In a crowded, competitive, research marketplace, association with the latest high-status brands and must-have products is crucial. Have we, and are we, adapting our qualitative inquiry to be associated with these leading brands and products? Addressing this requires adding some connections (+s) to our thinking about our qualitative inquiry and its interfaces with the research marketplace, such as those between funding, methods, publications, promotion, and tenure. Understanding the complexity of these connections enables us to decide which to ignore, negate, or embrace, and works against normalization of adaptive versions of qualitative inquiry shaped by the research marketplace.
AlvessonM. (2013). The triumph of emptiness: Consumption, higher education, & work organization. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2.
AlvessonM.SpicerA. (2016). The stupidity paradox: The power and pitfalls of functional stupidity at work. London, England: Profile Books.
3.
CaryL. J. (2006). Curriculum spaces: Discourse, postmodern theory and educational research (Vol. 16). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
4.
CheekJ. (2005). The practice and politics of funded qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 387-410). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
5.
CheekJ. (2011). The politics and practices of funding qualitative inquiry. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 251-268). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
6.
CheekJ. (2017). The marketization of research: Implications for qualitative inquiry. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
7.
CheekJ.GarnhamB.QuanJ. (2006). “What’s in a number?” Issues in providing evidence of impact and quality of research(ers). Qualitative Health Research, 16, 423-435. doi:10.1177/1049732305285701
8.
CreswellJ. W.KlassenA. C.Plano ClarkV. L.SmithK. C. (2011). Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health.
9.
DenzinN. K. (2009). Qualitative inquiry under fire: Toward a new paradigm dialogue. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
10.
DenzinN. K. (2010). The qualitative manifesto: A call to arms. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
11.
DenzinN. K. (2011). The politics of evidence. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 645-657). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
12.
DenzinN. K.GiardinaM. D. (Eds.). (2006). Qualitative inquiry and the conservative challenge. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
FoskettN. (2011). Markets, government, funding and the marketisation of UK higher education. In MolesworthM.ScullionR.NixonE. (Eds.), The marketisation of higher education and the student as consumer (pp. 25-38). Oxon, UK: Routledge.
15.
FurediF. (2011). Introduction to the marketisation of higher education and the student as consumer. In MolesworthM.ScullionR.NixonE. (Eds.), The marketisation of higher education and the student as consumer (pp. 1-7). Oxon, UK: Routledge.
16.
GarfieldE. (1999). Journal impact factor: A brief review. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 161, 979-980.
17.
HirschJ. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 16569-16572. doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102
KvaleS. (2008). Qualitative inquiry between scientific evidentialism, ethical subjectivism and the free market. International Review of Qualitative Research, 1, 5-18.
22.
LincolnY. S. (2012). The political economy of publication: Marketing, commodification, and qualitative scholarly work. Qualitative Health Research, 22, 1451-1459. doi:10.1177/1049732312457713
23.
MadisonD. S. (2003). Performance, personal narratives, and the politics of possibility. Turning Points in Qualitative Research: Tying Knots in a Handkerchief, 3, 469-486.
24.
MorseJ. M. (2006). The politics of evidence. Qualitative Health Research, 16, 395-404. doi:10.1177/1049732305285482
25.
QS Quacquarelli Symonds, Ltd. (n.d.). QS top universities. Available from www.topuniversities.com/
26.
RamirezF. O.ByrkjeflotH.PinheiroR. (2016). In PinheiroR.GeschwindL.RamirezF. O.VrangbækK (eds.) Higher education and health organizational fields in the age of “world class” and “best practices.” In Towards a comparative institutionalism: Forms, dynamics and logics across the organizational fields of health care and higher education (Research in the Sociology of Organizations Series, Vol. 45, pp. 35-57). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
27.
SeglenP. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314, 498-502. doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497
28.
TorranceH. (2011). Qualitative research, science and government: Evidence, criteria, policy, and politics. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 569-580). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
