Methodology and Research Methods

  • Philipp Golka


In this chapter, Golka builds on recent developments in abductive research methods to develop a way to apply abductive, qualitative research designs to concurrently address analytical and explanatory research questions. To that end, he also presents in detail the two data sets and analytic procedures used in the process. To understand how proponents framed social impact investing in order to forge cooperation with others, the author builds on a sample of proponents’ reports. To analyze the processes and conditions of whether and how these frames were accepted by nonfinancial actors, Golka crafts an extensive, longitudinal data set that includes interviews with key actors such as policymakers, but also government documents and media reports.


  1. Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2011). Generating research questions through problematization. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 247–271.Google Scholar
  2. Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014). Advancing research on hybrid organizing: Insights from the study of social enterprises. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 397–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beckert, J. (2010). How do fields change? The interrelations of institutions, networks, and cognition in the dynamics of markets. Organization Studies, 31(5), 605–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beckert, J. (2011). Die sittliche Einbettung der Wirtschaft. Von der Effizienz-und Differenzierungstheorie zu einer Theorie wirtschaftlicher Felder. Berliner Journal für Soziologie, 22(2), 247–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (2006). On justification: Economies of worth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Chiapello, E. (2015). Financialisation of valuation. Human Studies, 38(1), 13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diaz-Bone, R. (2015). Die “Economie des conventions”: Grundlagen und Entwicklungen in der neuen französischen Wirtschaftssoziologie. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dowling, E., & Harvie, D. (2014). Harnessing the social: State, crisis and (big) society. Sociology, 48(5), 869–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2012). A theory of fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Forst, R. (2013). Justification and critique: Towards a critical theory of politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  14. Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. New York: Aldine.Google Scholar
  17. Gross, N. (2009). A pragmatist theory of social mechanisms. American Sociological Review, 74(3), 358–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Martin, J. L. (2011). The explanation of social action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mayring, P. (2015). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken. Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
  20. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  21. Peirce, C. (1934). In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 5). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  23. Ragin, C. C., & Becker, H. S. (1992). What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Reay, T., & Hinings, C. R. (2005). The recomposition of an organizational field: Health care in Alberta. Organization Studies, 26(3), 351–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Siggelkow, N. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 20–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Snow, D. A., & Anderson, L. (1991). Researching the homeless: The characteristics and virtues of the case study. In J. R. Feagin, A. M. Orum, & G. Sjoberg (Eds.), A case for the case study (pp. 148–173). Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  27. Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International social movement research, 1, 197–217.Google Scholar
  28. Snow, D. A., & Trom, D. (2002). The case study and the study of social movements. In B. Klandermans & S. Staggenborg (Eds.), Methods of social movement research (pp. 146–172). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnestoa Press.Google Scholar
  29. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Tavory, I., & Timmermans, S. (2014). Abductive analysis: Theorizing qualitative research. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thomas, G. (2011). A typology for the case study in social science following a review of definition, discourse, and structure. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(6), 511–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to Abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization Studies, 26(9), 1377–1404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vaughan, D. (1997). The challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Vaughan, D. (2004). Theorizing disaster: Analogy, historical ethnography, and the challenger accident. Ethnography, 5(3), 315–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philipp Golka
    • 1
  1. 1.Sociology of Markets, Organizations and GovernanceFriedrich Schiller University JenaJenaGermany

Personalised recommendations