories emerge toward greater personal freedom compared to a from evidence and shape further data collection bureaucratic control system. (Eisenhardt, 1989a; Glaser & Strauss, 1967). In This research question was well matched to this analytic journey, both the organization of an in-depth qualitative study of newly formed qualitative data into coherent stories of experi- self-managed work teams in a small manufac- ence and sensemaking processes are essential turing firm. Barker’s immersion in the setting analytic activities. allowed him to gain detailed data on people’s Working within the nascent theory arena re- experiences over time, and thus to develop an quires an intense learning orientation and understanding of how teams cope with the in- adaptability to follow the data in inductively terpersonal challenges of self-management. figuring out what is important. Effective papers Data collection spanned two years, including present a strong, well-written story to make six months of weekly half-day plant visits; infor- sense of compelling field data. The essential mal conversations and interviews with manu- nature of the contribution of this type of work is facturing workers and other employees; and providing a suggestive theory of the phenome- considerable observation of teams working, non that forms a basis for further inquiry. meeting, and interacting informally. These first- To continue our focus on work teams, we hand data were supplemented by company doc- chose Barker’s (1993) paper as an exemplar of fit uments and surveys. Finally, Barker followed in nascent theory. Barker investigated how indi- one team closely for four months. viduals handled the transition from working in a Throughout the fieldwork, Barker engaged in bureaucratic organization to working together an iterative process of analyzing data, writing in self-managed teams in a production environ- up his understanding of the situations and ment without formal control systems. Prior liter- events, and developing new questions to shape ature maintained that organizations had moved subsequent data collection. Because his re- over time from simple control (e.g., direct, au- search question focused on understanding dif- thoritarian) to technological control (e.g., assem- ferences between control practices in the new bly lines) to bureaucratic control (e.g., hierar- self-managed teams and those in the old bu- chies, rules), with each new form of control reaucratic system, Barker elicited control- created to overcome the problems of the earlier related themes that he refined as he collected form. new data. He used “sensitizing concepts” (Jor- Many drawbacks had been identified with bu- gensen, 1989) drawn from previous research on reaucratic control systems, such as endless “red value-based control (Giddens, 1984; Tompkins & tape” that made it difficult to accomplish simple Cheney, 1985) to guide his work. His work illus- tasks. Weber (1958) had called the resulting sys- trates how sensitizing concepts can be a valu- tem of rules, regulations, and rigid structure an able tool in nascent theory research to guide “iron cage” that trapped employees in its imper- questions and help identify key themes. More- sonal grasp. To overcome the stifling nature of over, as Barker reports, reviewing emergent highly developed bureaucracies, firms began ideas with colleagues who lack prior knowledge implementing self-managed teams to allow em- of the firm or its teams is also an important ployees greater discretion, empowerment, lati- source of feedback.9

the cultures of firms or groups within firms using in-depth 9 See Adler and Adler (1987) for a discussion of the value qualitative field research. of feedback from research project outsiders. 1164 Academy of Management Review October

As this study illustrates, when researchers do In addition to Barker’s work, Table 4 summa- not know in advance what the key processes rizes attributes of two more research projects and constructs are, as they could if mature the- that demonstrate methodological fit for nascent ory on their topic were available, they must be theory. The research questions guiding these guided by and open to emergent themes and field studies were exploratory, designed to gen- issues in their data. Iterating between data col- erate new theory or propositions. Gersick (1988) lection and analysis provides the flexibility explored how temporary project groups develop needed to follow up on promising leads and to over time, and Maznevski and Chudoba (2000) abandon lines of inquiry that prove fruitless. explored processes that allow geographically The results of Barker’s application of this in- dispersed industrial technology teams to effec- vestigative process showed how what began tively interact and produce successful results. In as a challenging and engaging process for each case, theory relevant to the topic existed employees shifting to self-managed work but either failed to fit with observed processes teams degenerated into a stressful, fear- (Gersick, 1988) or was not well enough devel- inducing, ever-tighter iron cage. He explained oped to motivate testable hypotheses related to how concertive control in teams could be as or the particular question (Maznevski & Chudoba, more restrictive than a hierarchical bureau- 2000). Including Barker (1993), each investigator cracy. Barker’s process description, told in a chose to collect qualitative data, through open- compelling narrative form, shed new theoreti- ended interview questions, observations of cal light on a previously obscure construct. meetings, and review of archival qualitative

TABLE 4 Similarities Among Nascent Theory Studies

Maznevski and Chudoba Element Gersick (1988) Barker (1993) (2000)

Nature of the research Exploring how short-term Exploring how the control Exploring factors and question project groups develop over systems of self-managed processes that allow global time and how teams emerge, are virtual teams to operate developmental shifts in experienced by team effectively groups are triggered members, and differ from bureaucratic control systems Primary method of Observation of all group Observation, conversations, Observation of meetings, data collection meetings, supplemented by and in-depth interviews semi-structured and interviews of half the study that yielded qualitative unstructured interviews, sample, that yielded data about team communication logs, qualitative data about group interactions and control questionnaires, and access task strategies, actions, system development; to company documentation changes, and task longitudinal data collection that yielded qualitative completion; longitudinal (over two years) data about team interaction data collection (ranging from methods, timing, and seven days to six months) communication content; longitudinal data collection (twenty-one months) Data analysis Iterative, exploratory content Iterative, exploratory content Iterative, exploratory content analysis analysis analysis Contribution An importation of a new A new construct—concertive A suggestive model of how construct—punctuated control—and a suggestive virtual teams manage equilibrium—and a model of how teams move social interactions and a suggestive model of the from values to norms to new emphasis on the temporary project group life rules that become binding, rhythmic pacing of team cycle limiting, and invisible member encounters over time to create effective outcomes 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1165 data. Almost all data were collected longitudi- propositions. A single study may describe pat- nally, with researchers spending anywhere from terns that suggest both variance theories (an seven days with a single group (Gersick, 1988) to increase in X leads to an increase in Y) and over two years in the field (Barker, 1993). process theories (how a phenomenon works, how These papers introduced or elaborated con- a process unfolds), although effective papers structs—punctuated equilibrium, concertive tend to emphasize one over the other (Mohr, control, and temporal rhythms—that could be 1982). Just as quantitative methods are appropri- further developed in subsequent studies. All ate for mature theory and qualitative methods presented process models supported by repeat- for nascent theory, intermediate theory is well ing patterns across data sources (or cases), high- served by a blend of both. This blend works to lighting similarities of procedural stages or support provisional theoretical models. The phases across units. Instead of reasonably con- combination of qualitative data to help elabo- clusive results, each study provided suggestive rate a phenomenon and quantitative data to theoretical insights to inform and inspire future provide preliminary tests of relationships can research on an interesting phenomenon. promote both insight and rigor—when appropri- ately applied (e.g., Jick, 1979; Yauch & Steudel, 2003). At the same time, integrating qualitative Intermediate Theory Research and quantitative data effectively can be difficult Intermediate theory research draws from prior (e.g., Greene et al., 1989), and there is a risk of work—often from separate bodies of litera- losing the strengths of either approach on its ture—to propose new constructs and/or provi- own. sional theoretical relationships. The resulting Examples of research achieving methodolog- papers may present promising new measures, ical fit within intermediate theory are growing along with data consistent with the provisional in number, although there are fewer than the theory presented. Such studies frequently inte- two more familiar categories. To continue our grate qualitative and quantitative data to help focus on teams, we use Edmondson (1999) to establish the external and construct validity of illustrate this category. This field study intro- new measures through triangulation (Jick, 1979). duced a new construct, team psychological Careful analysis of both qualitative and quan- safety, and investigated its effect on team learn- titative data increases confidence that the re- ing and performance. The ideas were grounded searchers’ explanations of the phenomena are in two reasonably mature but separate theoret- more plausible than alternative interpretations. ical perspectives—team effectiveness and orga- One trigger for developing intermediate the- nizational learning—and included eight hypoth- ory is the desire to reinvestigate a theory or eses about factors that enhance or inhibit team construct that sits within a mature stream of learning and performance. The design inte- research in order to challenge or modify prior grated qualitative and quantitative data, pro- work. For example, Edmondson (1999) married viding an explicit rationale for doing so: insights from organizational learning research Most organizational learning research has relied (tacit beliefs impede learning) with theory on on qualitative studies that provide rich detail team effectiveness (structural differences across about cognitive and interpersonal processes but teams explain performance) to propose a provi- do not allow explicit hypothesis testing....Many sional explanatory model of team learning that team studies, on the other hand, utilize large samples and quantitative data but have not ex- focused on how differences in interpersonal cli- amined antecedents and consequences of learn- mate across teams affected both team learning ing behavior. . . . I propose that, to understand and performance. learning behavior in teams, team structures and Research questions conducive to developing shared beliefs must be investigated jointly, using intermediate theory include initial tests of hy- both quantitative and qualitative methods (Ed- mondson, 1999: 351). potheses enabled by prior theory (e.g., Edmond- son, 1999) and focused exploration that gener- Data were collected in a company where ates theoretical propositions as output (e.g., teamwork and collective learning were salient Eisenhardt, 1989b). The latter may include very and varied across teams. Variance was essen- preliminary quantitative analysis to reinforce tial for addressing the research question of the logic underlying the qualitatively induced whether psychological safety predicted team 1166 Academy of Management Review October performance; the salience of teams and learning the study broaden our understanding of team for the company was helpful in ensuring that effectiveness from a structural emphasis to in- informants took the topic seriously and provided clude interpersonal factors such as team psy- careful, informed reports of their experiences. chological safety. The study involved three stages, starting with Other studies illustrating fit in intermediate observations and interviews with eight teams to theory include Eisenhardt (1989b) and Allmen- develop new survey measures to supplement dinger and Hackman (1996), as shown in Table 5 existing team measures and to further the re- to summarize basic attributes of methodological searcher’s understanding of both psychological fit in this category. Blending qualitative and safety and team learning processes in a busi- quantitative methods occurs in two basic ways ness setting. in these studies. One approach supplements In the second phase a team survey10 was dis- qualitative work with quantitative data, allow- tributed to 496 members of 53 teams in the firm. ing researchers to discern unexpected relation- An additional survey was given to two or three ships, to check their interpretation of qualitative internal customers of each team’s work to pro- data, and to strengthen their confidence in qual- vide data on the team’s learning behavior and itatively based conclusions when the two types performance. To promote confidence in the of data converge (e.g., Eisenhardt, 1989b). The quantitative measures, additional data from other approach supplements quantitative tests other sources were collected. For example, a with qualitative data that enable a fuller expla- research assistant, blind to the study’s hypoth- nation of statistical relationships between vari- eses, collected additional structured interview ables, ensuring in particular that the proposed data from managers familiar with one or more of theory constitutes a valid analysis of the phe- the teams to generate independent quantitative nomenon rather than artifacts of measurement. measures of four team design variables11 so as This approach also provides a deeper under- to mitigate common method bias. Last, the study standing of and rationale for a proposed new used an extreme-case-comparison technique, construct (e.g., Edmondson, 1999). In summary, contrasting high- and low-learning teams, to un- hybrid strategies allow researchers to test asso- derstand how they differed and how these dif- ciations between variables with quantitative ferences were related to team performance. data and to explain and illuminate novel con- Standard statistical analyses were used to an- structs and relationships with qualitative data alyze the quantitative data,12 and the results (Yauch & Steudel, 2003). generally supported the hypotheses. The find- Intermediate theory research sheds light on ings were enriched by supplemental qualitative how theory in management moves from the nas- data to help explain the quantitative findings— cent stage toward maturity. Scholars have long shedding light on how those teams worked to- advocated cycling between inductive theory cre- gether. These comparisons allowed a more fine- ation processes and deductive theory-testing grained analysis of what was occurring “behind strategies to produce and develop useful theory the numbers” within the teams. The results of (e.g., Cialdini, 1980; Fine & Elsbach, 2000; Weick, 1979). As our examples illustrate, theory in or- ganizational research rarely marches steadily 10 Analyses of qualitative data in Phase I included exam- forward from nascent to mature, instead spawn- ining fieldnotes and interview transcripts to identify vari- ing tangent studies that both build and diverge. ables of interest and to assess differences between teams on Although some studies build on prior theory to those variables, as well as to shape the development of new survey measures through empathic design (Alderfer & elaborate and specify models more precisely Brown, 1972). (e.g., Stewart & Barrick, 2000), others use prior 11 The four team design variables were the extent to work to inspire investigations in a brand new which a clear goal was present, the extent to which the direction (e.g., Barker, 1993). Intermediate theory team’s task was interdependent, the extent to which the describes a zone in which enough is known to team composition was appropriate, and the amount of con- suggest formal hypotheses, but not enough is text support each team received. known to do so with numbers alone or at a safe 12 These analyses included tests of internal consistency reliability, discriminant validity (e.g., Campbell & Fiske, distance from the phenomenon (e.g., Edmond- 1959), group-level variables (Kenny & LaVoie, 1985), regres- son, 1999). In summary, intermediate theory sion analyses, and GLM analyses. studies propose provisional models that ad- 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1167

TABLE 5 Similarities Among Intermediate Theory Studies

Allmendinger and Hackman Element Eisenhardt (1989b) (1996) Edmondson (1999)

Nature of the research Generating testable research Assessing orchestra Preliminary tests of theory- question propositions about how characteristics under driven hypotheses about different variables were contrasting conditions of how team structure and related to strategic decision contextual change; team beliefs affect team speed; exploring how firms exploring factors that learning and performance; make fast decisions distinguished successfully exploring how effectively adapting groups from others psychological safety and learning behavior in teams are related Primary method of An interview protocol with Archival and interview data An interview protocol that data collection direct observations that that yielded qualitative data yielded qualitative data, yielded qualitative data about orchestras’ followed by the creation of about decision making in environmental context and an empathically developed fast-paced environments; histories; group surveys questionnaire used to also archival data and with established constructs collect quantitative data industry reports; quantitative yielding quantitative data, for main analyses, data about firm performance along with interviews and supplemented by new observations, to assess qualitative data to explain relationships among quantitative relationships variables in this unusual group context Data analysis Content analysis of qualitative Content analysis of Content analysis of data; pair-wise comparisons qualitative data; statistical qualitative data for input of stories between cases; analyses to assess to questionnaire quantitative analyses differences in theoretically development; statistical mentioned as supportive of relevant variables across analyses as initial tests; qualitative data orchestra types and contexts qualitative analysis for deeper understanding Contribution Iteratively developed research Provisional contingency New construct incorporated propositions and a framework of when and why into a provisional model provisional model of how previously established with roots in a mature firms make fast decisions theoretical models are theoretical model, and new useful for understanding integration of theoretical how groups respond to perspectives environmental change

dress both variance- and process-oriented re- tinuum, we drew from a range of articles pro- search questions. Using both qualitative and duced from original data collected in real orga- quantitative data, these studies can identify key nizations. We chose studies that concentrated process variables, introduce new constructs, re- on teams to enable focused comparisons, with- conceptualize explanatory frameworks, and out varying too many factors at once. In sum- identify new relationships among variables. mary, mature theory spawns precise, quantita- tive research designs, maturing or intermediate theory benefits from a mix of quantitative and Mean Tendencies and Off-Diagonal qualitative data to accomplish its dual aims, Opportunities and nascent theory involves exploring phenom- Above we presented a pattern in which the ena through qualitative data. These archetypal maturity of theory and research in a given nar- categories of organizational field research can row area strongly influences the design of field be positioned along the diagonal in Figure 1. research conducted in that area. To show how Congruence among the state of prior theory, methods vary in form across a theoretical con- the research question, and the research design 1168 Academy of Management Review October

FIGURE 1 and examining an area where theory no longer Methodological Fit As a Mean Tendency could be categorized as mature. Perlow’s (1999) ethnographic investigation of how people use their time at work provides an- other illustration of this approach. Contemplat- ing a relatively mature body of research on work/life balance and time management, Per- low saw unanswered questions about people’s day-to-day experience of time constraints. She set out to understand how—and why—people really used their time at work, as well as whether their time usage patterns were effective for both themselves and their workgroups. Her qualitative study of seventeen engineers in a software development group in a Fortune 500 company revealed patterns of work interruption help a new field study make a compelling new that greatly limited individual and group pro- contribution to the literature. As illustrated in ductivity, increasing the engineers’ work hours. the preceding pages and tables, the nature of The second phase of the study included a small this contribution varies as research travels experiment imposing “quiet time” to ameliorate along the diagonal, from a suggestive new the- the counterproductive pattern, improving pro- ory that invites further research to a provisional, ductivity briefly until old habits prevailed after partially supported theory that may introduce the researcher’s departure. From these findings, new constructs or integrate previously disparate Perlow (1999) suggested a need for a “sociology bodies of literature to a precise theory that adds of time” to recognize the interdependence of so- new specificity to the existing theoretical mod- cial and temporal contexts at work. In sum, she els in a given body of literature. started with a more mature area of research but This pattern of archetypes cleanly situated diverged from there to explore a key phenome- along the diagonal represents a mean tendency non—interactions among individuals’ time in effective field research, but by no means does management—to suggest new theory to inspire it comprise a rigid rule. First, the oval shape of and inform future discussions in this area. the diagonal line is intended to suggest leeway These two examples can be located conceptu- in research design. For instance, as noted ally at the intersection of initially mature theory above, intermediate theory may draw primarily and qualitative data marked by B in Figure 1. In from qualitative data, with minimal quantita- contrast, we consider the intersection of nascent tive data in the background, or it may rely theory and quantitative data, marked by A in extensively on quantitative data, with supple- Figure 1, an approach that is more difficult to mentary qualitative data to shed light on mech- justify. For instance, a strategy of collecting ex- anisms. Second, off-diagonal opportunities exist tensive quantitative data to explore for statisti- when—with awareness of the literature on a cal associations runs the risk of finding signifi- particular topic—a study’s focus is reframed cance by chance, merely because of the large from the broad to the narrow. In his study of number of potential relationships (Rosenthal & self-managed teams, for example, Barker (1993) Rosnow, 1975). Moreover, because data collec- did not ask what makes self-managed teams tion in organizational field research is expen- effective but, rather, how team members create sive and often moderately intrusive, it should be and cope with the social pressures of self- collected with care for a deliberate purpose. The management. Thus, despite the maturity of re- space below the diagonal in Figure 1, therefore, search on self-managed work teams, Barker may present creative opportunities for theoreti- used qualitative data to suggest compelling cal contributions, whereas work in the space new theory with evocative case descriptions of above is not likely to produce compelling field real work teams. Methodological fit in this ex- research. ample was created in an initially off-diagonal Finally, sometimes an initial diagnosis of location by framing the study’s focus narrowly study type must be revised because of unex- 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1169 pected findings. For example, a research project tive control in self-managed teams). More com- might start in the upper right-hand corner and monly, however, researchers who stray from the migrate down to intermediate status after a sur- diagonal are unaware of doing so—in part ow- prising quantitative finding seems worth inves- ing to the complexity of field data—and may run tigating further. Such a journey was described into a small number of predictable problems. in an initially mature theory study of nursing team effectiveness using medical error rates as Problems Created by Poor Fit a dependent variable (Edmondson, 1996). Star- tled to discover that team effectiveness and For each of the three levels of prior work ar- team leader coaching were correlated with ticulated above, we suggest that using either of higher, not lower, detected error rates, the re- the alternative (off-diagonal) methodologies cre- searcher suspected that differential reporting ates problems that diminish the effectiveness of climates accounted for the unexpected result. To the research products. Table 6 summarizes the explore this possibility, a research assistant, six problems and their three essential outcomes. blind to the quantitative data and to the new Two types of poor fit in areas of mature theory. hypothesis, explored how each team worked as When prior work related to a research question a social system. This additional qualitative data (e.g., what explains team effectiveness?) has provided tentative support for interpersonal cli- produced some reasonably robust findings, a mate as a hidden variable accounting for the study that relies on purely qualitative data risks unexpected result, reclassifying the study as a rediscovering known factors in its “new” theo- hybrid design working within intermediate the- ry—the problem of reinventing the wheel. Pour- ory. ing through qualitative data to find out what distinguishes, for example, two high-performing from two low-performing teams, a researcher is DISCUSSION likely to identify such factors as goal clarity, We argue that methodological fit promotes group process, or the adequacy of team compo- the development of rigorous and compelling sition or resources (e.g., Hackman, 1987). In short, field research. We delineate archetypes of meth- systematically analyzed qualitative data will odological fit in field research, in which three tend to uncover similar factors in response to levels of prior work (nascent, mature, and inter- similar questions. Given the time invested in the mediate) correspond to three methodological analytic process and the other sunk costs in the approaches (qualitative, quantitative, and hy- study, a researcher may then feel pressure to brid). Our framework is not intended as an in- overstate the novelty or implications of his or flexible set of rules but, rather, as a clarifying her findings. An alternative in this situation heuristic that articulates tacit principles embed- would be to analyze the data to investigate a ded in effective field research and that builds on different question (e.g., how team members cope methodological rules and guidelines covered with the pressures of self-management and peer elsewhere (e.g., Bouchard, 1976; Lee et al, 1999; control; Barker, 1993). McGrath, 1964). In a second type of poor fit, a study informed Some problems of poor fit can be solved by by a mature body of literature that integrates reframing a paper or reanalyzing qualitative qualitative and quantitative research in a sin- data; others may require new data or a fresh gle paper faces the problem of the uneven status start. Our framework—with both on- and off- of evidence. First, juxtaposing the interpretive diagonal opportunities—is intended to help re- nature of qualitative analysis with statistical searchers (and reviewers) ascertain which cases tests highlights the different functions of the two fall into the former category, as well as when data types. Specifically, qualitative data illus- and how to shape and reshape a research trate and may reveal processes, but they do not project and its outputs in such a way that the test or prove as well as quantitative data. Sec- conclusions are compelling. Off-diagonal oppor- ond, the combination will lengthen a research tunities exist when a researcher intentionally paper without increasing the strength of its con- opens a new area of focused inquiry within a clusions. If hypotheses are anchored in the lit- broadly familiar topic, thereby pursuing a new erature and are well argued, quantitative mea- topic related to an old phenomenon (e.g., concer- sures and tests should provide powerful and 1170 Academy of Management Review October

TABLE 6 Problems Encountered When Methodological Fit Is Low

Prior Work on Research Data Collection Question and Analysis Problems Encountered Outcome

Mature: Extensive literature, Qualitative only Reinventing the wheel: Study Research fails to build complete with constructs and findings risk being obvious or effectively on prior work to previously tested measures well-known advance knowledge about Hybrid Uneven status of evidence: the topic Paper is lengthened but not strengthened by using qualitative data as evidence Intermediate: One or more Quantitative Uneven status of empirical Results are less convincing, streams of relevant research, only measures: New constructs and reducing potential offering some but not all measures lack reliability and contribution to the literature constructs and measures external validity and suffer in and influence on others’ needed comparison to existing understanding of the topic measures Qualitative only Lost opportunity: Insufficient provisional support for a new theory lessens paper’s contribution Nascent: Little or no prior work Qualitative only Fishing expeditions: Results Research falls too far outside on the constructs and vulnerable to finding guidelines for statistical processes under significant associations inference to convince others investigation among novel constructs and of its merits measures by chance Hybrid Quantitative measures with uncertain relationship to phenomena: Emergent constructs may suggest new measures for subsequent research, but statistical tests using same data that suggested the constructs are problematic sufficient support for the ideas. In some cases, sum, long qualitative reports from the field are incorporating one or more stories may be useful unlikely to strengthen research projects that to familiarize readers with an unusual context present and test hypotheses relating known con- or to illustrate a finding, but when presented as structs. formal evidence, they usually fall short.13 In Fortunately, this problem has a simple solu- tion; the study should rely on the quantitative data as evidence and should use only as much 13 To better understand why this is usually the case, recall qualitative data as necessary to introduce or the three basic designs noted above for combining qualita- tive and quantitative data to develop and support a new theory: (1) explore first, through interviews and observations that guide the development of subsequent quantitative sam- or supporting the theory. In the second case (follow-up qual- ples and measures; (2) collect follow-up qualitative data to itative data), stories may illustrate how a theory works, but better understand—usually surprising—quantitative find- they cannot provide evidence of a relationship between con- ings; or (3) collect both types of data at the same time, to structs because the qualitative data are a biased sample, triangulate. When researchers can articulate good hypothe- collected by a biased observer. In the third case (simultane- ses from prior research and new logic, and can support these ity), the mix works well to triangulate across sources for new with quantitative analyses, all three hybrid approaches measures, but for known measures, triangulation is unnec- present risks. In the first case, preliminary field interviews essary. All three cases thus share the problem that the qual- or observations may help in the wording of survey items but itative data are redundant and may undermine the clarity of generally would not be needed to discern or develop new the quantitative analyses if presented as results rather than constructs and, thus, would not play a key role in suggesting as background or illustrative material. 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1171 discuss the research context. To illustrate such a inary ideas about emergent constructs, and the journey, the authors of a mature theory paper analyses, which pertain to the measures rather arguing that tacit knowledge increases the het- than to the phenomena themselves, do not aid erogeneity of learning curves across teams (Ed- the researcher in truly learning from the field mondson, Winslow, Bohmer, & Pisano, 2003) setting. Others (e.g., Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994) originally presented the paper at the Academy have illuminated the issues of measurement va- of Management annual meeting and then sub- lidity and reliability thoroughly; here we simply mitted it to Decision Sciences using a blend of note that it is difficult to create measures of quantitative and qualitative analyses as evi- acceptable external validity or reliability when dence. The paper tested theory-driven hypothe- phenomena are poorly understood. ses—that knowledge type moderates the rela- Another problem with using quantitative tionship between experience and rate of measures with nascent theory is that investiga- learning in surgical teams and that team stabil- tors, even with the best of intentions, are ity promotes team efficiency. To supplement tempted to go on fishing expeditions. Any statis- quantitative measures of established constructs tically significant relationships among vari- in the team and knowledge literature, the au- ables that emerge by chance are likely to be thors also presented qualitative interview data. overinterpreted as evidence to support an emer- Reviewers, confused by the inclusion of the gent theory. Further, given the measurement is- qualitative data, pushed back. Initially attribut- sue outlined above, it is difficult to interpret the ing this response to closed-mindedness, the au- true meaning of observed statistical relation- thors reluctantly removed the qualitative data ships or counts. Researchers need to go through from the findings, leaving only an anecdote or the process of building new ideas iteratively, two in the discussion to convey the nature of the with extensive exposure to the phenomenon and teams’ learning challenge. Despite the authors’ an open mind, before becoming captivated by reluctance, the clarity of the paper was greatly potentially chance associations. improved by the reviewers’ feedback, because Similarly, a hybrid approach also suffers from prior work on tacit knowledge and learning the uncertain status of (quantitative) measures curves was sufficiently mature that stories to that are employed before sufficient exploration elucidate mechanisms were unnecessary. The of a new area has pinned down factors to mea- authors’ initial unflattering attributions about sure. Quantitative measures indicate a priori the reviewers’ judgment might have been theoretical commitments that partially close avoided had the reviewers used the language of down options, inhibiting the process of explor- methodological fit to convey why the qualitative ing a new territory (Van Maanen, 1988). Yet even data did not strengthen support for the paper’s if the qualitative and quantitative data are stag- conclusions. gered in phases, the initial exploratory qualita- The challenge lies in realizing when qualita- tive phase in a nascent area of research is un- tive data—while complex, interesting, and sub- likely to yield more than one new variable ready tle—does not serve an evidentiary function, for formal tests—even preliminary ones—in the given the state of knowledge at the time. In same study. Statistical tests, thus, are unlikely areas of mature theory, scholars thus encounter to be as informative as they may seem to the problems when qualitative data are presented researchers. Quantitative tests take on a certain as evidence, and these problems lessen the po- illusion of accuracy that may mislead in this tential contribution of their work, as noted in context. For example, some years ago, the first Table 6. In short, mature theory is advanced author submitted a paper attempting to inte- with compelling quantitative studies. grate qualitative and quantitative data to ex- Two types of poor fit in areas of nascent the- plain how teams navigate the challenge of ory. When little or no prior work related to a learning a new technology. The quantitative research question exists, researchers face prob- measures were not only technically deficient lems when they seek to collect purely quantita- (new and unvalidated) but also at odds with the tive data. First, it almost certainly will be the espoused goal of exploring team processes. case that the quantitative measures will have Eliminating the quantitative analyses strength- an ambiguous relationship to the phenomena ened the paper considerably, allowing an ap- under study. The measures may capture prelim- propriate focus on understanding the team 1172 Academy of Management Review October learning process (Edmondson, Bohmer, & mondson, 1999), qualitative evidence of differ- Pisano, 2001). ences across teams in interpersonal climate When addressing a novel question, research- was important for establishing the external va- ers collect—as they should—qualitative data lidity of the construct, as well as for showing a opportunistically such that they are free to clear relationship between the construct and the chase new insights that emerge in an interview new measure. Without such data, the new sur- or observation. The sample is, by design, path vey measure would lack support for its implicit dependent. For instance, subsequent interview claim that it captured a distinct new construct questions (or interviewees) are determined iter- and would be more vulnerable to concerns atively as interesting ideas emerge in the pro- about common method bias. Therefore, research cess. Data analysis and data collection overlap, in an area of intermediate theory that combines as noted above. This approach allows new in- new and established measures without support- sight and theory to take shape, but it precludes ing qualitative data is likely to suffer from the the systematic sampling and consistent use of uneven status of empirical measures. measures required for meaningful statistical in- In contrast, a purely qualitative study in an ference—even with the most lenient standards. intermediate theory area encounters the prob- Thus, in nascent areas the inclusion of qualita- lem of lost opportunity for preliminary statistical tive data in a hybrid design does not overcome support for its hypotheses. Although intermedi- the problems associated with the use of quanti- ate theory hypotheses may suffer in comparison tative data. to hypotheses relating well-established con- Both of these fit problems stem, in part, from structs, when clearly argued, they merit initial the likely failure of quantitative measures and tests. By not taking advantage of this opportu- analyses used in a nascent area to conform suf- nity, research products are likely to be less com- ficiently to basic assumptions of statistical in- pelling than otherwise. ference. Although organizational researchers tolerate deviations from ideal samples and ac- cept imperfect measures in their quantitative Complementing Prior Work on Organizational field studies, designs that fall completely out- Research Methods side the guidelines for normal science—be- cause they have sampled in a snowballing man- For organizational researchers, a highly de- ner and/or deliberately used inconsistent veloped body of work prescribes rules and questions and techniques to collect data— guidelines for how to collect and analyze data distort the use of these powerful tools. As argued (e.g., Cohen & Cohen, 1983; Miles & Huberman, above, when little is known about a research 1994; Pedhazur, 1982; Rosenthal & Rosnow, topic or question, initial steps must be taken to 1975; Tabachnick & Fidell, 1989). In a growing explore and uncover new possibilities before body of work, researchers expound the legiti- useful quantitative measures can be informa- macy of qualitative research as a means of tive. Subsequent studies, building on an accu- expanding organizational knowledge (e.g., mulation of early qualitative work, are better Eisenhardt, 1989b; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Lee able to conduct preliminary statistical tests of et al., 1999; Miles & Huberman, 1994), and emergent theoretical ideas. many advocates view qualitative methodol- Two types of poor fit in areas of intermediate ogy as particularly, if not exclusively, valu- theory. Finally, when prior work related to a able (Morgan & Smircich, 1980). Others debate research question falls between nascent and the appropriateness of combining qualitative mature, such as when a new construct appears and quantitative methods in a single study likely to explain an outcome of interest, research (see both Sale et al., 2002, and Yauch & Steu- designs that use either exclusively quantitative del, 2003, for reviews). While the importance of or qualitative data both encounter problems. In matching methods to questions has been rec- the former case, new measures introduced to ognized (Bouchard, 1976; Campbell et al., 1982; capture new constructs lack credibility when Lee et al., 1999; McGrath, 1964), guidelines used without qualitative illustration and trian- have not been articulated to help researchers gulation. For example, when the construct of make choices among the variety of potential team psychological safety was introduced (Ed- sources of data they face in the field—only 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1173 some of which provide a good fit with their The Fitting Process research questions. As others have noted (e.g., Fine & Elsbach, To this prior work we add a framework for 2000), iterating between inductive theory devel- promoting methodological fit in field research, opment and deductive theory testing advances with a particular emphasis on the conditions our understanding of organizational phenom- under which hybrid designs are most effective. ena. This advance is rarely a sanitized linear Our goal is to help researchers think through progression that starts with a literature review, their options more systematically and explicitly moves on to the research question, data collec- so as to produce high-quality field research that tion, and analysis, and ends seamlessly with advances theory and practice. We also propose publication, as illustrated in Figure 2. We con- that our framework may help reviewers and ed- ceptualize the process of field research as a itors assess manuscripts reporting on field re- journey that may involve almost as many steps search. We suspect that few are immune to the backward as forward. More specifically, we ar- need for this help. gue that methodological fit is achieved through For instance, while revising this manuscript, a learning process. we encountered repeated real-life reminders Although our first-hand knowledge is limited of how challenging it can be to achieve meth- to just a few of the studies described in this odological fit in field research. First, a gradu- article, from these we conclude that creating fit ate student engaged in a qualitative disserta- is an iterative process that centrally involves tion in a nascent area gave a talk that feedback and modification at many stages. We presented a set of induced variables, com- model the fitting process as a funnel, drawing pared via t-tests, to support new theory. Se- (not incidentally) from the product development duced by the apparent certainty of quantita- literature (Wheelwright & Clark, 1992). The fun- tive data, the young researcher saw the nel symbolizes the relatively greater latitude statistical tests as more powerful than the and choice early in a project, which progres- careful thematic analyses that produced the sively narrow as time goes on. Before a single new variables. Perhaps this was inexperience piece of data is collected, the options are almost speaking. Yet, shortly thereafter, a mid-career unlimited. At a certain point, feedback contrib- researcher, with quantitative expertise, re- utes only to minor refinements in output—the quested feedback on a beautifully written slate is no longer blank. Figure 3 depicts this qualitative paper—addressing a mature the- model. ory question. Enthusiastic about the richness The fitting process necessarily starts—or in of verbatim data, the author failed to recog- some cases restarts—with some level of nize that the gist of the paper’s findings repli- awareness of the state of prior work in an area of interest. Ideally, a researcher develops a cated much that was already known in the reasonably good understanding of major relevant literature. Third, an even more ac- streams of work in one or more bodies of re- complished scholar reported plans to collect search literature and then begins to shape a survey data—triggered by a field site’s desire research question. This question substantially to be surveyed—in a highly unusual context narrows down the possibilities for the re- about which little was known. search design. In this way a study design (set-

FIGURE 2 Traditional Implicit View of the Field Research Process 1174 Academy of Management Review October

FIGURE 3 Field Research As an Iterative, Cyclic Learning Journey

ting, type of data, sample, analyses) follows experiences during data collection may suggest logically from and addresses issues of interest that the research design be modified. For in- to the researcher as well as to others in the stance, work that focuses on validating a new field who care about the same topics. In short, construct and understanding how it functions (a a researcher is agreeing to engage in a dia- process orientation) is likely to be conducted logue—albeit a slow and stilted one—with with qualitative methods. During the course of peers who care about related issues and ques- the investigation (e.g., through interviews or ob- tions. This dialogue transpires primarily servations), information may arise that suggests through papers, the written products of our that a new construct is related to other, more research. established variables of interest (e.g., perfor- As Figure 3 conveys, options decrease as mance) in ways that appear predictable. This decisions are made. Because data collection may lead a researcher to create a measure of the narrows the scope of subsequent decisions, it new construct and to use established measures is important to spend sufficient time iterating of other relevant constructs to collect quantita- within the first three stages in the process, as tive data in order to tentatively investigate vari- indicated by the wider cyclical arrows in the ance-based hypotheses. model. As a research question becomes more In the messy reality of field research, data focused, initial research design ideas emerge collection opportunities may emerge before the and are refined and elaborated. Design choices broadly involve the type of data to be researcher has a clear idea about how the data collected and the methods used to collect the will be used. At other times original research data (e.g., observation, interviews, surveys). designs may be disrupted by layoffs or other As a researcher strives to resolve the tension environmental changes beyond the investiga- between the ideal version of his or her project tor’s control. In such situations the researcher and one that is feasible and viable, the design must iterate back up the funnel in Figure 3, evolves. Considering how to operationalize, returning perhaps to the literature for direction, explore, or test different research questions or deciding to collect new data of a different often leads to the realization that those ques- nature to deepen understanding of a different tions or hypotheses need to be sharpened, re- phenomenon (e.g., see Meyer, 1982, for a superb vised, or scrapped. example of researcher flexibility). Just as consideration of design choices may Once data are collected, an effective re- result in reformulation of research questions, searcher employs analytic techniques that 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1175 match the nature and amount of data.14 The critical feedback is an essential asset of the process of writing up the results of the analy- field researcher seeking methodological fit. ses may trigger additional questions for the researcher, or suggest investigating alterna- Educating the New Field Researcher tive explanations during data analysis. Fi- nally, as anyone who has submitted a manu- One implication of an emphasis on method- script for publication knows, the researcher ological fit in field research is that researchers can expect additional cycles of learning prior who wish to explore different types of questions to publication. Even rejected manuscripts ar- in their careers must be methodologically ver- rive with comments and suggestions from re- satile. New field researchers need exposure to viewers that can inform revision of the manu- both quantitative and qualitative techniques, script in preparation for submission to another and they need to develop specific skills as well journal. It is not uncommon for reviewers to as general awareness of when each is most ap- suggest that authors return to the literature to propriate. In this way the researcher will gain a further develop their hypotheses or research larger toolbox with which to work, expanding questions from prior theory or to better inform the types of research questions he or she can the discussion of their results. By framing answer effectively, and thereby also benefiting these suggestions and recommendations as the field. Although not every researcher will be- inputs in a learning process, rather than as come a renaissance methodologist with deep devastating criticism, researchers improve the expertise and skill in all research techniques, a quality of their research. realistic goal is to provide students with enough The journey varies in certain predictable awareness of multiple methods to become effec- ways across the continuum. In more mature ar- tive collaborators with others whose deep skills eas, intensive conceptualization occurs early in in particular methodologies complement their the process while the literature is being di- own skills and preferences. gested, and compelling hypotheses and models A second implication of these ideas for meth- are developed. Before collecting extensive odological education is the need to explicitly quantitative data, the researcher wants to be teach the notion of methodological fit. We offer confident that the key hypotheses are sensible several suggestions for how to do this. First, new and likely to be supported. This requires exten- field researchers can be taught methodological sive conceptual work to develop the ideas care- fit by deconstructing exemplars, similar to our fully, obtaining considerable feedback from oth- approach in this paper. A set of exemplars can ers, and refining the predictions before data be put together based on topic (e.g., teams) or collection. Once hundreds of surveys are sent method (e.g., hybrid approach) to help students out, for instance, the stakes are quite high and identify a range of issues and trade-offs that the data irreversible. In contrast, in the nascent unfold in real research projects. Students can stage, the intensive conceptualization work oc- identify strengths and weaknesses of decisions curs later in a project, during and after data or trade-offs they discern, suggest changes that collection, through an inductive process of seek- might have improved the work, and appreciate ing patterns to explain the data. More data can the ways that the researchers’ choices were ef- be collected to dig into anomalies encountered. fective and mutually reinforcing. Thus, at both extremes, effective research Second, students can be invited to create re- projects require learning cycles, but the timing search proposals that include preliminary ideas of intense theoretical development varies. For about each of the elements of field research all field research endeavors, however, a learn- shown in Table 1, to be evaluated by professors ing-oriented mindset that values and welcomes and peers. In this way students can obtain feed- back on the degree of logical consistency among the proposed elements. Because it is easier to 14 As previously mentioned, many sources for data anal- detect others’ fit gaps than one’s own, this feed- ysis techniques can be recommended; for example, we refer back is invaluable. Such research proposals in- the interested reader to Miles and Huberman (1994) for infor- mation on the analysis of qualitative data and to Tabach- volve students in their areas of interest, while nick and Fidell (1989) for information on conducting multi- allowing them to view and shape the process of variate analyses of quantitative data. developing a research project. This learning 1176 Academy of Management Review October process is likely to require a climate of psycho- data sources in developing the framework were logical safety to help students take the interper- drawn from research in micro- and meso-orga- sonal risks of sharing early efforts at designing nizational behavior focused on teams, because research. Group dialogue is particularly useful this is the area we know best—the literature we when it allows students to think through ideas read most often, the papers we review, and the together, raise questions, help each other eval- research we conduct. Although this helped nar- uate their own decisions in terms of method- row the scope of inquiry into a manageable ological fit, and identify potential pitfalls. At- body of data, it is possible that the framework tention to methodological fit complements presented here would need to be modified for strategies others have suggested for devising other areas of management research. significant and satisfying research questions Second, a key limitation on the production of (Campbell et al., 1982). methodological fit is the versatility of the re- Third, involving students in the planning and searcher. The aim of this paper is to explicitly execution phases of professors’ research is an- discuss methodological fit to help researchers other way to enhance their access to the reason- make more informed decisions as they work ing, decisions, and trade-offs early on and through the iterative, nonlinear process of con- throughout the research process. This close in- ducting field research. Yet we recognize that volvement demands time and patience on the many, if not most, management scholars have part of professors, which pays off in effective strong preferences for methods they feel com- experiential learning through apprenticeship. fortable with. As such, a contingency approach Fourth, explicit thought experiments can help may not always seem desirable or feasible. students think through issues of methodological When research questions call for the flexibility fit in field research. For instance, a professor of a contingency approach, scholars may need might begin by posing a research question and to collaborate with those whose skills and pref- asking his or her students to determine how the erences are different from and complementary question should be refined to become action- to their own. able. From there, students can be asked to iden- Third, our framework does not address more tify how the piece of research might be different, narrow and precise methodological fit choices, depending on where along the continuum from such as which type of interviewing style to use nascent to mature the existing literature is po- in a given research site or which statistical tests sitioned. provide the best fit for a given data set. We do In sum, implications of our framework for ed- not describe techniques for quantitative and ucating new field researchers include the need qualitative data collection and analysis or for for skill set versatility, the use of exemplars (or sampling, topics that have been well covered models of fit in published work) as case studies elsewhere (e.g., Cohen & Cohen, 1983; Cook & from which to induce implicit principles, direct Campbell, 1979; Eisenhardt, 1989b; Glaser & experience of the research process, and genera- Strauss, 1967; Keppel, 1991; Miles & Huberman, tive conversation about possibilities to supple- 1994; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994; Tabachnick & ment training in specific methodological tools Fidell, 1989). and techniques. Thus, we advocate experiential education rather than lecture in communicating CONCLUSION these ideas. To the extent possible, methodolog- ical fit should be “discovered” by students This article pulls together key elements from rather than merely described to them. The sat- management field research into a single frame- isfaction of discovering them firsthand may work that provides language and advice for dis- make the lessons more powerful and lasting. cussing and promoting methodological fit. We drew on contemporary research on teams to show a spectrum of theoretical development Limitations and Boundaries and its methodological implications. We do not First and foremost, the ideas in this paper are advocate one method over others but, rather, intended for field research, thereby excluding clarify how methodological choices can en- many important areas of management scholar- hance or diminish the ability to address partic- ship. It is also important to point out that our ular research questions. In developing a new 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1177 framework, we revisited old territory with a Barley, S. R. 1990. Images of imaging: Notes on doing modern lens that acknowledges the growing im- longitudinal field work. Organization Science, 1: 220– 247. portance of field research for developing theory at all stages. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: We showed that fit is achieved by logical pair- Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. ings between methods and the state of theory Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51: 1173– development when a study is conducted. As an 1183. area of theory becomes more mature with Bouchard, T. J., Jr. 1976. Field research methods: Interview- greater consensus among researchers, most im- ing, questionnaires, participant observation, systematic portant contributions take the form of carefully observation, unobtrusive measures. In M. D. Dunnette specified theoretical models and quantitative (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psy- tests. Conversely, the less that is known about a chology: 363–413. Chicago: Rand McNally. phenomenon in the organizational literature, Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. 1959. Convergent and dis- the more likely exploratory qualitative research criminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod ma- trix. Psychological Bulletin, 56: 81–105. will be a fruitful strategy. In the middle, a mix of qualitative and quantitative data leverages Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. 1963. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Hough- both approaches to develop new constructs and ton Mifflin. powerfully demonstrate the plausibility of new Campbell, J. P., Daft, R. L., & Hulin, C. L. 1982. What to study: relationships. Generating and developing research questions. Beverly This article emphasizes fit as a critical, but Hills, CA: Sage. not exclusive, input to high-quality field re- Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. 1993. Relations search. Notably, the quality of the individual between work group characteristics and effectiveness: elements of research, including the review of Implications for designing effective work groups. Per- related literature and effective techniques for sonnel Psychology, 46: 823–850. data collection and analysis, matters greatly. Chen, G., & Klimoski, R. J. 2003. The impact of expectations Our argument is simply that fit is important and on newcomer performance in teams as mediated by potentially overlooked by busy or inexperienced work characteristics, social exchanges, and empower- ment. Academy of Management Journal, 46: 591–607. researchers who may fail to see larger patterns that give rise to inconsistencies between their Cialdini, R. B. 1980. Full-cycle social psychology. Applied Social Psychology Annual, 1: 21–47. aims and their methods. The exemplars dis- cussed in this article illustrate how fit among Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. 1983. Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hills- the elements of field research can be achieved dale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. across different field research contexts. In this Cohen, S. G., & Ledford, G. E. 1994. The effectiveness of way we hope to encourage other researchers to self-managing teams: A quasi-experiment. Human Re- consider methodological fit in their efforts to lations, 47: 13–43. contribute to our collective understanding of or- Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. 1979. Quasi-experimentation: ganizational phenomena and management Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: practice. Houghton Mifflin. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). 2000. Handbook of qual- itative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. REFERENCES Edmondson, A. C. 1996. Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and organizational influences on Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. 1987. Membership roles in field the detection and correction of human error. Journal of research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Applied Behavioral Science, 32: 5–28. Alderfer, C. P., & Brown, D. L. 1972. Designing an “empathic Edmondson, A. 1999. Psychological safety and learning be- questionnaire” for organizational research. Journal of havior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, Applied Psychology, 56: 456–468. 44: 350–383. Allmendinger, J., & Hackman, J. R. 1996. Organizations in Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. 2001. Dis- changing environments: The case of East German sym- rupted routines: Team learning and new technology im- phony orchestras. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: plementation in hospitals. Administrative Science Quar- 337–369. terly, 46: 685–716. Barker, J. R. 1993. Tightening the iron cage: Concertive con- Edmondson, A. C., Winslow, A., Bohmer, R., & Pisano, G. 2003. trol in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Learning how and learning what: Effects of tacit and Quarterly, 38: 408–437. codified knowledge on performance improvement fol- 1178 Academy of Management Review October

lowing technology adoption. Decision Sciences, 34: 197– extensions, and new directions. San Francisco: Jossey- 223. Bass. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989a. Building theories from case study Lee, T. W., Mitchell, T. R., & Sablynski, C. J. 1999. Qualita- research. Academy of Management Review, 14: 532– tive research in organizational and vocational psy- 550. chology, 1979–1999. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55: 161–187. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989b. Making fast strategic decisions in high velocity environments. Academy of Management Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. 2000. Bridging space over Journal, 32: 543–576. time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11: 473–492. Fine, G. A., & Elsbach, K. D. 2000. Ethnography and experi- ment in social psychological theory building: Tactics for McGrath, J. E. 1964. Toward a “theory of method” for research integrating qualitative field data with quantitative lab on organizations. In W. W. Cooper, H. J. Leavitt, & M. W. data. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 36: Shelly, II (Eds.), New perspectives in organization re- 51–76. search: 533–547. New York: Wiley. Georgopolous, G. S. 1986. Organizational structure, problem- McGrath, J. E. 1984. Group interaction and performance. solving, and effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Gersick, C. J. G. 1988. Time and transition in work teams: Meyer, A. D. 1982. Adapting to environmental jolts. Adminis- Toward a new model of group development. Academy of trative Science Quarterly, 27: 513–537. Management Journal, 31: 9–41. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. 1994. Qualitative data anal- ysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Giddens, A. 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of Califor- Mohr, L. B. 1982. Explaining organizational behavior. San nia Press. Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. 1967. The discovery of grounded Morgan, G., & Smircich, L. 1980. The case for qualitative theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: research. Academy of Management Review, 5: 491–500. Aldine. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. 1994. Psychometric theory. Goodman, P., Devadas, S., & Hughson, T. L. 1988. Groups and New York: McGraw-Hill. productivity: Analyzing the effectiveness of self- Pedhazur, E. J. 1982. Multiple regression in behavioral re- managing teams. In J. P. Campbell & R. J. Campbell search: Explanation and prediction (2nd ed.). New York: (Eds.), Productivity in organizations: 295–327. San Fran- Holt, Rinehart & Winston. cisco: Jossey-Bass. Perlow, L. A. 1999. The time famine: Toward a sociology of Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. 1989. Toward work time. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 57–81. a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. 1975. Primer of methods for the design. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11: behavioral sciences. New York: Wiley. 255–274. Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H., & Brazil, K. 2002. Revisiting the Hackman, J. R. 1987. The design of work teams. In J. W. Lorsch quantitative-qualitative debate: Implications for mixed- (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior: 315–342. methods research. Quality and Quantity, 36: 45–53. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Stewart, G. L., & Barrick, M. R. 2000. Team structure and James, L. R. 1982. Aggregation bias in estimates of percep- performance: Assessing the mediating role of intrateam tual agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 219– process and the moderating role of task type. Academy 229. of Management Journal. 43: 135–148. James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimating Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. 1989. Using multivariate within-group interrater reliability with and without statistics. New York: Harper & Row. response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69: 85– 98. Tompkins, P. K., & Cheney, G. 1985. Communication and unobtrusive control in contemporary organizations. In Jick, T. D. 1979. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: R. D. McPhee & P. K. Tompkins (Eds.), Organizational Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quar- communication: Traditional themes and new directions: terly, 24: 602–611. 179–210. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Jorgensen, D. L. 1989. Participant observation: A methodology Van Maanen, J. 1988. Tales of the field: On writing ethnogra- for human studies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. phy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kenny, D. A., & LaVoie, L. 1985. Separating individual and Wageman, R. 2001. How leaders foster self-managing team group effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- effectiveness: Design choices versus hands-on coach- ogy, 48: 339–348. ing. Organization Science, 12: 559–577. Keppel, G. 1991. Design and analysis: A researcher’s hand- Weber, M. 1958. The protestant ethic and the spirit of capi- book. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. talism. New York: Scribner. Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. 2000. Multilevel theory, Weick, K. E. 1979. The social psychology of organizing. New research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, York: McGraw-Hill. 2007 Edmondson and McManus 1179

Wheelwright, S. C., & Clark, K B. 1992. Revolutionizing prod- Yauch, C. A., & Steudel, H. J. 2003. Complementary use of uct development: Quantum leaps in speed, efficiency, qualitative and quantitative cultural assessment meth- and quality. New York: Free Press. ods. Organizational Research Methods, 6: 465–481.

Amy C. Edmondson ([email protected]) is Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management and chair of the doctoral programs at Harvard Business School. She received her Ph.D. in organizational behavior from Harvard University. Her research examines leadership and interpersonal interactions that enable organizational learn- ing in hospitals and other operational contexts. Stacy E. McManus ([email protected]) is a management consultant at Monitor Executive Development in Cambridge, Massachussetts. She earned her Ph.D. in industrial and organizational psychology from the University of Tennessee. Her research interests include organizational mentoring relationships and career devel- opment.