Conducting Qualitative Research in Organizations Ethically: Organizationality as a Heuristic to Identify Ethical Challenges

1Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The consideration of research ethics to protect the research participants is a central element of empirical social research. Empirical research in organizations has certain characteristics: the research field is organized hierarchically and characterized by formal membership, specific control mechanisms, positive and negative sanctions, etc. Drawing on existing literature, we use the concept of “organizationality” to argue the characteristics of organizations lead to specific ethical challenges, for example dealing with layered field accesses, power asymmetries, and potentially strong sanctions. These challenges make it difficult to ensure confidentiality and non-maleficence and protect participants from risks. We present ethical challenges that typically arise at critical stages of the qualitative research process (planning, field access, the field, data storage, publication, and data archiving). This paper offers a heuristic to identify ethical challenges in qualitative organizational research. It extends the debate on research ethics in qualitative social research to organizational contexts, thereby bringing into focus the structural dimensions of harm.

References Powered by Scopus

This article is free to access.

Get full text

This article is free to access.

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Qualitative inquiry in doctoral research: Pathways to effective design and implementation

11Citations
25Readers
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Scheytt, C., & Pflüger, J. (2024). Conducting Qualitative Research in Organizations Ethically: Organizationality as a Heuristic to Identify Ethical Challenges. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241237548

Readers over time

‘24‘2506121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 6

67%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

11%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

11%

Researcher 1

11%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Social Sciences 4

44%

Business, Management and Accounting 3

33%

Energy 1

11%

Computer Science 1

11%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0