Pretense, Pride And Prejudice In Qualitative Leadership Research: An Appraisal And Two Examples From Europe

Abstract

In this paper we identify a number of prevailing epistemological inconsistencies in qualitative leadership research and suggest some emendations. We first analyze current research practices in the leadership field. We note that few qualitative studies are conducted and that many such so-called qualitative studies adhere wholly or partly to a positivist paradigm. We evoke possible rationales for this, i.e. we uncover mechanisms by which the positivist paradigm maintains its dominant position. Subsequently we propose an alternative research paradigm, social constructionism, and purport why this paradigm may be particularly suited to leadership research. By means of two practical personal research experiences we provide the reader with concrete examples of social constructionist leadership research and of what issues, barriers and satisfactions researchers might face during such a research journey. We conclude with some pragmatic ideas as to how scholars could be introduced to constructionist epistemologies and encouraged to apply interpretative research stances to leadership themes more often.