collection in a qualitative study.

But, the map cannot be

considered the territory simply because the map is a reflexive
product of the map maker's invention. The map maker sees
himself quite as much as he sees the territory. There are
Reclaiming Qualitative Methods for however better and worse maps and qualitative researchers
Organizational Research: A Preface seek to construct good ones by moving closer to the territory
they study in the physical sense as well as in the intellectual
sense by minimizing the use of such artificial distancing
mechanisms as analytic labels, abstract hypotheses, and
John Van Maanen, Editor preformulated research strategies.
Qualitative methodology and quantitative methodology are not
mutually exclusive. Differences between the two approaches
are located in the overall form, focus, and emphasis of study. As
THE TERRITORY IS NOT THE MAP demonstrated by several of the research accounts in this issue,
The label qualitative methods has no precise meaning in any of qualitative methods represent a mixture of the rational,
the social sciences. It is at best an umbrella term covering an serendipitous, and intuitive in which the personal experiences of
array of interpretive techniques which seek to describe, decode, the organizational researcher are often key events to be
translate, and otherwise come to terms with the meaning, not understood and analyzed as data. Qualitative investigators tend
the frequency, of certain more or less naturally occurring also to describe the unfolding of social processes rather than
phenomena in the social world. To operate in a qualitative mode the social structures that are often the focus of quantitative
is to trade in linguistic symbols and, by so doing, attempt to researchers. Moreover, no matter what the topic of study,
reduce the distance between indicated and indicator, between qualitative researchers in contrast to their quantitative
theory and data, between context and action. The raw materials colleagues claim forcefully to know relatively little about what a
of qualitative study are therefore generated in vivo, close to the given piece of observed behavior means until they have
point of origin. Although the use of qualitative methods does not developed a description of the context in which the behavior
prohibit a researcher's use of the logic of scientific empiricism, takes place and attempted to see that behavior from the
the logic of phenomenological analysis is more likely to be position of its originator. Thai such contextual understandings
assumed since qualitative researchers tend to regard social and empathetic objectives are unlikely to be achieved without
phenomena as more particular and ambiguous than replicable direct, firsthand, and more or less intimate knowledge of a
and clearly defined. research setting is a most practical assumption that underlies
and guides most qualitative study.
The data developed by qualitative methods originate when a
researcher figuratively puts brackets around a temporal and From this perspective, qualitative methods are rather similar to
spatial domain of the social world. These brackets define the the interpretive procedures we make use of as we go about our
territory about which descriptions are fashioned. These everyday life. The data we collect and act upon in everyday life
descriptions are essentially idiographic maps of the territory, are of the same sort a qualitative researcher explicitly attempts
which must then be read and interpreted by the investigator if to gather and record. Such data are symbolic, contextually
any nomothetic statements are to result from a given study. embedded, cryptic, and reflexive, standing for nothing so much
Doing description is then the fundamental act of data as their readiness or stubbornness to yield to a meaningful
interpretation and response. When crossing the street, for
example, the sight of a ten-ton truck bearing down on us leads
to an immediate and presumably
Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 9 Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 10
prudent action. We do not stop to first ask how fast the truck is alized principles which have been postulated for the behavior of
traveling, from where did it come, how often does this occur, or individuals, groups, and organizations and the specific, always
what is the driver's intention. We move. Our study of the truck contextual understandings and explanations given by social
involves little more than a quick scan, a glance up the road actors that provide purpose and meaning to their behavior.
which reveals to most of us a menacing symbol of such power Second, the gap between the theoretical constructions we use
that a speedy, undeliberated response is mandatory. It is the to construct our study and the availability of data to render such
aim of qualitative researchers to identify such symbols and, as a theories testable appears also to be growing. Third, our data
way of assessing their meaning, to record the pattern of manipulation techniques have become increasingly complex,
responses these symbols elicit. mathematically sophisticated, and governed by strict
assumptions, but, paradoxically, our interpretive frameworks
This example also suggests that the linking of sign and
which make such data meaningful have grown looser, more
signified, representation and conduct, proximal and distal, open-ended, fluid, and contingent. Fourth, there is an increasing
awareness and phenomenon in social research is always
distrust among organizational observers of the claims made for
dependent upon an interpretive framework. And, when a given such analytic conveniences as the formal interview, the
interpretive framework becomes firmly accepted and more or
paper-and-pencil survey, the lab study, the use of official
less set by a researcher, analytic formulas can be established statistics, records, documents and the like. Indeed, there seems
and focusing devices put into place such that the investigator is
to be rather widespread skepticism surrounding the ability of
able to engage in quantitative study. It is in this sense that conventional data collection techniques to produce data that do
quantitative and qualitative work are connected. But, if one is to not distort, do violence to, or otherwise falsely portray the
consider for example the almost 25-year history of ASO, such
phenomena such methods seek to reveal. In particular, the
linkages are rarely made explicit when a study is eventually
overwhelming role played by the survey instrument in
published. Perhaps, Gresham's Law is at work in organizational
organizational research has led some observers to suggest that
studies wherein the programmed research is driving out the the field is becoming simply the study of verbally expressed
unprogrammed.
sentiments and beliefs rather than the study of conduct. To
There are however a number of organization theorists beginning further refine our data analysis techniques, however, is not to
to question the wisdom of allowing Gresham's Law to take its improve the quality of the data which is, in the final analysis, at
course unquestioned. There is a growing concern about where issue.
quantitative techniques are carrying us. For example, questions
Given this abbreviated list of commonly voiced concerns, it is
have been raised about the extent to which our methods are
worth pointing out as a final prefacing matter that there is
guiding our theory and concern has been expressed about the something of a quiet reconstruction going on in the social
degree to which our procedures have become so ritualized that
sciences and some of the applied disciplines. It is hardly
the necessary connection between measure and concept has revolutionary, but a renewed interest in and felt need for
vanished. Since quantitative methods have held an almost qualitative research has slowly been emerging among
monopolistic grip on the production of knowledge in the field,
sociologists, educators, urban planners, psychologists, public
any serious reflection regarding current organization theory interest lawyers, welfare administrators, health care personnel,
must at some point consider the value of alternative methods.
political scientists, labor economists, and others. There has
Several unresolved but interrelated and crucial problems of come of age the significant realization that the people we study
organizational inquiry currently exist which are both (and often seek to assist) have a form of life; a culture that is
epistemological and methodological in nature. First, there is a their own and if we wish to understand the behavior of these
rather curious and troubling distance between the gener people and the groups and organizations

Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 11 Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 12
of which they are a part, we must first be able to both appreciate Four criteria eventually emerged as the reviewers attempted to
and describe their culture. As a society, we have become decide what papers would be most appropriate for this special
increasingly aware of the fact that we live, work, and play in issue. First, we tried to eliminate those papers where
multicultural surroundings. Moreover, within this society at least, prescription dominated description. Second, we looked for the
it is becoming clear that the origins of many of these cultures practical importance of a given paper to organizational
are not coupled conceptually to matters such as geography, researchers. That is, we tried to eliminate those papers that
ethnicity, or social class but are grounded in organizational appeared to be primarily epistemological or methodological in
experiences. Whether we are examining the organizational favor of those papers which illustrated the actual use of
worlds of middle managers, tramps, stockbrokers, high school qualitative methods. Third, we wanted to achieve a disciplinary
principals, police officers, production workers, or professional mix among the papers published. The intent was to
crooks, we are certain to uncover special languages, unique demonstrate the utility of qualitative methods to a variety of
and peculiar problems, and, more generally, distinct patterns of distinct, discipline-based problems. And, fourth, we tried to
thought and action. What this rather profound realization means select papers that presented novel themes in organizational
for our own scholarly work in the organizational areas is an studies. T his fourth criterion presented something of a dilemma
essential theme that runs through each of the articles since many qualitative methods (e.g., content analysis,
presented, in this special issue. participant observation, constitutive ethnography, the
construction of life histories, semiotics, conversational analysis,
A STUDY OF STUDIES etc.) are by definition quite novel to organizational research
A call for papers on qualitative methods was printed in the since they have been so infrequently employed in the area. Our
March 1979 issue of ASO. From the pool of potential authors resolution here (and it is not without ambiguity) was to examine
with firsthand qualitative research experience, we requested the findings uncovered by the method discussed in a paper and
short contributions to the journal dealing with the meaning, use, judge whether or not such findings would be relatively
and function of the various types of data with which they had predictable given what is currently known about organizations
worked. But, since the number of papers submitted far and the life that goes on within them. Essentially, what we were
exceeded the journal space available (even when expanded to after was at least a partial answer to the question: What can we
a full issue), we were faced with the difficult task of further learn about organizations that we do not already know by the
specifying and making explicit our standards for what would use of a particular qualitative method?
constitute a worthy contribution in this area. Unlike quantitative
Looking at the thirteen papers of this volume collectively, three
approaches, there are few guidelines to follow when assessing
somewhat distinct thematic groupings can be discerned. The
the soundness of a given qualitative technique. Moreover, there first and most heavily represented set of articles addresses the
is, as this issue attests, a large and increasing number of rather
use of what Peggy Sanday calls in the lead article,
specific qualitative methods available for use in organizational "ethnographic paradigms." That there are multiple ethnographic
research. Yet, what was most difficult to deal with was the fact paradigms is perhaps the crucial point of Professor Sanday's
that the papers we received each represented some thing of a
informed review of the variety of anthropological methods
unique meshing of problem, theory, method, and the persons) currently in use. John Van Maanen, commenting upon the mix
standing behind it all. To say one paper was somehow more
of participant observation and ethnographic interviews used in
valuable than another required the further elaboration of the his studies of the police, makes the point in the second article
somewhat loose and inarticulate standards we began with last
that the key analytic decisions of qualitative study are most
March. often accomplished by the investigator in the research setting
itself and that the

Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 13 Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 14
selection of substantive topics to pursue in a given study cannot drawn among social science methods is often an arbitrary and
be disembodied from the actual research process itself. Donald oversimplified distinction. Authors of papers in this set
Light then suggests in the next paper that the structure of demonstrate that quantitative indicators ranging from the crude
organizational life invariably lies well beneath the surface in a to the sophisticated can and do emerge from the use of field
given research setting. To begin to describe what such structure methods and the direct observation of organizations. Matthew
looks like requires that the investigator develop careful Miles argues that it is a mistake to think that qualitative
descriptions of the daily routines and concerns of the members researchers are somehow against measurement. Moreover, as
of the studied organization over a lengthy period of time. Professor Miles demonstrates in his discussion of fieldwork
Structure, from Professor Light's perspective, is a label for crises, researchers should develop quantitative indicators where
various social processes which, in his research on professional possible. By so doing, they can guard against the entropic
training, are virtually impossible to comprehend over the short tendencies that are involved in team research wherein team
run or by simply relying on the publicly articulated and members seek to go their own ways leading to an empirical
rationalized understandings presented by the members of the defocusing and quite possibly the analytic deterioration of the
organization. Michael Piore, in the following paper, makes a study. Todd Jick takes up this same theme in the following
similar point. Essentially, the author calls for what amounts to a paper bluntly titled "Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Data."
"new economics," one that views the economy (both at the After a review of the surprisingly rich literature on triangulation
macro and micro levels) as a social process. Since the in social research, Professor Jick displays the practical utility of
qualitative tradition in economics has largely disappeared from having intimate
view, Professor Piore's comments on the role played by direct,
familiarity with a research setting as a means of building several
firsthand involvement in his own highly respected research has
quantitative indicators of what to outsiders might seem to be
particular interest. Andrew Pettigrew, in the next to last paper of
rather impressionistic and ill-defined concepts. Closely related
the set, also displays an interest in unscrambling social
to the multiple methods explored by Professor Jick as a way of
processes. In his case, however, the social process of concern
handling messy research topics, Charles McClintock, Diane
is that of leadership. By examples taken from his current
Brannon, and Steven MaynardMoody in the next selection
research project, Professor Pettigrew demonstrates the crucial
argue for a more systematic approach for constructing case
importance of taking a qualitative stance toward the key events,
studies. In this paper, a method based on the logic of survey
figures, and transition points in an educational institution as a
analysis is described that seems to have considerable potential
way of understanding how organizational cultures are shaped
for producing, in the authors' view, "thick and generalizable
and reshaped over time. Henry Mintzberg closes out this first
analyses." The final paper of this set is by Kirk Downey and
set of papers with a crisp summary of the assumptions that
Duane Ireland and deals with the relative advantages and
underlie his own extensive research on the management of
disadvantages of both quantitative and qualitative methods. The
organizations. "Direct research" is the tag that he uses to
authors here show that the supposed analytic match that is
capture the critical aspects of his method and, in large measure,
ideally sought between problem and method invariably leaves
the points he articulates provide a rather comprehensive
considerable latitude for the use of both quantitative and
synopsis of the methodological positions taken by the authors of
qualitative techniques. Taking the assessment of an
the preceding papers.
organization's environment as an illustrative substantive
The second set of papers represents methods less dominated domain, Professors Downey and Ireland show how it is possible
by ethnographic, observational, and on-site, in-depth interview and, in many cases, clearly desirable to assess an
techniques alone. Instead, these papers succinctly suggest that organization's environment in qualitative terms. Moreover, they
the quantitative versus qualitative distinction suggest that many researchers in this area may well have been
pushed
Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 15 Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 16
inappropriately (and perhaps prematurely) toward the serves also to constrain and perhaps prefigure the analysis of
quantification of environmental concepts without giving due that world. Since language or "styles of discourse" can be seen
consideration to-the meaning of the concepts they measure. to shape organizational analysis, the author suggests that the
researcher's own use of language become subject to
The third and concluding set of papers presented in this issue is
methodological concern. Although the analysis of discourse has
distinguished solely by the novel themes explored by the
long been a key method of literary criticism, its use in social
authors. Unlike the previous two groupings of papers, the analysis is particularly pertinent and overdue since such
authors of the papers in this third set share neither a similar
analysis involves not only the interpretation of a "natural text"
approach to data collection nor a similar stance toward data as (social behavior) but the creation of another text as well through
they are produced. What these three papers do share however the descriptive accounts of social behavior generated by the
is a fresh outlook upon the legitimate topics of organizational
researcher.
inquiry. The writings that appear in this set are not only rich with
tightly drawn and worked out examples, but are full of the subtle In closing, it must be said that the intent of this issue is to
ironies that challenge us to think more clearly about encourage the further development of qualitative study as a way
organizational research. The first paper is Gerald R. Salancik's of increasing the diversity of the field, thus increasing the
seductive plea to tickle, provoke, and otherwise stimulate sources of insight and discovery. We wish to encourage
organizations to see what, if anything, will occur. Professor additionally a more penetrating and reflective approach to the
Salancik essentially calls for the application of a natural study of organizations than has been the case to date. If this
experimentation model in organizational study. This can be special issue sharpens the dialogue among observers of
accomplished, for example, retrospectively through close organizations and helps to create an increased awareness of
inspection of the artifacts of organizational research such as the the methodological options available to them, our purposes will
non-response of organizational members to survey have been achieved.
questionnaires. Some of the previously overlooked assumptions
and implications associated with the use of unobtrusive
measures in organizational research are spelled out in the
following paper by Eugene Webb and Karl Weick. Arguing that
while research designs and analytic techniques have become
far more complex in recent years, the task of data collection still
plods along the relatively parochial self -report path with
researchers devoting little effort to considering the range of
alternatives available to them. In brief, Professors Webb and
Weick issue a lively call for the creative and playful use of
unobtrusive measures in organizational studies and suggest in
passing the intriguing proposition that as the popularity of the
governing theories of the field declines, the interest in qualitative
methods may well increase. It is these "governing theories" that
interest Peter Manning in the concluding article of this issue.
Taking deadly aim at the correspondence theory of truth
whereby the independence of the observer and the observed is
assumed, Professor Manning displays how the language
chosen to represent a given social world

Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 17 Qualitative Research John Van Maanen 18