Vol. 9 No. 4 (2021): Business & Management Studies: An International Journal
Articles

The use of interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) in management and organization studies: A systematic review

PDF (Türkçe)
  • Halit Keskin,
  • Zeynep Aksoy,
  • Selahaddin Şamil Fidan
Halit Keskin
Prof. Dr., Yıldız Technical University, İstanbul, Türkiye
Zeynep Aksoy
Res. Assist., Yıldız Technical University, İstanbul, Türkiye
Selahaddin Şamil Fidan
Res. Assist., Yıldız Technical University, İstanbul, Türkiye
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v9i4.1925

Published 2021-12-25

How to Cite

Keskin, H., Aksoy, Z., & Fidan, S. Şamil. (2021). The use of interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) in management and organization studies: A systematic review. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 9(4), 1437–1451. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v9i4.1925

Copyright (c) 2021 Halit Keskin- Zeynep Aksoy- Selahaddin Şamil Fidan

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This study systematically reviews management and organization studies that used interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) as a qualitative research design and introduced IPA to Turkey's management and organization studies literature. Within this scope, 17 IPA studies included in the Web of Science database were systematically examined in terms of the aim of the research, research question, sampling, industry, the profession of participants, and data analysis method that reflect the nature of IPA. Results reveal that all 17 studies examined phenomena experienced in the organizational context. However, only nine studies used the purposive sampling method.  Also, only 6 out of 17 studies used a homogenous sample, whereas other studies did not mention the homogenous sample term. Furthermore, while some studies collected data from a single country, other studies collected data from multiple countries. However, only two studies collected data from Turkey. In addition, 15 organizational IPA studies used semi-structured interviews as the data collection technique. Finally, this study makes guiding light suggestions to future IPA studies based on the research findings.

PDF (Türkçe)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Ahn, J., Dik, B.J. ve Hornback, R. (2017). The experience of career change driven by a sense of calling: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 102, 48-62.
  2. Berber, A. (2017). Yönetimde kavramsal çerçeve belirleme ve nitel araştırma yöntemleri. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 46(Özel sayı), 71-73.
  3. *Berber, A. ve Acar, A. G. (2020). Power crafting at work: A phenomenological study on individual differences. Human Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726720942828
  4. Boden, Z., Larkin, M. ve Iyer, M. (2019). Picturing ourselves in the world: Drawings, interpretative phenomenological analysis and the relational mapping interview. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 16(2), 218-236.
  5. *De Miguel, M. S., Lizaso, I., Larranaga, M. ve Arrospide, J. J. (2015). Women bus drivers and organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(1), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-07-2013-0120
  6. Dias, A. R. ve Teixeira, A. A. (2017). The anatomy of business failure: A qualitative account of its implications for future business success. European Journal of Management, 26, 2-20.
  7. Gill, M. J. (2014). The possibilities of phenomenology for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), 118-137.
  8. *Gill, M. J. (2015). Elite identity and status anxiety: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of management consultants. Organization, 22(3), 306-325.
  9. *Gill, M. J. ve Burrow, R. (2018). The function of fear in institutional maintenance: Feeling frightened as an essential ingredient in haute cuisine. Organization Studies, 39(4), 445-465.
  10. *Hennekam, S., Macarthur, S., Bennett, D., Hope, C. ve Goh, T. (2020). Women composers’ use of online communities of practice to build and support their careers. Personnel Review, 49(1), 215-230.
  11. *Hodgins, M. ve McNamara, P. (2017). Bullying and incivility in higher education workplaces: Micropolitics and the abuse of power. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 12, 190-206.
  12. *Jayawardena-Willis, T. S., Pio, E. ve McGhee, P. (2019). The divine states (brahmaviharas) in managerial ethical decision-making in organisations in Sri Lanka: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-21.
  13. Kızıldağ, D. ve Özkara, B. (2016). Türkiye’de örgütsel davranış araştırmalarındaki yönelimler: Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Örneği*. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 14(28), 611-631.
  14. *Landells, E. M. ve Albrecht, S. L. (2017). The positives and negatives of organizational politics: A qualitative study. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-015-9434-5
  15. *Lane, A. ve Lee, D.L. (2018). Career transitions of highly skilled immigrants: Two case studies. The Career Development Quarterly, 66, 315-328.
  16. Larkin, M., Eatough, V. ve Osborn, M. (2011). Interpretative phenomenological analysis and embodied, active, situated cognition. Theory & Psychology, 21(3), 318–337.
  17. Larkin, M., Shaw, R. ve Flowers, P. (2019). Multiperspectival designs and processes in interpretative phenomenological analysis research. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 16(2), 182-198.
  18. Mathieu, J. E. (2016). The problem with [in] management theory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(8), 1132-1141.
  19. McCoy, L. K. (2017). Longitudinal qualitative research and interpretative phenomenological analysis: philosophical connections and practical considerations. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 14(4), 442-458.
  20. Merriam, S. B. ve Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4. ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  21. *Millward, L. J. (2006). The transition to motherhood in an organizational context: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79(3), 315-333.
  22. Newman, A., Obschonka, M., Schwarz, S., Cohen, M. ve Nielsen, I. (2019). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: A systematic review of the literature on its theoretical foundations, measurement, antecedents, and outcomes, and an agenda for future research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 110, 403–419.
  23. *Parlak, S., Celebi Cakiroglu, O. ve Oksuz Gul, F. (2021). Gender roles during COVID-19 pandemic: The experiences of Turkish female academics. Gender, Work & Organization. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12655
  24. Ployhart, R. E. ve Bartunek, J. M. (2019). Editors’ comments: There is nothing so theoretical as good practice—A call for phenomenal theory. Academy of Management Review, 44(3), 493-497.
  25. Ramos-Rodríguez, A.-R. ve Ruíz-Navarro, J. (2004). Changes in the intellectual structure of strategic management research: a bibliometric study of the Strategic Management Journal, 1980–2000. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 981-1004.
  26. *Rowlands, L. ve Handy, J. (2012). An addictive environment: New Zealand film production workers’ subjective experiences of project-based labour. Human Relations, 65(5), 657–680.
  27. Rudolph, C. W., Murphy, L. D. ve Zacher, H. (2020). A systematic review and critique of research on “healthy leadership”. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(1), 101335.
  28. *Sengupta, A., Mittal, S. ve Sanchita, K. (2020). How do mid-level managers experience data science disruptions? An in-depth inquiry through interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). Management Decision. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-01-2020-0099
  29. Schwarz, G. ve Stensaker, I. (2014). Time to take off the theoretical straightjacket and (re-)introduce phenomenon-driven research. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 50(4), 478-501.
  30. Schwarz, G. M. ve Stensaker, I. G. (2016). Showcasing phenomenon-driven research on organizational change. Journal of Change Management, 16(4), 245-264.
  31. Smith, J. A. (2004). Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1(1), 39-54.
  32. Smith, J. A. (2011). Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis. Health Psychology Review, 5(1), 9-27.
  33. Smith, J. A. (2019). Participants and researchers searching for meaning: Conceptual developments for interpretative phenomenological analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 16(2), 166-181.
  34. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P. ve Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method, and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  35. Smith, J. A. ve Osborn, M. (2015). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. J. A. Smith (Yay. haz.). Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (ss. 25-53). London: Sage.
  36. *Snodgrass, J. L., Jenkins, B. B. ve Tate, K. F. (2017). More than a job club, sister: Career intervention for women following incarceration. The Career Development Quarterly, 65, 29-43.
  37. *Taylor, Y., Everett, A. M. ve Edgar, F. (2021). Perception of cross-cultural adjustment by immigrant professionals from three ethnic groups in one host context. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management.
  38. *Tomkins, L. ve Eatough, V. (2014). Stop ‘helping’me! Identity, recognition and agency in the nexus of work and care. Organization, 21(1), 3-21.
  39. Tracy, S. J. (2020). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (2. Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
  40. Trede, F. ve Higgs, J. (2009). Framing research questions and writing philosophically: The role of framing research questions. In Writing Qualitative Research on Practice (2 ed., ss. 13-26). Sense Publishers.
  41. Van de Ven, A. H. (2016). Happy birthday, AMD! Academy of Management Discoveries, 2(3), 1–3.
  42. *Williams, H. C., Pritchard, K., Miller, M. C. ve Reed, C. (2020). Climbing to freedom on an impossible staircase: Exploring the emancipatory potential of becoming an entrepreneur-employer. International Small Business Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242620967613
  43. Yardley, L. (2000). Dilemmas in qualitative health research. Psychology & Health, 15, 215-228.
  44. Yin, R. (1989). Case Study Research: Design & Methods (2. ed). Beverly Hills: Sage.
  45. Yıldız (*) işareti, bu çalışma kapsamında incelenmek üzere örnekleme dâhil edilen makaleleri göstermektedir.