This paper describes an ongoing abductive research process with two researchers, with different educational background, involved in the same action research, thus having different theoretical perspectives on the study. The method of involving two researchers in the same study is not main stream in action research. The empirical data is analysed based on the two research perspectives and on parallel abduction. The abduction as part of action research integrates the participating company in the abductive process, another unexplored, non main stream, approach to abductive action research.
The overall research, valid for both researchers, is about customer orientation and innovation in a paper/packaging supply chain, where the study is conducted at one actor at one end of the supply chain. The theoretical perspectives are strategy and product development in alignment with customer orientation and innovation; with focus on the focal company and their relations to their 1st and 2nd customers.
The importance of integration of the theoretical perspectives as well as differentiation of perspectives is illustrated in the paper. Furthermore the paper elaborate on the integration of the case company in the abductive process.
The paper concludes by describing the advantages, challenges and uncertainties of having two research perspectives involved and integrated in the research process. The phenomenon of integrating, while at the same time differentiating the two perspectives in the analysis is also elaborated on. Another conclusion, is that abductive action research allows for integration of the participating company in the abductive process, which adds a dimension to the iterative process.
[1]
Lars-Erik Gadde,et al.
Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research
,
2002
.
[2]
G. Kovács,et al.
Abductive reasoning in logistics research
,
2005
.
[3]
B. Gammelgaard.
Schools in logistics research?: A methodological framework for analysis of the discipline
,
2004
.
[4]
S. Ottosson.
Participation action research-: A key to improved knowledge of management
,
2003
.
[5]
B. Gammelgaard.
Case studies in logistics research
,
2003
.
[6]
Evert Gummesson,et al.
All research is interpretive
,
2003
.
[7]
J. Stock.
Applying theories from other disciplines to logistics
,
1997
.
[8]
Danny Samson,et al.
Effective case research in operations management: a process perspective
,
2002
.
[9]
D. Greenwood,et al.
Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change
,
1998
.
[10]
I. Heyman.
Tolkning och reflektion
,
1996
.
[11]
Arni Halldorsson,et al.
Logistics knowledge creation: reflections on content, context and processes
,
2002
.
[12]
Christopher A. Voss,et al.
Case research in operations management
,
2002
.
[13]
K. Eisenhardt.
Building theories from case study research
,
1989,
STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.
[14]
Evert Gummesson,et al.
Qualitative research in marketing
,
2005
.
[15]
Danièle Bourcier,et al.
Abduction in language interpretation and law making
,
2000
.
[16]
Dag Näslund.
Logistics needs qualitative research – especially action research
,
2002
.