Using critical realism to think about business and management research John Kitching Manchester Metropolitan University 30 March, 2016

Aims  to show how CR can support empirical research: formulating a research problem reviewing the literature generating/collecting data analysing data writing a causal explanation  to encourage a dialogue… what are your experiences, reflections, questions?

What is CR?  CR is a philosophy of science/metatheory: necessity of ontology – what does theory presuppose? reality is stratified – empirical, actual, real/deep causal powers theory – agency, structure, culture contrast positivism, ‘strong’ constructionism  CR is not a substantive theory of any social object  so: multiple theories might be consistent with CR

Forms of explanation: Causal powers v empirical regularities Power Effect/event

What CR critics don’t like  failure to distinguish human & natural sciences: human-made world differs from the natural world needs specific methods to identify/validate meanings  emphasis on unobservables (‘metaphysics’): how do we know agential, structural & cultural causal powers exist? causal powers are invisible; only their effects are visible but: risks behaviourism; agents’ subjective states invisible too (belief, intention, emotion)  presumed ‘foundationalism’: fallibility & corrigibility of knowledge claims - no ‘God’s-eye view’

Key principles - the ‘holy trinity’  ontological realism – we study a world that exists independently of our explanations/constructions of it  epistemic relativity - our explanations/constructions are inevitably shaped (not determined) by human culture & biology  judgemental rationality – we have good reasons to choose between alternative explanations/constructions

CR supports causal explanation  explanation in terms of interaction of causal powers: society as an open system of interacting powers conditions of possibility of social events what must the world be like for us to have the experiences we do?  agency – personal powers (reflexivity, intentionality)  structure – objective relations between positioned agents (e.g. class, gender, ethnicity, organisations, markets)  culture – ideas, norms, discourses  avoid structural/cultural determinism & voluntarism  But: CR doesn't’t tell you what structural/cultural powers exist

The range of CR-inspired explanation VoluntarismDeterminism Where CR can help

 how & why questions - causation  research design: intensive v extensive research designs: depends on nature of object & questions asked Formulating a research problem

Reviewing the literature  what does the literature say? what relevant entities exist & what causal powers (agential, structural, cultural) do they have? what effects do these causal powers have on the object of interest (commonly social practices & their effects)?  CR provides tools to critique existing studies: what entities & causal powers do studies omit or conceptualise inadequately?  conceptualising objects of study: abstract v concrete what properties & powers do objects possess to be the kind of object they are?

Example: impact of regulation on small business  immanent critique: regulation only constrains small business performance owner perceptions of effects of regulation & actual effects identical regulatory effects explained in terms of correlations between variables  a new conception of regulatory effects: effects contingent on exercise of agency direct & indirect effects constraining and enabling small business owners’ projects effects not necessarily visible (attributable)

Routes of regulatory influence direct indirect Customers Suppliers Competitors Infrastructure providers Regulatory authorities SMALL BUSINESS

Generating/collecting data  qualitative methods (intensive research design): case studies, ethnography, interviews causal relations between agents linking agential meanings (beliefs, intentions, perceptions, values) to action (practices) to circumstances (structural & cultural context)  quantitative methods (extensive research): surveys properties of taxonomic groups correlations as indicative of structural & cultural powers

Analysing data, writing a causal explanation  agency, structure & culture: a necessary part of explanation CR cannot tell you which structures are most important for your research question or how they influence it theorise how agents exercise agency in their specific structural & cultural settings morphogenetic model (Archer) – how structure/culture conditions agency which, in turn, elaborates structure/culture narrative coding (classifying & connecting strategies)  validity checks: rule out alternative explanations logic of scientific discovery (search for deeper powers)

Thank you for listening Questions/comments welcome!

A framework (Maxwell 2012, 2013) RESEARCH QUESTIONS Goals Conceptual framework ValidityMethods