Legitimizing Diverse Uses for Qualitative Research: A Rhetorical Analysis of Two Management Journals

This paper examines how management researchers rhetorically construct the theoretical purpose and contribution of qualitative studies. By means of a rhetorical analysis of qualitative studies published in the Academy of Management Journal and Journal of Management Studies, we identify three sets of rhetorical practices, or repertoires, in the period 19992011. These repertoires differ with regard to how they position and legitimize the use of qualitative research. The first repertoire, which we label modernist', bases the legitimacy of qualitative research on its exploratory and theory-building strengths. The second revisionist' repertoire accepts key assumptions of modernism, but allows for an expanded role for qualitative research. In contrast, the third subversive' repertoire is non-positivist and rejects the traditional theory-building/-testing dichotomy. Using the insights from our rhetoric of science' approach, we argue for the use of alternative repertoires that decouple qualitative research from the rhetoric of exploration.