Abstract
Well-accepted methodological practices require thoughtful and appropriate use to avoid becoming mindlessly applied and distorted. We review how ideas from Langley’s (1999) process data analysis article have been used in practice. By closely analyzing 176 empirical articles in management and organization journals from 1999 to 2019, we highlight how Langley’s ideas have been applied in exemplary ways and adapted through bricolage (a central concept in qualitative methods). In many instances, we found that Langley’s ideas have been given a cursory nod or have even been distorted (what we label as considerations); thus, we recommend how to avoid replicating these applications. We discuss process data analysis tools from Langley’s article that have been underused (labeled overlooked) but that may be valuable in future process studies. Through our deep reading and review, we highlight how using Langley’s ideas can enhance the transparency and trustworthiness of a qualitative process study and mitigate her ideas’ movement toward a mindless template application.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
