In this essay, we discuss how tables can be used to ensure—and reassure about—trustworthiness in qualitative research. We posit that in qualitative research, tables help not only increase transparency about data collection, analysis, and findings, but also—and no less importantly—organize and analyze data effectively. We present some of the tables most frequently used by qualitative researchers, explain their uses, discuss how they enhance trustworthiness, and provide illustrative examples to inspire readers in their use of tables in their own research.
AugustineGSoderstromSMilnerD, et al. (2019) Constructing a distant future: Imaginaries in geoengineering. Academy of Management Journal62(6): 1930–1960.
3.
BansalPCorleyK (2012) Publishing in AMJ—Part 7: What is different about qualitative research?Academy of Management Journal55(3): 509–513.
4.
BechkyBAOkhuysenGA (2011) Expecting the unexpected? How SWAT officers and film crews handle surprises. The Academy of Management Journal54(2): 239–261.
5.
BoréusKBergströmG (2017) Analyzing Text and Discourse: Eight Approaches for the Social Sciences. London: SAGE.
6.
BothelloJSalles-DjelicML (2018) Evolving conceptualizations of organizational environmentalism: A path generation account. Organization Studies39(1): 93–119.
7.
CairoA (2012) The Functional Art: An Introduction to Information Graphics and Visualization. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education.
8.
CamoesJ (2016) Data at Work: Best Practices for Creating Effective Charts and Information Graphics in Microsoft Excel. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education.
9.
CanatoARavasiDPhillipsN (2013) Coerced practice implementation in cases of low cultural fit: Cultural change and practice adaptation during implementation of Six Sigma at 3M. The Academy of Management Journal56(6): 1724–1753.
10.
CharmazK (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London: SAGE.
11.
ChristiansonMK (2019) More and Less Effective Updating: The Role of Trajectory Management in Making Sense Again. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, pp. 45–86.
12.
CloutierCLangleyA (2020) What makes a process theoretical contribution?Organization Theory1(1): 1.
13.
CloutierCRavasiD (2020) Identity trajectories: Explaining long-term patterns of continuity and change in organizational identities. Academy of Management Journal63(4): 1196–1235.
14.
CohenSLBinghamCBHallenBL (2019) The role of accelerator designs in mitigating bounded rationality in new ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly64(4): 810–854.
15.
CompagniAMeleVRavasiD (2015) How early implementations influence later adoptions of innovation: Social positioning and skill reproduction in the diffusion of robotic surgery. Academy of Management Journal58(1): 242–278.
16.
CozzolinoAVeronaGRothaermelFT (2018) Unpacking the disruption process: New technology, business models, and incumbent adaptation. Journal of Management Studies55(7): 1166–1202.
17.
CroidieuGKimPH (2018) Labor of love: Amateurs and lay-expertise legitimation in the early U.S. radio field. Administrative Science Quarterly63(1): 1–42.
18.
DalpiazERindovaVRavasiD (2016) Combining logics to transform organizational agency: Blending industry and art at Alessi. Administrative Science Quarterly61(3): 347–392.
19.
DubinR (1976) Theory building in applied areas. In: DunnetteMD (ed.) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, pp. 17–40.
20.
EisenhardtKM (1989a) Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review14(4): 532–550.
21.
EisenhardtKM (1989b) Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Academy of Management Journal32(3): 543–576.
22.
FarnySKiblerEDownS (2019) Collective emotions in institutional creation work. Academy of Management Journal62(3): 765–799.
FewS (2012) Show Me the Numbers: Designing Tables and Graphs to Enlighten. Burlingame, CA: Analytics Press.
25.
GephartRP (2004) Qualitative research and the academy of management journal. Academy of Management Journal47(4): 454–462.
26.
GioiaDACorleyKGHamiltonAL (2013) Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods16(1): 15–31.
27.
GlesneC (1999) Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction. New York: Longman.
28.
GohKTPentlandBT (2019) From actions to paths to patterning: Toward a dynamic theory of patterning in routines. Academy of Management Journal62(6): 1901–1929.
GrimesMG (2018) The pivot: How founders respond to feedback through idea and identity work. Academy of Management Journal61(5): 1692–1717.
31.
GrodalS (2018) Field expansion and contraction: How communities shape social and symbolic boundaries. Administrative Science Quarterly63(4): 783–818.
32.
GrodalSAntebyMHolmAL (2020) Achieving rigor in qualitative analysis: The role of active categorization in theory building. Academy of Management Review. Epub ahead of print 13April. DOI: 10.5465/amr.2018.0482.
33.
HehenbergerLMairJMetzA (2019) The assembly of a field ideology: An idea-centric perspective on systemic power in impact investing. Academy of Management Journal62: 1672–1704.
34.
HoppmannJNaegeleFGirodB (2019) Boards as a source of inertia: Examining the internal challenges and dynamics of boards of directors in times of environmental discontinuities. Academy of Management Journal62(2): 437–468.
35.
Howard-GrenvilleJMetzgerMLMeyerAD (2013) Rekindling the flame: Processes of identity resurrection. Academy of Management Journal56(1): 113.
36.
JarzabkowskiPBednarekRLêJK (2014) Producing persuasive findings: Demystifying ethnographic textwork in strategy and organization research. Strategic Organization12(4): 274–287.
37.
JarzabkowskiPLeJBalogunJ (2019) The social practice of coevolving strategy and structure to realize mandated radical change. Academy of Management Journal62(3): 850–882.
38.
JonsenKFendtJPointS (2018) Convincing qualitative research: What constitutes persuasive writing?Organizational Research Methods21(1): 30–67.
39.
KaplanSOrlikowskiWJ (2013) Temporal work in strategy making. Organization Science24(4): 956.
40.
KelloggKC (2019) Subordinate activation tactics: Semi-professionals and micro-level institutional change in professional organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly64(4): 928–975.
41.
KlagMLangleyA (2013) Approaching the conceptual leap in qualitative research. International Journal of Management Reviews15(2): 149–166.
42.
KreinerGEHollensbeESheepML, et al. (2015) Elasticity and the dialectic tensions of organizational identity: How can we hold together while we are pulling apart?Academy of Management Journal58(4): 981–1011.
43.
KroezenJJHeugensPPMAR (2019) What is dead may never die: Institutional regeneration through logic reemergence in Dutch beer brewing. Administrative Science Quarterly64(4): 976–1019.
44.
LangleyA (1999) Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review24(4): 691–710.
45.
LincolnYSGubaEG (1985) Establishing Trustworthiness. Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE, pp. 289–331.
46.
LockeK (2001) Grounded Theory in Management Research. London: SAGE.
47.
LockeKGolden-BiddleK (1997) Constructing opportunities for contribution: Structuring intertextual coherence and “problematizing” in organizational studies. The Academy of Management Journal40(5): 1023–1062.
48.
MartinJAEisenhardtKM (2010) Rewiring: Cross-business-unit collaborations in multibusiness organizations. Academy of Management53(2): 265–301.
McPhersonCMSauderM (2013) Logics in action: Managing institutional complexity in a drug court. Administrative Science Quarterly58(2): 165–196.
51.
MichelA (2011) Transcending socialization: A nine-year ethnography of the body’s role in organizational control and knowledge workers’ transformation. Administrative Science Quarterly56(3): 325–368.
52.
MilesMBHubermanAM (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
53.
MilesMBHubermanMSaldanaJ (2020) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
54.
MohrLB (1982) Explaining Organizational Behavior. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
55.
MosakowskiEEarleyPC (2000) A selective review of time assumptions in strategy research. The Academy of Management Review25(4): 796–812.
56.
NadinSCassellC (2004) Using data matrices. In: CassellCSymonG (eds) Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. London: SAGE, pp. 271–287.
57.
NigamADokkoG (2019) Career resourcing and the process of professional emergence. Academy of Management Journal62(4): 1052–1084.
58.
O’MahoneyJHeusinkveldSWrightC (2013) Commodifying the commodifiers: The impact of procurement on management knowledge. Journal of Management Studies50(2): 204–235.
59.
PacheA-CSantosF (2013) Inside the hybrid organization: Selective coupling as a response to competing institutional logics. Academy of Management Journal56(4): 972–1001.
60.
PandzaK (2011) Why and how will a group act autonomously to make an impact on the development of organizational capabilities?Journal of Management Studies48(5): 1015–1043.
61.
PattonMQ (2003) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
62.
PrattM (2009) For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal52(5): 856.
63.
PrattMG (2008) Fitting oval pegs into round holes: Tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American Journals. Organizational Research Methods11(3): 481–509.
64.
PrattMGKaplanSWhittingtonR (2020a) Editorial essay: The tumult over transparency: Decoupling transparency from replication in establishing trustworthy qualitative research. Administrative Science Quarterly65(1): 1–19.
65.
PrattMGSonensheinSFeldmanMS (2020b) Moving beyond templates: A bricolage approach to conducting trustworthy qualitative research. Organizational Research Methods. Epub ahead of print 9June. DOI: 10.1177/1094428120927466.
66.
RavasiDRindovaVDalpiazE (2017) Analyzing changes in organizational cultural repertoires. In: MirRJainS (eds) The Routledge Companion to Qualitative Methods in Organization Studies. . London, UK:: Routledge, pp. 203–225.
67.
RavasiDRindovaVStiglianiI (2019) The stuff of legend: History, memory, and the temporality of organizational identity construction. Academy of Management Journal62(5): 1523–1555.
68.
ReayTZafarAMonteiroP, et al. (2019) Presenting findings from qualitative research: One size does not fit all! In: ZilberTBAmisJMairJ (eds) Research in the Sociology of Organizations. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Ltd, pp. 201–216.
69.
ReinhardtAKreinerGGioiaD, et al. (2018) Conducting and publishing rigorous qualitative research. In: CassellCCunlifeAGrandyG (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 515–532.
70.
RindovaVDalpiazERavasiD (2011) A cultural quest: A study of organizational use of new cultural resources in strategy formation. Organization Science22(2): 413–431.
71.
SadehLJZilderTB (2019) Bringing “together”: Emotions and power in organizational responses to institutional complexity. Academy of Management Journal62(5): 1413–1443.
72.
SaldanaJ (2016) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Thousand Oaks: CA: SAGE.
73.
SmithANWatkinsMBLadgeJJ, et al. (2019) Making the invisible visible: Paradoxical effects of intersectional invisibility on the career experiences of executive black women. Academy of Management Journal62(6): 1705–1734.
74.
SmithWK (2014) Dynamic decision making: A model of senior leaders managing strategic paradoxes. Academy of Management Journal57(6): 1592–1623.
75.
SpradleyJP (1979) The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
76.
SpradleyJP (1980) Participant Observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
77.
SuttonRIHargadonA (1996) Brainstorming Groups in Context: Effectiveness in a Product Design Firm. Thousand Oaks, CA: Cornell University Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management, pp. 685–718.
78.
WeickKE (1995) Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
79.
YinRK (2003) Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
80.
ZietsmaCLawrenceTB (2010) Institutional work in the transformation of an organizational field: The interplay of boundary work and practice work. Administrative Science Quarterly55(2): 189–221.
81.
ZilberT (2011) Institutional multiplicity in practice: A tale of two high-tech conferences in Israel. Organization Science22(6): 1539–1559.
82.
ZimmermannARaischSCardinalLB (2018) Managing persistent tensions on the frontline: A configurational perspective on ambidexterity: Managing persistent tensions on the frontline. Journal of Management Studies55(5): 739–769.
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.
