Methodology

Our mixed method approach consists of three interrelated projects supported by the engaged scholarship approach:

1.  Narrative building by an explorative comparative case study analysis: The first project starts with inductive, exploratory research for new narrative in leadership. A qualitative inquiry should open the ground. This research departs from an initial pre-understanding of leadership (Sachs & Rühli, forthcoming). Leadership in its distinct features has not yet been explored with rich empirical evidence in an interconnected way as outlined in the section of challenges above. The research strategy for this part of the study is a longitudinal, comparative and embedded case design.[i] We are thus searching for especially illuminating and rich cases. In identifying these, we will proceed in various steps.

We can draw from our previous pool of examples that have the potential to unveil new narratives for leadership that can serve as a starting point for identifying cases. Furthermore and also as a consequence of our earlier research, we can also refer to a broad network of relations with practitioners and academics. These contacts can provide us with information and possibly also support us in gaining access to insightful cases. Thus and against this background, we will in a first step start with a round of expert interviews (called pioneers) to define a first set of cases with potential for our study. As a second step of sampling, we will choose cases of which members of the field say they are/were engaged in new narratives of leadership. For making this decision, we will conduct interviews with a number of individuals close to the field. We will check with them whether the cases respect the following criteria: Samples retained should evolve around a specific issue or project and its related stakeholder network around which we can see new narratives for leadership evolving. The focus of the analysis will be decisive events (positive or negative) in the evolution of such new narratives.

Given the set of cases, data collection will be based on multiple sources in order to triangulate the evidence from our research.[ii] The main source of data will be open-ended, semi-structured interviews with the participants in the firms and stakeholder groups that will be identified in a snow-ball procedure. We will further collect secondary data to trace the case and to give further evidence for new narratives.  As we chose cases that are ongoing, we will finally refer to a third source of data, which is the silent observation of single meetings, roundtables, etc., taking notes on the interactions of the parties involved. Through observation, we hope to reveal unusual or non-reflected aspects related to new narratives. Through a constant within-case comparison of events, themes, categories and relations between them, we can investigate their similarities and differences. Within-case analysis thus will first and foremost provide us with a complete narrative of each case. It provides us with a first theoretical conjecture that will be verified through cross-case analysis. Expanding the findings from the within-case analysis to the cross-case analysis will need a careful description of the dimensions that should be compared and to what extent the comparability of contexts between the cases is given. The analytical process is supported through software for qualitative data analysis, more specifically ATLAS/ti. By nature, qualitative data are complex and data material extensive. Human capacity to absorb great amounts of data and to detect the relevant patterns in them is limited. To omit premature conclusions, we will therefore make use of a computer aided qualitative data analysis. It can support the data analysis systematically but also secures data richness and the closeness to the original data. Furthermore, using software helps us to more systematically explore the data through various search and retrieve functions, and the results generated within ATLAS/ti can be exported to be used for further statistical analysis. Expected results from this first phase of research therefore are empirically rich categories of new narratives for leadership which will be further condensed in a second project to be described below.

2.  Classification and Categorizations by Multidimensional Scaling Analyses: The aim of the second project is then to classify and categorize those dimensions of leadership, which are shown to be central to value creation in mutual stakeholder networks. We will built on the findings of the first project step to address the research questions: “What underlying factors do leaders use in classifying (i.e., distinguishing among) potential sources of value creation in the stakeholder network?” and “How universal are these categorizations across stakeholders?”  We address these questions by a combined card-sorting and multidimensional scaling design. Card sorting is an empirical investigative technique originating from cognitive science aimed to reveal the tacit knowledge of respondents.[iii] We will combine two techniques: free-listing and card-sorting. Free-listing is used to define the domain specific field.[iv]

3. Theory Testing: We will test our findings from project 2 with quantitative methods. In the third project we identified antecedents and moderators of leaders in mutual value creation in stakeholder networks. This as well as consequences of new understanding for leadership in stakeholder networks will be analyzed with survey research from multiple sources. For example performance of leaders in the stakeholder network will be established by objective data (network duration, number of lawsuits, content analysis of press reports etc.) and by self-ratings (well-being scales).

back